CEDR N5 Improvements in the field of Road Safety New trends in member states Road Safety strategies

Transcription

1 CEDR N5 Improvements in the field of Road Safety New trends in member states Road Safety strategies CEDR Strategic Plan TD3 Network Management Thorshavn, Faroe Islands, March 30th 2016 Auður Þóra Árnadóttir

2 What is CEDR? CEDR (Conference of European Directors of Roads)

3 Organization of CEDR

4 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Description of theme: One of seven objectives of task N5 (Improvements in the field of Road Safety) is: To continue the successful sharing of information in the field of Road Safety among the CEDR member states, and to identify common trends in the road safety strategies of member states. In order to work towards this objective one of the Working Themes of the N5 Task Group is: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Target: To share information on issues that have proved to be effective in the road safety work in order to decrease the number of killed and injured in road traffic

5 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies - Form Data have been collected for each country on: No. of killed in traffic per year per 100 thousand population from 2009 No. of seriously injured in traffic per year per 100 thousand population from 2009 Time frame of Road Safety Plan Main bodies involved in the plan Main targets of the Road Safety Plan Sub-targets or indicator targets Road Safety measures Road user behaviour Vehicle Infrastructure Monitoring Information on performance indicators

6 No. of killed in traffic per 100 thousand population in 17 CEDR countries Development Austria Cyprus Denmark France Germany Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Luxembourg Norway Poland Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland UK

7 No. of killed in traffic in 2015 Data on the number of killed in traffic in 2015 are already available for some countries Number of killed in traffic % change Austria ,5 Cyprus ,7 Denmark ,6 Germany ,7 Hungary ,4 Iceland ,0 Ireland ,0 Luxembourg ,9 Poland ,3 Slovenia ,1

8 No. of seriously injured per 100 thousand population After the first phase of data collection it was clear that it made no sense to compare the number of seriously injured The definitions of seriously injured are clearly not the same (will improve with MAIS3+) E.g. Germany: A person is not seriously injured unless he/she has been in a hospital for at least 24 hours To see the development of the rate of seriously injured in each country during the study period an index is used

9 The development of seriously injured per 100 thouand population in each country Not possible to compare different countries 140,0 Seriously injured per 100 th population- Value for 2009 set 100 for each country 120,0 A change in registration in Austria in ,0 80,0 60,0 40,0 20,0 0,0

10 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Comparison The time frame of the existing Road Safety plans is different: : Hungary : Austria, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, : Iceland : Cyprus, Spain : Denmark, Ireland, Poland : Slovenia : Norway : Luxembourg Towards 2020: Sweden

11 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Comparison It is different which bodies are involved in the Road Safety Plan. *All relevant stakeholder regarding to road safety work on Germany (Limited info for some countries). National transport or Ministry of Ministry Municipalities/ Local Authorities/ Other ministries County or Nongovernmental National road traffic safety Transport, (or) Ministry (or or regional road and Company authority (or authority (or Infrastructure, Ministry of Directorate Directorate) governmental traffic operating the organisations Research Fire- agency) agency) Police Interior Justice of Health of Education organisations administrations road system institutes fighters Austria x x x x x x x x Cyprus x x x x x Denmark x x x x x x Germany* Hungary x x x x x Iceland x x x x Ireland x x x x x Italy x x x x x x Luxembourg x x x x x x x Norway x x x x x x Poland x x x x x x x x x Slovenia x x x x x x x x x Spain x x x x x x x x Sweden x x x x x x Switzerland x x x x

12 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Comparison Only two countries, Norway and Sweden, have officially declared Vision Zero, i.e. a transport system in which no one is killed or severly injured. Some other countries express their vision in a context of comparison with the best ones. Examples: Austria: Let s make Austria one of the five safest countries in Europe Iceland: The fatality rate in 2022 shall not be higher than in the best performing countries

13 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Main targets Main targets. (Norway uses the word: Interim targets). All the countries aim at reducing the number of fatalities or the fatality rate before the end of the planning period. Italy specifies groups of road users in this context. Many of them also have targets for seriously injured or rate of seriously injured. It should also be noted that Norway and Iceland focus on the sum of fatalities and serious injuries. Austria and Hungary also mention injury accidents. Denmark includes slightly injured

14 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Main targets Main targets include: Sum of fatalities and serious injuries Fatalities Seriously injured Fatality rate Rate of seriously injured Injury accidents Austria x x x Cyprus x? Denmark x x x Germany x x Hungary x x Iceland x x Italy x Ireland x x Luxembourg x x Norway Poland x x Slovenia x x Spain x (sub-target) x Sweden x x 1 Switzerland? x No. of slightly injured

15 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Comparison Sub-targets or indicator targets. Some countries have intermediate targets for the number of killed and seriously injured, e.g. Austria wanted to be half the way in 2015, the Road Safety Plan is being evaluated Other countries list up a number of indicator targets (with a numerical target) or focus areas (no numerical targets). These indicator targets are variable and regard the road user or his/her behaviour, the vehicle or the infrastructure. Examples: Use of safety equipment*, speed compliance, number of killed or injured road users in different road user groups, such as vulnerable road users, young drivers, no. of safe vehicles, percentage of roads with forgiving roadsides, etc. *Germany will step up its awareness campaign in order to increase the number of children correctly restrained in motor vehicles

16 Working Theme: New trends in member states Road Safety strategies Comparison Safety measures (a few examples) Road users: Enforcement (e.g. automatic (section) speed control), campaigns (e.g. to raise cyclists and motorcyclists awareness of the importance of textiles with reflective materials), revocation of driver s licence (Switzerland, Iceland), accompanied driving (Germany, Iceland), higher fines (Austria, Luxembourg), young children in rear-facing seats (Austria, Norway), penalty points Vehicles: Promotion of safer vehicles (Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland), alcolocks, seatbelt reminders, intelligent speed adaption Infrastructure: Road Safety Infrastructure Mangagement, speed limits (Sweden), forgiving road sides, rumble strips, separation of driving directions, improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists,road safety plans for municipalities, the importance of road safety in urban and regional planning

17 Remarks It is clear that the safety of vulnerable road users, such as cyclists, is a major concern. Better infrastructure for this group is lacking, at least in some countries. In Iceland the articles on cyclists in the Road Traffic Law have to be revised Germany: It is important that road safety campaigns make cyclists aware not only of their rights but also of their obligations regarding safe use of the road. At the same time, other road users should also be encouraged to show more consideration for cyclists and to comply with the rules of the road.

18 Case study (cont.) In 2015 sixteen persons were killed in traffic in Iceland. Seven were foreigners (5 of 7 were foreign tourists) Far too many tourists do not wear seat belts in the rear seats. This especially applies to tourists from the southern part of Europe and Asia. Now the task is to find a way to change this. More "photostops" are also needed

19 Case study Tourists in Iceland Number of tourists at the international airport in Keflavik, Iceland from (For comparison: The total number of inhabitants in Iceland on January 1st 2015: )

20

21

22 Thank you for your attention