ANALYSIS OF TRENDS IN FATAL ACCIDENTS OF VULNERABLE ROAD USERS IN SRI LANKA Ms. M.D.R.P. Jayaratne Transportation Engineering Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka Tel: +94 11 2650 567 Fax: +94 11 2651 216 Email: pradeepa@civil.mrt.ac.lk Prof. Amal S. Kumarage Transportation Engineering Division, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Moratuwa, Moratuwa, Sri Lanka Tel: +94 11 2650 567 Fax: +94 11 2651 216 Email: kumarage@sltnet.lk Abstract Road accidents have become a noticeable social problem in Sri Lanka. According to Police records, there are over a 1,000 road accidents per week with 5 to 6 people being killed every day. Among the victims of road accidents, the pedestrians, cyclists & motor cyclists are the most vulnerable roads users in Sri Lanka. The risk of these unprotected road users in road traffic is considerably higher than for other vehicle occupants. This paper attempts to analyze & describe these vulnerable road users with respect to many parameters. The detailed analysis was carried out using detailed police accidents records for the years 2001 and 2002. In addition to the above accident data, historical data pertaining to accidents from year 1977 to 2002 and related socio economic indicators were used in this research. According to the statistics, 37% of accident fatalities were pedestrians in year 2002 and most of them had to pay with their life, not because of their fault but often due to the fault of motorist. According to the analysis only 5% of pedestrians are at fault for the accident. This means that the motorist has been responsible for the pedestrian s death in 95% of the cases. Furthermore, the smaller vehicles such as motor cycles and 3 wheelers are those that are more frequently involved in collisions with pedestrians. However, larger vehicles such as light vehicles, buses & lorries are mostly involved in pedestrian fatalities. Although, the motor cycle had the highest number of pedestrian accidents, it was ranked in fourth place for fatal accidents. This demonstrates that smaller vehicles are most involved in pedestrian fatalities, while it is the collisions with the larger vehicles that results in fatalities. Another alarming concern is that 1 in 11 serious accidents and 1 in 6 pedestrian deaths have been reported as hit and run. Most of these were accidents involving mostly motor cycles and light vehicles. Furthermore, it is found that half of the pedestrian fatalities have occurred while crossing the road, but not on a marked pedestrian crossing. Another one third of all pedestrian deaths and injuries occurred while walking along the edge of the road or the shoulder or sidewalk. The bicycle and motor cycle users are the most vulnerable vehicle users on our roads today. The vulnerability with respect to each km of road traveled by users of different vehicles shows that the bicycle and motor cycle users have much higher fatality rates than users of any other vehicle type.
And when analyzed further, it was found that 4% motor cyclist fatalities and 11% of cyclist fatalities were also the result of hit & run cases. Further analysis of motor cyclists revealed that not wearing a helmet is another main cause of the death of motor cycle riders. In general it is seen that the bigger vehicle (or road user) is responsible for an accident with a smaller road user. The light vehicle, private bus, lorry and motor cycle are the most dangerous vehicle types. As such, special attention on driving habits of these drivers, which jeopardize the pedestrian, appears to be an important strategic intervention. Controlling speeds through physical measures such as speed reducing devices in areas where there is heavy pedestrian activity and by enforcement methods in other areas is highly recommended to address this problem of speed related accidents. However in the case of injury or death to riders of motor cycles and drivers of vehicles, the person injured or killed has also been held responsible in the majority of instances. 1 INTRODUCTION Road accidents have become a noticeable social problem in Sri Lanka, even though, they may at first seem relatively unimportant, especially when compared to critical problems such as malnutrition, scarcity of financial and economic resources, terrorist problems, unemployment etc. Although it is true that the loss and suffering resulting from road accidents may be small when compared with that caused by poverty and sickness, the problem is much more serious than we imagine. There is no doubt that accidents have kept on increasing yearly. Analysis of casualty data of Sri Lanka showed that pedestrians were a particularly vulnerable road user group. According to the statistics 30% of the casualties were pedestrian while 37% of fatalities were pedestrian fatalities. Lacking any protection whatsoever in most instances, a pedestrian is completely vulnerable to serious injury when struck by a moving vehicle. Even a relatively slow-moving vehicle can cause fractures and other major injuries to a pedestrian. In addition to pedestrians, two-wheeler vehicles users such as motor cyclists & pedal cyclists are two road users that are most at risk on our roads today. The motor cycle is the most frequently involved vehicle type in fatal accidents accounting for 20.2% of all the vehicles involved in fatal accidents. This is followed by bicycles which contribute another 12% to fatal accidents. However, Sri Lanka is not alone in facing this grim reality of increasing road accidents. Most of the developing countries that are facing rapid increases in motorization and in some cases rapidly growing population as well, have also reported similar situations. A few countries mostly from among the developed countries such as Japan and Sweden, are role models having actually reduced the number of road accidents steadily. But in these countries motorization has pretty much reached saturation. However, road accidents as well as the number of casualties arising from these crashes, including fatalities have continued to grow in absolute numbers in Sri Lanka. To understand the possible underlying causes for the increasing trends in road accidents, it is important to study these trends with the relative trends in the growth of population, degree of motorization, changes in the vehicle mix and degree of urbanization. In order to understand the relative growth of accidents during the period of study compared to growth in population and vehicle population, Figure 1 has been developed to understand the growth of the different types of accidents set to a base of 100 for the year 1980. As such, the relative growth rates for each of these trends compared to the others can be easily observed. Figure 1 shows that all types of accidents have increased at a rate greater than the increase in population, but lower than the growth in the fleet of vehicles or the estimated vehicle kms operated for that year. Furthermore, the growth rate for fatal accidents is significantly lower than all other types of accidents reported. This reveals that even though the number of reported accidents has steadily increased, the accident situation in Sri Lanka has improved relative to extraneous factors. As such, the increase in
motorization and people switching from relatively safer modes of transport to more risky modes of transport appears to be the most likely causes of the increasing trends in accidents. This hypothesis and others as the overall causes of increasing trends will be explored further in the following sections. Growth Rate (1980=100) 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 Operational Vehicles Operated Vehicle kilometers Road Accident Passenger km Accident Fatality Population Trends in Growth Rates (1980=100) 150 100 50 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 1: Trends in Growth Rates (1980 = 100) 2 METHODOLOGY For the purpose of this study, data has obtained from various sources. The main source of Accident data are Police Records. The police have a statutory duty to investigate road accidents for legal purposes. Police used a standardized form to collect data on accidents. Using this form they collect the accident data from each of the police stations all over the country. The collected data is then sending to Police Headquarters in Colombo. The Traffic Police headquarters maintain the database and prepares reports quarterly and annually. Police data provide details such as where and when the accident occurred and who was involved, and details of the vehicle involved, details of drivers etc. They maintain three different databases for casualties, vehicle types & master accident database. The detailed analysis was carried out using detailed police accidents records for the years 2001 and 2002. The Police recording sheet carried 51 different pieces of information regarding each accident, covering the characteristics of the nature of accidents, degree of injury, characteristics of the driver, vehicle, road etc. A total of 52,094 & 54,911 accidents records were reported for year 2001 and 2002 respectively while 88,123 & 92,610 vehicles were involved in road accidents for year 2001 & 2002 respectively. A total of 22,706 casualty accidents records were analyzed for the year 2001 and 24,304 for the year 2002. In addition to the above accident data, historical data pertaining to accidents from year 1977 to 2002 and related socio economic indicators were used in this research. 2.1 Trends in Accident Fatality Rates When road accidents increase at a rate faster than that of the growth of population as observed in Figure 1, it translates to a higher risk faced by the population. Risk in terms of fatal road accidents is usually measured in terms of deaths arising from road accidents per
year per 100,000 persons. This risk during the period 1977 to 2002 has more than doubled. This is when we compare the road fatalities as a ratio of all deaths, inclusive of natural deaths which is presently 1 in 51 deaths when compared to 1977 when it was only 1 in 116 deaths. 2.2 Identifying Vulnerable Road Users A similar trend analysis of the fatality rates in terms of deaths per 100,000 populations is shown in Figure 2. This clearly indicates that pedestrian accident rates have remained more or less constant over the last 25 years. This does not speak well for road authorities and their lack of attention on road safety improvements for pedestrians, but neither does it indicate a worsening situation for pedestrians. However, in contrast to pedestrians, the fatality rate for vehicle users as measured by fatalities per billion passenger kms travelled has increased sharply to nearly double over this same period. This points out to the changes in the types of vehicles that are being used for motorized travel. The shift from public transport to motor cycles is a prime reason that could be attributed to this trend. This could very well be due to increasing vehicle-vehicle crashes due to reckless and high speed travel. This hypothesis has been examined and well supported in previous studies done by the University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. Fatality Rate per one hundred thousand Population (1982-2002) 12.0 10.0 all users veh. user pedestrians Pedal Cyclist Motor Cyclists 8.0 Fatality Rate 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Figure 2 : Fatality Rate per 100,000 Population The percentage of the fatalities by casualty type is shown in Figure 3. These casualty types were divided in to 6 categories. They are pedestrian, Cyclist, motor cyclists, bus passenger, other passengers & drivers. The category bus passenger included all private bus passengers as well as SLCTB (state owned) bus passengers. In the other passenger category all other passengers are included. As shown in the Figure 3, it can be said that the pedestrian, cyclist & motor cyclists are the most vulnerable roads users in Sri Lanka. According to the Sri Lanka Police statistics, there were 24,304 number of road casualties in year 2002 where 9% (e.q. 2,175) of these were fatalities. The risk of the unprotected road users such as pedestrians, cyclist & motor cyclist in road traffic is considerably higher than for other vehicle occupants. This paper analyses the trends of the fatal accidents involving these three categories of most vulnerable road users.
3 ANALYSIS OF VULNERABLE ROAD USERS 3.1 Pedestrian Accident Analysis Among the different categories of road users, police statistics reveal that fatalities & injuries have been generally higher for pedestrians. It is found that out of 24,304 road crash casualties, pedestrians accounted for most of the injuries (30%). Among these pedestrian casualties there were 815 pedestrian fatalities which was 37% of all road fatalities in that year (Figure 3). This section attempts to analyze the data pertaining to the pedestrian fatalities in the areas of hit & run accidents, movement of pedestrians, type of vehicles that cause pedestrian accidents etc. Other Passengers 18% Driver 10% Pedestrian 37% Bus Passenger 3% Motor Cyclists 16% Cyclist 16% Figure 3 : Percentage of Fatalities by Casualty Type (2002) 3.1.1 Hit and Run Cases in Pedestrian Accidents There are many thousands of accidents on the road each year that involve individuals who flout the law by failing to stop at the scene. It was found that in the case of pedestrian accidents that have resulted in deaths, nearly 1 in 6 accidents have been reported as hit and run. The vehicles identified as running away are mostly motor cycles and light vehicles. Furthermore, when analyzing the hit & run accidents, there were 131 fatalities, which were a result of single vehicle hit and run accidents. These involved 122 pedestrian fatalities which were 15% of collisions with pedestrians that result in the death of the pedestrian have been reported as hit and run. According to analysis, there were 129 grievous single vehicle accidents and out of this 117 were pedestrian accidents. There were another 661 non grievous accidents. Eighty seven per cent of this was pedestrian hit and run accidents. It is a sad reflection that a high percentage of motorists appear to escape the consequences of their actions when they hit a pedestrian. 3.1.2 Movements of Pedestrians and Accidents Further analysis was done regarding the movement of the pedestrian at the time of the accident by degree of injury and it is shown in Table 1. There are two extremely vulnerable activities that cause the bulk of pedestrian accidents. The first thing that strikes the reader of
Table 1 is the fact that one half (i.e. 52%) of pedestrian fatalities (as well as other injury related pedestrian accidents) have occurred while the pedestrian was crossing the road. Of such instances, 409 (97%) cases arose from the pedestrian crossing the road, away from a marked crossing. While jay walking may be attributed to some accidents, the absence of marked crossings where necessary is another possible cause. Therefore, there is a need for many designated crossings with pedestrian crossing signals, warning signs, humps, rumble strips and other speed restriction devices that encourage drivers to reduce the speed. The second most common activity that results in pedestrian accidents appears to be walking along the edge of the road or the shoulder or sidewalk, which makes up one third of all pedestrian deaths and injuries. The absence of safe walking areas is thus seen as a major obstacle to road safety. Clearing of unauthorized structures that occupy walking areas, parked vehicles, debris, garbage and shrubs should be made mandatory for all the road authorities. Table 1 : Pedestrian Activity by Degree of Injury Injury Type Pedestrian Activity at time of accident Fatal Grievous Non- Grievous Total Walking on shoulder or sidewalk 317 403 1,742 2,462 Walking on road carriageway 19 31 214 264 Crossing road not on a Pedestrian crossing 409 578 2,659 3,646 Crossing road on Pedestrian crossing 15 28 88 131 Playing on road 1 9 10 Pedestrian after drinks/drugs 1 2 3 6 Any other action 54 131 556 714 Total 815 1,147 5,271 7,233 3.1.3 Vehicles that Cause Pedestrian Accidents In this section we analyze accidents involving only a single vehicle. Single vehicle accidents are typically, vehicles that knock down a pedestrian or run off the road or hit a fixed object by the side of the road. The accidents resulting in injury or death, the vast majority are classified as single vehicle accidents. Therefore accidents are classified by the object of collision as recorded by the Police. There were 18,950 single vehicle accidents in year 2002, around 34% involve knocking down a pedestrian, while the balance are mostly collisions with fixed objects such as road furniture, trees, animals etc. In fact of the 2,308 fatal accidents, 1,180 (58%) have been single vehicle accidents. In this section the single vehicle accidents involving pedestrians are analyzed with respect to the different vehicle types and ranked accordingly. This is given in Figure 4 and shows that motor cycles are ranked in first place and are responsible for 1,535 accidents involving pedestrians while light vehicles (mostly utility and passenger vans) are ranked in second place with three wheelers(autos or tuk-tuks) following in third place. Table 2 throws lights on some interesting revelations indicating that the smaller vehicles are those more frequently involved in collisions with pedestrians than the larger vehicles. For example, of the 247 accidents involving bicycles (as a single vehicle), 174 (or 70%) have been collisions with pedestrians. In the case of motor cycles too, it is 61%. In the case of larger vehicles, they appear to have more collisions with other fixed objects.
Table 2 : Single Vehicle Accidents by Vehicle Type & Object of Collision (2002) Pedestrian Other Objects Total Bicycle 174 (70%) 73 (30%) 247 Motor Cycle 1,535 (61%) 971 (39%) 2,506 3 Wheeler 782 (45%) 974 (55%) 1,756 Car 729 (25%) 2,192 (75%) 2,921 Light Vehicle 1,365 (26%) 3,839 (74%) 5,204 Buses 838 (33%) 1,733 (67%) 2,571 Lorry/Land Vehicles 782 (23%) 2,635 (77%) 3,417 Other Vehicles 176 (54%) 152 (46%) 328 However, when fatal accidents are analyzed this sequence changes drastically. Light vehicles are found to be the most frequently involved in fatal collisions with pedestrians. Of the 795 fatal pedestrian accidents, 194 (25%) were caused by light vehicles (mostly vans). Private buses are ranked in second place being responsible for another 17% of fatal accidents. Lorries contributing 15% of fatal accidents are ranked in third place, while the motor cycles which had the highest number of pedestrian accidents was ranked in fourth place for fatal pedestrian accidents. Hence it can be seen that pedestrian accidents involving larger vehicles results in the death of the pedestrian more often, than when they are hit by a smaller vehicle such as a motor cycle, or three wheeler. No. of Single Vehicle Fatal Accidents Colliding with Pedestrians 1,500 1,400 1,300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 - Bicycle Motor Cycle Fatal 3 Wheeler Car Light Vehicle Injured Buses Lorry/Land Vehicles Other Vehicles Figure 4: Accidents Involving a Single Vehicle (Object of Collision: Pedestrian) 2002 3.2 Vulnerable Vehicle Users This section analyses the degree of vulnerability of the different vehicle users. As shown earlier as well in Table 3, the bicycle and motor cycle users are the most vulnerable vehicle users on our road today. They account for 56% of all fatalities of vehicle users. Moreover, it shows that their vulnerability with respect to each road km traveled by users of different vehicles shows that the bicycle and motor cycle users have fatality rates much higher than any other vehicle type. On the other hand, the bus is the safest form of road transport, particularly for the passengers.
Table 3 : Fatality Rates for Vehicle Users Vehicle User Type No. of Fatalities Pax kms (mn) veh kms (mn) Fatalities per mn user kms Fatalities per mn veh. Kms Motor Cycle Users 413 4,073 3,394 0.101 0.122 Bicycle Users 352 2,409 2,190 0.146 0.161 3 Wheel Users 92 1,179 655 0.078 0.140 Bus Users 153 46,900 1,330 0.003 0.115 Private Vehicle Users 171 9,665 4,883 0.018 0.035 Freight Vehicle Users 163 4,584 1,938 0.036 0.084 Other vehicle users 16 128 32 0.125 0.501 1,360 68,938 14,421 0.020 0.094 3.2.1 Causes for Accident This section attempts to analyse the data pertaining to determine some of the causes of these motor cycle & pedal cyclist s fatal accidents. When analysed it was found that 4% motor cycle users fatalities and 10% of bicycle users fatalities were the result of hit & run cases. Table 4 : Hit & Run Analysis Motor Cycle users Cycle users Total Hit and Run 15 35 50 Other 398 305 703 Total 413 340 753 Furthermore, motor cycle accidents were analysed to find out the use of safety measures such as wearing helmet. It was found that 1/5 th of the riders did not wear a helmet at the time of the accidents. In a country where over 95% of motor cyclists wear safety helmets; it is evident that fatalities are higher for those not wearing safety helmets. However, this warrants further investigation & research. Table 5 : Analysis for Helmet wearing for Motor Cycle Users No. of Fatalities Wearing Yes 84 Helmets No 326 TOTAL 410 Both motor cycle and cycle users were also analyzed with respect to the maneuver of vehicle at time of accident and shown in Table 6. It was found the higher percentage of the fatalities has occurred while the vehicle was going straight. It was 82% in the case of motor cycle users, while 67% for bicycle users. This warrants further research to determine more exact causes. A possibility for both bicycles and motor cycles is rear end crashes. The second most dangerous maneuver is the turning of vehicle. Overtaking is also considerably higher for the motor cycle user fatalities.
Table 6 : Analysis of Fatalities by Maneuver of vehicle Motor Cycle users Bicycle Users Turning Left/Right 32 34 Overtaking 23 3 Emerging from Minor roads 5 12 Going ahead 339 237 Other maneuver 14 66 TOTAL 413 352 A further analysis shown in Table 7 underscores the reason for high fatalities among cyclists as being rear ended where 118 of the 237 fatal accidents involved a bicycle been hit by another vehicle going in the same direction. In the case of motor cycles, the fatalities seem to cover a much wider range of maneuvers. But sudden stopping or halting of motor cycles on the carraigeway seems to account for 87 of the 339 motor cycle fatalities which may be considered unacceptably high. Table 7 : movement of Straight going bicycle & motor cycle fatalities Movement of Vehicle users Bicycle Users Motor Cycle Users One moving vehicle only or temporarily halted 10 87 Two Vehicles same direction 118 80 Two Vehicles opposite direction 60 109 Two vehicles different roads 2 2 More than two moving vehicles 6 15 Non moving vehicles (parked) 0 0 Not known 41 46 237 339 A further reason for accidents appears to be riders not in possession of a valid driving license. Sixty seven percent of motor cycle riders who had met with fatal accidents were reported to have been without a valid driving/riding license. This is much higher than the 44 percent for all other vehicle drivers. This high percentage is likely to be the apparent ease with which one can learn to ride a motor cycle and the fact that many people get their first experience for controlling a vehicle by riding a motor cycle. Table 8: Availability of Driving License for motor cycle riders No. of Fatalities (%) Driving License available Yes 111 (33%) No 225 (67%) Total Motor Cycle Riders 336 3.3 Faulty Parties in Vulnerable Road User Accidents Among the 24,303 casualties in road accidents in 2002, there were 2,175 deaths including pedestrians and those traveling in vehicles. Analysis was done to find out the faulty rate of each casualty type. As shown earlier there have been 815 pedestrian fatalities of which only 43 (5%) of them have been killed as a result of the pedestrian being at fault. This means that the motorist has been responsible for the pedestrian deaths in 95% of the cases. Similarly it can be seen that even though there have been 340 deaths of cyclists, only in 83 instances have the cyclist been at fault. The faulty rate of cyclist was only 24% as shown in the Figure 5.
This clearly puts driver and riders of motor vehicles as being chiefly responsible for causing pedestrian & cyclists fatalities. Driver 69% 65% Rider 53% 54% Cyclist Passenger - Pvt Bus Passenger (Other) Pedestrian 6% 5% 3% 5% 6% 24% 26% 22% Passenger - SLTC Bus 4% 6% Faulty Rate (Fatalities) Faulty Rate (All Casualties) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Faulty Rate Figure 5: Faulty Rate of Casualties However, contrastingly, in the case of injury or death to motor cycle riders and also vehicle drivers, the picture is quite different. It is observed that in the case of the motor cycle, the rider is to be blamed in 53% of the accidents that sustain injury, while in the case of drivers of other motorized vehicles they are responsible for around 70% of the cases. This analysis shows that injuries and deaths resulting from road accidents suffered by pedestrians, cyclists, bus passengers and passengers of private vehicles is mostly, as a result of negligence, on the part of the driver of the motorized vehicle, involved in the accident. However in the case of injury or death to riders of motor cycles and drivers of vehicles, the person injured or killed has also been held responsible in the majority of instances. 3.4 Faulty rate of drivers/riders involved in Accidents It is revealed that the Police have determined that 49,985 drivers were found to be at fault in the 54,911 road accidents reported in 2002. Out of this, 2,041 drivers were reported at fault for causing fatal accidents. As shown in Figure 6, drivers of four categories of vehicles are associated with causing over 73% of the fatal accidents. These are the drivers of light vehicles (mostly vans) 403 fatal accidents, lorry drivers 372 fatal accidents, motor cycle riders 371 fatal accidents and private buses 343 fatal accidents. Another interesting analysis is shown that of the 150 car drivers involved in fatal accidents in 2001, 128 were found to be at fault. Therefore, the faulty rate of car drivers involved in fatal accidents was 85% in year 2001. Likewise, the faulty rates for each vehicle type for year 2001 & 2002 have been calculated. Accordingly, it was found that armed forces drivers (92%), car drivers (85%), light vehicle drivers (85%), private bus drivers (82%) and lorry drivers (81%) were the most frequently found at fault in fatal accidents in year 2001. However, in 2002 data, this order changes with private bus drivers (84%) having advanced to top spot followed by light vehicle drivers (83%), lorry drivers (82%), car drivers (79%), land vehicle drivers (79%), armed forces vehicle drivers (79%) & SLCTB bus drivers (78%) respectively.
Bicycle 2002 Motor Cycle 2001 3 Wheeler SLCTB Bus Land Vehicle Lorry Private Bus Light Vehicle Car Forces Vehicle Other Vehicles 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Figure 6: Faulty Rate vehicle users for Fatal Accidents by Vehicle Type Even though it was found earlier that the vehicle most involved in fatal accidents was the motor cycle, (e.g. 571 in year 2001 & 600 in year 2002), the number of riders at fault for these accidents was 362 & 371 respectively. Hence the faulty rate is much lower when compared to the other larger vehicles mentioned above. That is to say that the larger vehicles appear to be more at fault than the smaller vehicles. This is also confirmed further when considering bicycle riders. The number of bicycles involved in fatal accidents was very high (e.g. 357) but only 78 bicycle riders were at fault and therefore the faulty rate of bicycle riders is the lowest at 22%. Therefore, it can be concluded that most bicycle accidents have occurred due to the fault of other drivers and not due to their own fault. 4 CONCLUSION In Sri Lanka, the pedestrian, pedal cyclist and motor cycle user are found to be the most vulnerable road users for fatal accidents. In general it is seen that the bigger vehicle (or road user) is generally responsible for an accident with a smaller and generally more vulnerable road user. Thus special care must be taken in all driver/rider training and testing programs as well as general awareness campaigns to highlight the need for more defensive driving/riding habits that ensure a higher respect for the rights of road users who are less conspicuous or are relatively smaller in physical size. Of the offending vehicles, for pedestrian casualties, the motor cycle is the most dangerous vehicle. This is possibly due to riders trying to weave in and around pedestrians, without reducing speed. Light vehicles too appear to cause many pedestrian deaths, possibly due to the high speeds at which many of them are driven and possibly due to the nature of impact on the frontal face of a van as opposed to a car or three wheeler, which may be less sympathetic to the pedestrian in an impact. As such, campaigns that focus attention on driving habits of motor cyclists and van drivers which appear to jeopardize the pedestrian appears to be an important strategic intervention. Half of pedestrian accidents had occurred while the pedestrian was crossing the road. While jay walking may be attributed to some accidents, the absence of marked crossings where necessary is another probable cause. The absence of safe walking areas is also a major obstacle to road safety. Clearing of unauthorized structures that occupy walking areas should be made mandatory for all the road authorities.
The paper also reveals that most hit and run cases also result in injury or death to one of the vulnerable road users. While these factors make pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclist vulnerable to road accidents, it is also shown that 20% of motor cyclist deaths are among people who do not wear safety helmets. The most dangerous maneuver of vehicle was going straight. This is possibly evident of poor road markings especially centre median markings and separators. Overtaking & turning are the next hazardous maneuvers for the motor cycle & bicycle riders. And most of bicycle user fatalities were rear end accidents. Another interesting revelation was that 67% of motor cycle riders did not possess a valid driving/riding license at the time of the accident. Thus intense inspection programs should be intensified. Especially the training and testing of younger drivers/riders should be intensified. While younger drivers are more likely to be involved in crashes in any part of the world, the differences in the ratio clearly emphasize the need for improved driver/rider training and testing procedures. In the case of cyclists, they have a difficult position in traffic. They are sometimes supposed to follow rules for motorists, sometimes rules like those intended for pedestrians. Their needs are similar to those of pedestrians but they are taken into account in traffic as a last resort. Therefore, special attention should pay in providing adequate facilities to cyclists to move safely on the road with other motorized traffic when designing the infrastructure. REFERENCES Geetam Tiwari, Dinesh Mohan & Nicole Muhlarad, (2004), The Way Forward: Transportation Plaanning & Road Safety, TRIPP, Indian Institute of Technology, India. Godfrey St. Bernard and Winston Matthews (2003), A contemporary analysis of road traffic crashes, fatalities and injuries in Trinidad and Tobago, Injury Control & Safety Promotion, West Indies. Goran Tegner (2000), An Analysis of Urban Road Traffic Safety in the city of Stockholm The use of aggregate time-series models with the TRIO programme, Solna, Sweden, 11th International Conference: TRAFFIC SAFETY OF THREE CONTINENTS, 10-11 September 2000, CSIR Conference Centre, Pretoria, South Africa Kumarage Amal S., Wickramasinghe S.M. & Jayaratne M.D.R.P., (2003), Accident Abstract 2001 & 2002, Sri Lanka. Kumarage Amal S., Wickramasinghe S.M. & Jayaratne M.D.R.P., (2003), Analysis of Pedestrian Accidents in Sri Lanka, SLAAS, Annual Session 2004, Sri Lanka. Kumarage Amal S., Wickramasinghe S.M. & Jayaratne M.D.R.P., (2003), Analysis of Road Accidents in Sri Lanka: for year 2001 & 2002, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Ministry of Health (2003), Colombo, Sri Lanka. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, (1998), Safety of Vulnerable Road Users, OECD, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France. Pailbul Suriyawongpaisal & Somchai Kanchanasut (2003), Road Traffic injuries in Thailand: Trends, selected underlying determinants and status of intervention, Injury Control & Safety Promotion, Thailand Sri Lanka Traffic Police, Annual Accident Statistic Report (2003), Police Headquarters, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Transportation Engineering Division (2005), TransPlan Database, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka. Transportation Engineering Division, Historical Database (2004), University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka.