Docstoc

Thematic Network

Document Sample
Thematic Network Powered By Docstoc
					                                     Thematic Network


Road Safety   and   Environmental Benefit-Cost and Cost-Effectiveness   Analysis for
                               Use in Decision-Making




                - WP 4 –
   Testing the efficiency assessment
     tools on selected road safety
                measures


                                     Public




                                                                            May 2005




                        Funded by the European Commission
                - WP 4 –
   Testing the efficiency assessment
     tools on selected road safety
                measures
                                    Public




                              ROSEBUD
 Road Safety and Environmental Benefit-Cost and Cost-Effectiveness
                Analysis for Use in Decision-Making

                     Contract No: GTC2/2000/33020



Network co-ordinator: Federal Highway Research Institute - BASt, Germany

WP 4 co-ordinator:       Austrian Road Safety Board – KfV, Austria


Editors:                 Martin Winkelbauer and Christian Stefan (KfV)


Partners in WP 4:        Centre d’Etudes Techniques de l’Equipement du Sud
                         Quest – CETE SO, France
                         Technion, Transportation Research Institute – TRI,
                         Israel
                         National Technical University of Athens – NTUA,
                         Greece
                         Transport Research Centre – CDV, Czech Republic
                         Technical Research Centre of Finland – VTT, Finland
                         Austrian Road Safety Board – KfV, Austria

Report No:               D6

Date:                    May 2005




                         Thematic Network funded by the European
                         Commission, Directorate General for Energy
                         and Transport responding the Thematic
                         programme “Competitive and Sustainable
                         Growth” of the 5th framework programme
TABLE OF CONTENTS


INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................7
CASE A: ANTI-LOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES .............................. 12
by Martin Winkelbauer, ...................................................................................................... 12
Austrian Road Safety Board (KfV), Austria ........................................................................ 12
CASE B1: SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE
        KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL (VIENNA, A22 MOTORWAY).................................. 24
by Christian Stefan ............................................................................................................24
Austian Road Safety Board (KfV), Austria ......................................................................... 24
CASE B2: AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL) ..... 44
by Christian Stefan ............................................................................................................44
Austian Road Safety Board (KfV), Austria ......................................................................... 44
CASE C1: DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC ............................ 53
by Petr Pokorný ................................................................................................................. 53
Transport Research Centre, CDV, The Czech Republic....................................................53
CASE C2: DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA.................................................... 63
by Petr Pokorný ................................................................................................................. 63
Transport Research Centre, CDV, The Czech Republic....................................................63
CASE E1: FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS IN THE CZECH
        REPUBLIC............................................................................................................ 72
by Petr Pokorný ................................................................................................................. 72
Transport Research Centre, CDV, The Czech Republic....................................................72
CASE E2: SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS .......................................................... 82
by Victoria Gitelman and Shalom Hakkert, ........................................................................ 82
Transportation Research Institute, Technion, Israel .......................................................... 82
CASE E3: TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES ................................................................... 96
by George Yannis and Petros Evgenikos .......................................................................... 96
NTUA / DTPE, Greece....................................................................................................... 96
CASE F1: GRADE-SEPARATION AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS .................................. 114
by Marko Nokkala, ........................................................................................................... 114
VTT Building and Transport, Finland ............................................................................... 114
CASE F2: GRADE-SEPARATION AT ROAD-RAIL CROSSINGS................................. 128
by Victoria Gitelman and Shalom Hakkert, ...................................................................... 128
Transportation Research Institute, Technion, Israel ........................................................ 128
CASE G: MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES ........................................ 141
by Philippe Lejeune,......................................................................................................... 141
CETE SO, France............................................................................................................ 141
CASE H: INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION..................... 155
by Victoria Gitelman and Shalom Hakkert, ...................................................................... 155
Transportation Research Institute, Technion, Israel ........................................................ 155
CASE I1: INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND
       ALCOHOL) ......................................................................................................... 168
by George Yannis and Eleonora Papadimitriou ............................................................... 168
NTUA / DTPE, Greece..................................................................................................... 168
CASE I2: CONCENTRATED GENERAL ENFORCEMENT ON INTERURBAN
        ROADS IN ISRAEL ............................................................................................ 185
by Victoria Gitelman and Shalom Hakkert, ...................................................................... 185
Transportation Research Institute, Technion, Israel ........................................................ 185
CASE J1: 2 + 1 ROADS IN FINLAND ............................................................................ 204
by Marko Nokkala, ........................................................................................................... 204
VTT Building and Transport, Finland ............................................................................... 204
CASE J2: 2 + 1 ROADS IN SWEDEN ............................................................................ 214
by Marko Nokkala, ........................................................................................................... 214
VTT Building and Transport, Finland ............................................................................... 214
CASE K: COMPULSORY BICYCLE HELMET WEARING............................................. 222
by Martin Winkelbauer, .................................................................................................... 222
Austrian Road Safety Board, KfV, Austria........................................................................ 222
SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT.................................... 241
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 249
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................... 261
                                                      INTRODUCTION



INTRODUCTION
by Victoria Gitelman and Martin Winkelbauer

Every year, more than 1 million injury accidents (including 50,000 fatalities and 1.7 million
people injured) occur on public roads throughout the European Union. Hence, improving
road safety was given top priority in the European Union’s Transport Policy. To reach the
overall objective of halving the number of fatalities by 2010, it is essential to know the
reduction potentials of the wide variety of already-existing road safety measures. A
prerequisite for this task is reliable knowledge about the effectiveness and efficiency of the
road safety measures considered. Previous ROSEBUD work packages answered the
question how efficiency assessment tools are currently used in different countries (WP1),
what factors prevent the use of those tools (WP2) and what can be done to overcome
existing barriers and shortcomings (WP3). The main task of work package 4 (WP4) is to
test the developed efficiency assessment tools on selected road safety measures. The
WP4 program was as follows:
•     to carry out a certain number of Efficiency Assessment Studies
•     to report experiences gained from those studies
•     and to evaluate, through these practical examples, the results of previous work
      packages (in treating barriers and the use of standardised procedures, respectively)

1.1 Selecting the cases for Efficiency Assessment

In accordance with the above program, eleven test cases were chosen, covering as many
types of road safety measures as possible (see Table 1). The applicability of the
developed analyses techniques of WP3 were tested in light of both the limitation of
available data and restrictions of decision-making procedures in different countries.
                                Table 1: Selected cases for evaluation in work package 4

    Nr.          Case Study               Road Safety Approach          Level     Countries Responsibility
     A    ABS motorcycle                  Vehicle                      National   AT              AT
     B    Section control                 User + Enforcement           Local      AT, NL          AT
     C    Daytime running lights          Vehicle + User               National   AT, CZ          CZ
                            1
     D    Speed cameras                   User + Enforcement           Local      FI, IL          IL
     E    Traffic calming (urban areas)   Infrastructure               Local      CZ, GR, IL      IL
     F    Railroad crossings              Infrastructure               Local      FI, IL          FI
          Measures against collisions                                  Local +
     G                                    Infrastructure                          FR              FR
          with trees (guardrails)                                      National
          Road improvement mix (rural                                  Local +
     H                                    Infrastructure                          IL              IL
          areas, national network)                                     National
          Intensive police enforcement
      I                                   User + Enforcement           National   GR, IL          GR
          (speed and alcohol)
     J    2+1 roads                       Infrastructure               Regional   FI, SW          FI
          Compulsory helmet regulation
     K                                 User                            National   AT, DE          AT
          for cyclists


1
    At the workshop in Bordeaux in December 2004, WP4 members decided to cancel the whole of case D
    due to missing data on the topic. Furthermore, speed enforcement is covered quite extensively by two
    other cases - case study B and I.
                                                                                                       Page 7
                                                  INTRODUCTION


Selected cases were carried out by several working groups consisting of one to three WP4
members and a non-specified number of URG members. Various considerations were
taken into account before a safety measure was considered a test case. They are:
    1. Different categories of safety-related measures as defined by WP1, i.e. user-related
       measures, vehicle-related measures, infrastructure related measures, organisation
       and rescue services. The available experiences and data from different countries
       have been analysed with the purpose to cover as many safety-related categories as
       possible.
    2. Safety measures can be attributed to different levels of implementation (national,
       regional and local) which influences the effect of the treatment on its environment.
       Local measures are limited to certain spots on the road network and small areas,
       respectively, while national measures like Daytime Running Lights affect the whole of
       a (driver) population. Therefore, decision-making as well as implementation becomes
       more complicated as measures leave the local level and advance to the regional and
       national level. It was agreed that all levels of implementation should be considered
       during case selection to guarantee an overall analysis of the various decision-making
       processes.
    3. Selecting the cases, preference was given to the measures mentioned in different
       national road safety programmes. Such programmes are characterized thorough
       long-term and clearly worked-out methods, as well as a detailed catalogue of
       measurements. Furthermore, road safety programmes are guaranteed by having
       passed legislation and having all the necessary financing. By selecting cases already
       incorporated in road safety programmes, medial as well as political attention for the
       work of WP4 is at its highest and cooperation of decision-makers is most likely.
       Besides, consultations with the URG members were carried out, to point to the
       measures of high interest for different countries.
    4. A Cost-Benefit Analysis is sometimes conducted for measures that have already been
       implemented (ex post evaluation). The goal of such studies is to assess if a certain
       measure made sense from an economic point of view. However, decision-makers are
       frequently interested in an ex ante analysis, to compare potential costs and benefits of
       certain road safety measures that have not yet been implemented. It was agreed that
       the test cases should present a mixture of both approaches.
The selected cases (see Table 1) were carried out by several working groups consisting of
one to three WP4 members and a non-specified number of URG members. All relevant
steps of applicability testing have been conducted in close cooperation with the user
reference group, which gave the users the opportunity to be trained in the application of
these tools.
    1.2 Evaluation techniques
The selected cases should be evaluated using standardized techniques. This section
provides a concise description of the main steps and data components, which are needed
to perform a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)/ Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of a road
safety measure2. The description includes: basic formulae, safety effects, implementation
units, target accidents, accident costs and implementation costs. The evaluation of WP4
case-studies was performed in line with these evaluation techniques.



2
    This is a concise compilation of Chapters 2, 3 of the WP3’s report. More details can be found in the report.
                                                                                                           Page 8
                                           INTRODUCTION




a. Basic formulae
The cost-effectiveness of a road safety measure is defined as the number of accidents
prevented per unit cost of implementing the measure:
Cost-effectiveness = Number of accidents prevented by a given measure/ Unit costs of
implementation of measure
For this calculation, the following information items are needed:
   •   A definition of suitable units of implementation for the measure,
   •   An estimate of the effectiveness of the safety measure in terms of the number of
       accidents it can be expected to prevent per unit implemented of the measure,
   •   An estimate of the costs of implementing one unit of the measure.
The accidents that are affected by a safety measure are referred to as target accidents. In
order to estimate the number of accidents it can be expected to prevent (or prevented) per
unit implemented of a safety measure, it is necessary to:
   •   Identify target accidents,
   •   Estimate the number of target accidents expected to occur per year for a typical unit
       of implementation,
   •   Estimate the safety effect of the measure on target accidents.

The numerator of the cost-effectiveness ratio is estimated as follows:
Number of accidents prevented (or expected to be prevented) by a measure = The number
of accidents expected to occur per year X The safety effect of the measure


The benefit cost ratio is defined as:
Benefit-cost ratio = Present value of all benefits/ Present value of implementation costs
When a CBA is applied, then, besides the above CEA’s components, the monetary values
of the measure’s benefits are also required. The monetary values imply, first of all,
accident costs and, depending on the range of other effects considered, may also include
costs of travel time, vehicle operating costs, costs of air pollution, costs of traffic noise, etc.
In order to make the costs and benefits comparable, a conversion of the values to a
certain time reference is required. Such an action needs a definition of the economic
frame, i.e. the duration of effect (length of service life of the project) and the interest rate,
which are those commonly used for the performance of economic evaluations in the
country.
In a basic case, where the benefits come from the accidents saved only (and no influences
on travel expenses and the environment are expected), the numerator of the benefit-cost
ratio will be estimated as:
Present value of benefits = Number of accidents prevented by the measure X Average
accident cost X The accumulated discount factor,
where the accumulated discount factor depends on the interest rate and the length of life
of the measure.

                                                                                             Page 9
                                                INTRODUCTION




b. Safety effects
The most common form of a safety effect is the percentage of accident reduction following
the treatment. The main source of evidence on safety effects is from observational before-
after studies. Other (theoretical) methods for quantifying safety effects are also possible.
One should remember that the safety effect of a measure is stated as available if the
estimates of both the average value and the confidence interval of the effect are known.
One should also ascertain that both the type of measure and the type of sites (units) for
which the estimates are available, correspond to those for which the CBA/CEA is
performed.
For WP4’s evaluations, it was desirable to apply the local values of safety effects, i.e.
those attained by the evaluation studies performed in the country. When the local values
do not exist, the summaries of international experience can be used3.
If the value of a safety effect is supposed to be provided by a current study (for which the
CBA is performed), the estimation of safety effect should satisfy the criteria of correct
safety evaluation. This implies that the evaluation should account for the selection bias
and for the uncontrolled environment (e.g. changes in traffic volumes, general accident
trends).


c. Implementation units
In the case of infrastructure measures, the appropriate unit will often be one junction or
one kilometre of road. In the case of area-wide or more general measures, a suitable unit
may be a typical area or a certain category of roads. In the case of vehicle safety
measures, one vehicle will often be a suitable unit of implementation, or, in the case of
legislation introducing a certain safety measure on vehicles, the percentage of vehicles
equipped with this safety feature or complying with the requirement. For police
enforcement, it may be a kilometre of road with a certain level of enforcement activity (e.g.
the number of man-hours per kilometre of road per year); in the case of public information
campaigns - the group of road users, which is supposed to be influenced by the campaign.


d. Target accidents
The accidents affected by a safety measure present a target accident group. Depending
on the type of safety measure it can also be a target injury group, target driver population,
etc.
Target accidents depend on the nature of the safety measure considered. There are no
strict rules for this case. For general measures like black-spot treatment, traffic calming,
speed limits, etc. the target accident group usually includes all injury accidents.
One should remember that if we apply a specific and not general accident group, proper
corrections should be performed for the accident costs, as well.




3
    Such as: Elvik R. and Vaa T (2004) The handbook of road safety measures. Elsevier.
                                                                                         Page 10
                                              INTRODUCTION


e. Accident costs
As known, a detailed survey of practice in estimating road accident costs in the EU and
other countries was made by an international group of experts as part of the COST-
research programme4. Five major cost items of accident costs were identified as follows:
(1) Medical costs
(2) Costs of lost productive capacity (lost output)
(3) Valuation of lost quality of life (loss of welfare due to accidents)
(4) Costs of property damage
(5) Administrative costs


The relative shares of these five elements differ between fatalities and the various degrees
of injuries, and also differ among countries.
We assume that each country has its official valuations of accident injuries and damage.
Otherwise, the comparative figures from the recent studies can be of help5. All the values
are applicable for the WP4’s evaluations but, in every case, there should be a clear
indication which components of the above accident costs are included.
For the sake of comparability of the evaluation results, the monetary values will be
converted to € at 2002-prices.
The literature discusses mostly the valuations of fatalities and injuries whereas a CBA
usually needs average accident costs. In a simple case, the average accident cost can be
estimated as the sum of injury costs multiplied by the average number of injuries with
different severity levels, which were observed in the target accidents’ group; the damage
value per accident should be stated and added to the injury costs.


f. Implementation costs
The implementation costs should be determined for each safety measure considered. The
implementation costs are the social costs of all means of production (labour and capital)
that are employed to implement the measure.
The implementation costs are generally estimated on an individual basis for each
investment project. As no strict rules are available on the issue, performing a WP4’s
evaluation, all the components of the implementation costs should be explained. Typical
costs of engineering measures, which are recommended for the CBA evaluations in the
country, are desirable.
The implementation costs should be converted to their present values, which include both
investment costs and the annual costs of operation and maintenance. Similar to the case
of accidents costs, for the sake of comparability of the evaluation results, the monetary
values will be converted to € at 2002-prices.

4
  Alfaro, J-L.; Chapuis, M.; Fabre, F. (Eds): COST 313. Socioeconomic cost of road accidents. Report EUR
    15464 EN. Brussels, Commission of the European Communities, 1994.
5
  see Chapter 2 of WP3’s Handbook




                                                                                                   Page 11
case A: Anti-Lock braking systems for motorcycles




                                            ROSEBUD
                                      WP4 - CASE A REPORT




                      ANTI-LOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR
                              MOTORCYCLES




                                                    BY MARTIN WINKELBAUER,

                 AUSTRIAN ROAD SAFETY BOARD (KFV), AUSTRIA
                                 ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1     PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 15
2     DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................... 15
3     TARGET GROUP ................................................................................................. 16
4     ASSESSMENT METHOD ..................................................................................... 16
4.1   Choice of efficiency assessment method .............................................................. 16
4.2   Assessment Tool, Calculation Method .................................................................. 16
4.3   Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time ................. 16
4.4   Considered cost of the measure ........................................................................... 17
5     ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION ...................................................................... 17
5.1   Target group.......................................................................................................... 17
5.2   Accident statistics, number of licensed vehicles.................................................... 18
5.3   Unit of implementation .......................................................................................... 19
5.4   Crash costs ........................................................................................................... 19
5.5   Vehicle lifespan ..................................................................................................... 20
5.6   "NoVA": the tax to reduce...................................................................................... 20
5.7   ABS market prices ................................................................................................ 21
6     ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................... 21
7     DECISION-MAKING PROCESS........................................................................... 22
8     IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS .......................................................................... 22
9     CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION............................................................................... 22
1     PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 27
2     DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE.....................................................................27
2.1   System description................................................................................................ 28
2.2   Target accident group ........................................................................................... 29
2.3   Objectives of the measure .................................................................................... 29
2.4   Impact of Section Control on average speed ........................................................ 30
3     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS................................................................................. 31
3.1   Costs of the measure ............................................................................................ 31
3.2   Economic benefits due to reduced road traffic emissions ..................................... 31
3.3   Effect on accidents................................................................................................ 34
3.4   Revenues due to speed violation .......................................................................... 38
3.5   Computation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio.................................................................. 39
4     CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 40
5     DECISION-MAKING PROCESS........................................................................... 41




                                                                                                                       Page 13
                            ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure

1. Fitting motorcycles with anti-lock brake systems (ABS)
2. Reducing vehicle-specific taxes on ABS for motorcycles
Problem
On the one hand, ABS is highly beneficial in reducing motorcycle accident numbers and
severity. On the other hand, ABS is relatively expensive and still not very popular among
motorcycle riders, mostly due to the high costs. From the traffic safety point of view,
measures must be taken to support ABS equipment for motorcycles, i.e. to raise
consumers' willingness to invest in ABS.
Target Group
Motorcycle riders
Targets
Reduction of motorcycle accident numbers and severity
Initiator
Motorcycle dealer organisation
Decision-makers
Motorcycle dealer organisation, specific motorcycle manufacturer, Ministry of Finance
Costs
1. Costs of fitting motorcycles with ABS
2. Tax reduction on this share of the total motorcycle price
Benefits
Reduction of motorcycle accident numbers and severity, and all related costs.
No impacts on the environment, mobility needs and time consumption.
Cost-Benefit Ratio

                                                            crash reduction potential
                                                            8% (min)      10% (max)
                Cost/Benefit Ratio of ABS                      1.11          1.39
                Cost/Benefit Ratio of ABS – tax reduction      9.39         11.73




                                                                                        Page 14
                           ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES




1           Problem

Elaborate scientific studies clearly indicate that anti-lock brake systems (ABS) are highly
beneficial in reducing the number of motorcycle accidents and their severity. But still, only
a small number of motorcycle manufacturers offer motorcycles with ABS. Particularly in
the cheaper segments, motorcycles with ABS can hardly be found. Only in the segment of
expensive motorcycles are ABS frequently offered. It is quite obvious that the price of a
heavy, expensive motorcycle covers more easily the cost of fitting it with ABS.
Furthermore, only in the expensive segment is ABS frequently found as standard
equipment, while in the cheaper segments ABS has to be ordered and paid for separately.
It was found that the reasons for motorcycle drivers not to buy a motorcycle with ABS are:
•   ABS not available in the class of motorcycle they want to buy
•   ABS not available for the model they want to buy
•   lack of knowledge on the safety potential
•   price
•   biased opinions against ABS
If safety features for powered vehicles have to be promoted, tax reductions frequently are
named as an effective option. This option has been used effectively several times
particularly for measures reducing air pollution from passenger cars.


2           Description

Anti-lock brake systems are a very effective countermeasure against driver misbehaviour
in emergency situations. The daily training of a driver - including each and every braking
manoeuvre performed - creates a clear message: the closer the stopping distance, the
harder you have to brake. In an emergency situation where the expected stopping
distance exceeds the available space, the driver takes countermeasures within fractions of
a second according to this message. This means that the driver will pull the emergency
brake lever as hard as he or she can. This emergency reaction (reflex) cannot be
influenced by an average driver and can only be corrected afterwards by experienced and
well-trained drivers.
For the motorcycle, the reflex of emergency braking usually leads to blocking one or both
wheels, which immediately creates a very high danger of falling off the vehicle. Motorcycle
drivers are well aware of this danger and leave a huge "safety gap" between the
decelerations they actually apply and the real decelerating potential of their vehicles.
Motorcycle drivers use practically only about 60% of the decelerating potential of their
vehicles [VAVRYN, WINKELBAUER, 1998].
Anti-lock brake systems use different technical approaches. In general what they do is
avoid the blocking of wheels during braking. In most of the cases this will keep motorcycle
drivers from falling off their vehicles when braking under emergency conditions. In
addition, this will also enable motorcycle drivers to significantly improve their braking
performance [VAVRYN, WINKELBAUER, 2002]
Within this study, two different approaches are assessed. The first approach is anti-lock
brake systems itself as a vehicle-based safety measure. The second is tax reduction on


                                                                                       Page 15
                            ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



safety features, which generally reduces the price of a "safe vehicle". Applied to this case,
a lower price of ABS may encourage motorcycle drivers to buy motorcycles with ABS.


3            Target group

Basically, the target group for this measure is all motorcyclists purchasing a new
motorcycle. For the quantification of the safety effect [KRAMLICH, SPORNER, 2000]
relevant accident types (target accidents) were identified and the impact was assessed.
These results were combined in the end to give figures about the reduction potential on
the bases of all motorcycle accidents.


4            Assessment method


4.1          Choice of efficiency assessment method

•     ABS was assumed to have an impact on accidents of all severity categories.
•     Environmental impacts were not expected.
•     Time consumption impacts were not expected.
•     Effects on mobility needs were not expected.
Although there are only safety impacts to consider as benefits, these effects occur at
different levels of severity, i.e. fatal, severe and minor injuries and property damage. None
of the categories can be left out due to the size of impact. To combine all of these into a
common criterion, a cost/benefit analysis is needed.

4.2          Assessment Tool, Calculation Method

A self-made calculation method was chosen using a spreadsheet program.

4.3          Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time

Safety
To estimate the direct accident-reducing impact of ABS, a very elaborate study from
Germany was used as a reference for this efficiency assessment. Other direct impacts
than these were not expected. But it was not obvious how having an ABS on the vehicle
changes driver behaviour. Many studies have been performed to assess the safety impact
of ABS in passenger cars, most of them detecting that the safety effect of ABS is close to
zero. A survey based on accident data from the United States [FARMER et al, 1996]
indicates a small but significant increase of fatalities to occupants of ABS-equipped
passenger cars. Particularly, fatal single-vehicle crashes are more frequent if cars are
fitted with ABS. However, this particular study does not address impacts on other than
fatal injuries, and all these studies were based on passenger car accident data.
Although single-vehicle accidents are more frequent among motorcycle accidents, the
results found for passenger cars cannot simply be adopted for motorcycle accidents.
Particularly because the main effect of motorcycle ABS (avoidance of drivers falling of the
vehicle instantly after blocking one or both wheels) is not applicable to passenger cars.

                                                                                       Page 16
                             ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



There was no evidence that ABS have any impacts on motorcycle drivers' risk-taking
behaviour.
Environment, mobility, travel time
As indicated above, impacts on the environment, mobility and travel time were not
expected.

4.4          Considered cost of the measure

Initially, this study was intended to assess the effectiveness of reducing taxes on ABS, i.e.
the share of the total motorcycle price in terms of fitting it with ABS. This is an easy task if
ABS is offered as extra equipment and is not included in the regular price. For reasons of
comparability and to avoid complexity (not referred to in the studies estimating the
accident reduction potential), it was decided to also use these values for motorcycles with
ABS as standard equipment.


5            Assessment quantification


5.1          Target group

KRAMLICH and SPORNER published a study on accident reduction potential of
motorcycle ABS at the 2000 Ifz motorcycle conference. They identified accident types
where ABS may influence accident numbers and severity by using in-depth data from 910
motorcycle accidents that occurred on German roads.
Among 610 crashes involving one motorcycle and one passenger car, 65% involved the
motorcycle driver using the brake prior to the collision. Among these, 19% of the
motorcycle drivers fell off the vehicle. In 93% of these cases ABS would have avoided the
crash, or at least reduced the severity of the accident.
300 single-vehicle crashes were identified. 82.7% were accidents at corners (with 40% of
the drivers falling off the vehicle before a collision with an obstacle or running off the road)
and 17.3% on straight roads (50% drivers falling off). For least 40% of the single-vehicle
crashes, ABS would be beneficial by avoiding the accident or at least reducing its severity.
Applying these results to all motorcycle accidents including all types of crashes, ABS
would be beneficial in 54% of the cases. This gives a final estimate of reducing all fatal
and severe injuries to motorcycle drivers by 8 to 10% in Germany. To apply these findings
to Austria, two issues had to be checked:
•     Distributions of accident types in Germany and Austria were compared and were found
      to be very similar.
•     There is no evidence that the reduction potential found for each of the accident types
      should differ between Germany an Austria (e.g. the number of drivers braking prior to
      the collision).
Another question concerned which categories of motorcycles to integrate into the study.
The options were:
•     Light motorcycles: this term changed in definition during recent years; currently this
      means motorcycles with a maximum of 25 kW engine power and mass/power ratio of
                                                                                          Page 17
                             ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



      at least 0.16 kg/kW. This vehicle category has existed since 1991 with the introduction
      of the graduated licensing system, which defines this category as a novice driver bike.
•     "Kleinmotorrad": motorcycles with 50 cm³ capacity at most, but no speed limit. This
      category no longer exists, but there are still several thousand vehicles registered.
•     Moped: 50 cm³, 45 km/h speed limit.
•     Motorcycles with a side car.
•     Motorcycle: more or less all vehicles besides the categories mentioned above.
Since the light motorcycle is a sub-category of motorcycle, there is no difference in speed
limits and there are similar conditions in daily use. It was decided to select both these
categories, i.e. motorcycle and light motorcycle, and to leave out all other categories.
Besides, it is very unlikely that mopeds fitted with ABS will be on the market soon (or will
have a considerable market share). Driving dynamics of all vehicles running on more than
two wheels cannot be compared to powered two-wheelers (PTW).

5.2          Accident statistics, number of licensed vehicles

During recent years, motorcycle accident numbers changed significantly in Austria. The
number of licensed vehicles increased enormously. Although the total number of fatalities
and injuries has been relatively constant over the last decade, there was a significant shift
within the age distribution. While the number of younger accident victims went down, the
number of 35 to 55 year old persons injured or killed as motorcycle drivers grew
significantly. Particularly due to the strong increasing numbers of registered vehicles, it
was decided to focus on recent years. Between 2001 and 2002 the method of collecting
data on registered vehicles changed significantly, making data up to 2001 not comparable
to later numbers of registrations. Taking all this into account, accident and registration data
from 1999 to 2001 was taken as a basis for this assessment. The average of these years
was used for calculating total crash costs and crash costs per registered motorcycle. By
selecting this method, the latest available accident data without the shortcoming of
unsuitable registration data was chosen.




                                                                                         Page 18
                              ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



                       Table 2: Accident and vehicle statistics, Austria, 1987 - 2001
                           Motorcycle occupants and registrations in Austria

                              slight      severe      fatalities     total number of registered
                             injuries     injuries                 vehicles by the end of the year
                1987          1718         1,492        104                    87,920
                1988          1713         1,597        117                    99,445
                1989          1763         1,524        123                   104,840
                1990          1664         1,468         96                   105,177
                1991          1664         1,483        106                   112,219
                1992          1758         1,452         80                   124,904
                1993          1519         1,300         96                   138,034
                1994          1743         1,426         94                   154,297
                1995          1502         1,256         85                   174,907
                1996          1470         1,233         84                   193,685
                1997          1550         1,364        111                   212,791
                1998          1673         1,446         87                   236,314
                1999          1833         1,602        103                   261,744
                2000          1997         1,656        112                   278,118
                2001          1935         1,628        107                   293,053
              Mean 99-01     1,921.7      1,628.7      107.33                 277,638


5.3          Unit of implementation

There were two options do define a unit of implementation:
•     The entire vehicle park (i.e. all registered motorcycles in Austria)
•     one motorcycle
To make estimates for the whole vehicle park, it would have been necessary to predict
sales statistics on motorcycles in total and the share of motorcycles equipped with ABS.
The only advantage would have been to be able to predict the total budget needs when tax
reduction is given to safety equipment. Selecting one motorcycle gives a clearer picture of
the cost/benefit relation and is independent from future market development.

5.4          Crash costs

The accident costs for Austria were taken from the Austrian Road Safety Programme
2002-2010. The study by METELKA, CERWENKA and RIEBESMEIER (published 1997,
data from 1993) used does not include humanitarian costs and added value of the market.
As it was agreed upon for all ROSEBUD WP4 case studies, these values were adopted to
the 2002 price level.
A study to recalculate the accident costs for Austria is currently being prepared and will be
supported by the Federal Ministry of Transportation, Innovation and Technology. Referring
to the fact that this assessment deals with motorcycle accidents, is was decided to assume
the occurrence of major material damage in case of fatal and severe injuries, and minor
material damage only in cases of slight injuries.




                                                                                                     Page 19
                            ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



                                   Table 3: Crash costs in Austria

                                                           1993           2002
                      fatalities                       € 805,33      € 949,897
                      severe injuries                  € 43,605       € 51,439
                      slight injuries                   € 3,695        € 4,359
                      major material damage             € 4,870         € 5,745
                      minor material damage             € 1,242        € 1,465


5.5        Vehicle lifespan

The average lifespan of a motorcycle is a crucial question since it directly impacts the
annual implementation costs. Unfortunately this question is very difficult to answer; only
some basic conditions could be found to finally reach an estimate. The current vehicle
licensing statistics (including all vehicles currently having a licence plate) showed an
average age of 8.77 years for motorcycles, 8.06 years for light motorcycles and 8.53 years
all together if "old-timers" (first registration 1979 and earlier) are excluded. If these vehicles
are included and an average age of 28 years is estimated, the total average age is 11.19
years (9.86 for motorcycles and 13.27 years for light motorcycles). But these numbers
include all vehicles currently registered and therefore only determine a minimum for the
average lifespan.
It was estimated that a motorcycle with one calendar year, on average, is used for 78% of
the year, considering the sales per month and the duration of the motorcycle season in
Austria from April to October.
Some detailed data provided by Honda Austria showed that in the segment of touring and
Enduro motorcycles, about 15 years after some representative models were taken from
the market, more than 50% of the vehicles once sold were still registered. Crosschecks
have been performed by looking at the sales of spare parts that are regularly replaced.
This showed that these vehicles are not only in the licensing statistics, but also being
used. For the super sport segment, this procedure leads to much shorter estimates for
lifespan, what may be caused by the way these vehicles are used and who is using them.
In the luxury segment, after 20 years more than 90% of the vehicles are still on the roads.
To determine exactly the impact of vehicle park development on accident statistics
considering the market penetration with ABS equipped vehicles, detailed data on mileage
by vehicle age would have been necessary. Unfortunately such data was not available.
Considering all this input, the average lifespan of a motorcycle was estimated to be
12 years.

5.6        "NoVA": the tax to reduce

In Austria, 20% VAT has to be paid in most cases for powered vehicles. Additionally there
is the "Normverbrauchsabgabe" ("NoVA"), which can be translated as "fuel consumption
tax". For motorcycles, this tax equals 0.02% of the net price multiplied by the capacity in
cubic centimetres, then reduced by 100. On average, about 10% NoVA has to be paid
(data provided by Honda Austria). Generally, the NoVA percentage is applied to the price
of the vehicle including all extras and VAT. It was intended to discount the value of ABS
from the NoVA assessment base.



                                                                                           Page 20
                                ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



5.7          ABS market prices

There are different types of ABS systems on the market available at different costs. There
is a difference in the construction of these systems, but no evidence of different accident
reduction potential. Generally speaking, the cheaper system is used for motorcycles in a
lower price segment of vehicles.
Without VAT and NoVA the current market prices for the two systems were € 454.55 and €
862.07. Considering a market share of 67% for the cheaper system and transferring to
2002 prices, the average net market price for an ABS was considered to be € 561.11. The
average tax reduction would therefore be € 66.39 per vehicle.


6            Assessment Results

The calculation procedure:
•     Injuries of all severity levels were investigated, evaluated and the numbers from the
      years 1999 to 2001 were determined to be most useful for further assessment.
•     Total annual crash costs were calculated in reference to the unit of implementation, i.e.
      one motorcycle using average numbers of registered vehicles within this period.
•     Using the minimum and maximum of crash reduction potential, minimum and maximum
      monetary values for annual cost reductions were calculated.
•     The average lifespan of a motorcycle was investigated. Using statistics on currently
      registered vehicles, monthly sales statistics and statistics on specific vehicles
      comparing sales and number of vehicles still running, the lifespan was estimated at 12
      years.
•     Total cost reduction over the lifespan of a motorcycle was calculated.
•     ABS market prices were investigated and brought to 2002 price level.
•     Average tax rates were investigated.
•     Using all this data, the cost/benefit ratio was calculated for motorcycle ABS and for a
      NoVA tax elimination on motorcycle ABS.
        Table 4: costs and benefits of motorcycle ABS over the lifespan of an average vehicle, Austria

                                                                   crash reduction potential
                            costs per vehicle
                                                                   8% (min)      10% (max)
            average crash costs                                    € 623.24        € 779.06
            ABS costs                                              € 561.11        € 561.11
            Cost/Benefit Ratio of ABS                                1.11            1.39
            Cost/Benefit Ratio of ABS – tax reduction                9.39           11.73




                                                                                                         Page 21
                           ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES




7          Decision-Making Process

The case study "motorcycle ABS" was intended to be a "real life” case in the frame of
ROSEBUD WP4. This included taking the risk of not having feedback from the decision-
making process within the duration of WP4.
Before starting this case, it was intended to bring the case forward to the Ministry of
Finance together with another case, a change of taxes on particle emission filters for
diesel engines. This could not be achieved, besides, when this was done, the CBA on
motorcycle ABS was not finished. Another attempt to bring the case forward to the Ministry
of Finance was not successful. This was the current status when the work on WP4 cases
had to be finished.
The initial intention to integrate the Austrian Motorcycle Importers' Association into the
decision-making process had to be dropped due to political reasons. However, there will
be another attempt to reduce the tax on ABS for motorcycles using this CBA as a core
argument. If this step should be carried out with the duration of ROSEBUD, the
experiences will be considered for the final product and published in the ROSEBUD
newsletter.


8          Implementation barriers

Before starting this assessment, frame conditions were scanned for possible barriers,
considering the barriers identified in ROSEBUD WP2 and WP3.
None of the fundamental barriers seemed to play a significant role within this work.
A fundamental question was raised within this study: Is it appropriate to consider tax
reductions on safety equipment of vehicles as a road safety measure? This would mean to
only take this tax reduction into account as costs of the measure. Or will the entire cost of
the safety equipment have to be considered in a public economic sense?
Some shortcomings were found in the data available. There is no appropriate data on
vehicle mileage, particularly mileage data referring to the age of the vehicle.
At the beginning of this study it was clear that tax reductions on safety equipment had
never been granted before. Even internationally, no such cases could be found although
tax reductions are frequently proposed to promote safety equipment of vehicles.


9          Conclusion/Discussion

General
It was proposed by a research institute to carry out this assessment to support motorcycle
manufacturers and dealers in their intention to ask the Ministry of Finance for a tax
reduction on ABS for motorcycles. Particularly, if the Ministry of Finance is the recipient of
such a claim, the cost/benefit assessment seemed to be promising as an argument.
•   It was unclear whether tax reduction on vehicle safety equipment may exclusively be
    considered as a cost in the context of public economy, or the entire cost for this safety
    equipment has to be accounted for.




                                                                                        Page 22
                            ANTILOCK BRAKING SYSTEMS FOR MOTORCYCLES



•   If elimination of the "NoVA" tax on ABS purchase costs in Austria is considered as a
    road safety measure, it is cost effective by a factor of 9.39 to 11.73 (reduction of fatal
    and severe injuries by 8 to 10%).
•   The cost/benefit ratio of fitting motorcycles with an ABS is between 1.11 and 1.39
    (reduction of fatal and severe injuries by 8 to 10%) in Austria.
Technical
•   Accident data was easily accessible at an appropriate level of quality.
•   Vehicle registration data was easily accessible, however, a strong trend during the
    recent years gave some limitations on the time period to include.
•   The average lifespan of a vehicle (i.e. motorcycle) could not be determined directly.
•   There was no appropriate data on vehicle mileage and mileage by vehicle age to
    exactly determine exposure.
•   There was good evidence of the impact of the measure. Since this data was from
    abroad, it was necessary to check its validity in Austria, which was also easy to do.
•   It was easy to determine the costs of the measure, i.e. ABS market prices and average
    tax rates.
•   The calculations could easily be carried out using a spreadsheet program.


REFERENCES

KRAMLICH T., SPORNER, A. (2000): Zusammenspiel aktiver und passiver Sicherheit bei
                       Motorradkollisionen. GDV, Institut für Fahrzeugsicherheit,
                       München.
VAVRYN K., WINKELBAUER M. (1996):Bremsverzögerungswerte und Reaktionszeiten
                      bei Motorradfahrern, KfV. Wien.
SPORNER A. (1996): Ansatzpunkte für die Bewertung der Risikoexponierung bei
                         PKW/Motorrad - Kollisionen, Büro für Kfz-Technik, VdS.
                         München.
VAVRYN K., WINKELBAUER M. (1998): Bremskraftregeverhalten von Motorradfahrern,
                      KfV. Wien.
VAVRYN K., WINKELBAUER M. (2003): Bremsbedienung von Motorradfahrern mit und
                      ohne ABS, KfV. Wien.
ROSEBUD WP3 Report (2004): Improvements in efficiency assessment tools.
ROSEBUD WP2 Report (2004): Barriers to the use of efficiency assessment tools in road
                       safety policy.




                                                                                          Page 23
CASE B1: Section Control – Automatic Speed Enforcement in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel (Vienna, A22 motorway)




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE B REPORT


   SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED
ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL
         (VIENNA, A22 MOTORWAY)




                                                    BY CHRISTIAN STEFAN

                  AUSTIAN ROAD SAFETY BOARD (KFV), AUSTRIA
           SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




TABLE OF CONTENTS



1     PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 27
2     DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE.....................................................................27
2.1   System description................................................................................................ 28
2.2   Target accident group ........................................................................................... 29
2.3   Objectives of the measure .................................................................................... 29
2.4   Impact of Section Control on average speed ........................................................ 30
3     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS................................................................................. 31
3.1   Costs of the measure ............................................................................................ 31
3.2   Economic benefits due to reduced road traffic emissions ..................................... 31
3.3   Effect on accidents................................................................................................ 34
3.4   Revenues due to speed violation .......................................................................... 38
3.5   Computation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio.................................................................. 39
4     CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 40
5     DECISION MAKING PROCESS........................................................................... 41




                                                                                                                    Page 25
             SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Section Control - Automatic Speed Enforcement in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel (Vienna, A22
motorway)

Problem
Traffic accidents due to excessive speeding
Target Accident Group
All accidents in the tunnel
Objectives
Reducing accidents and harmonization of traffic flow (reduction of “Stop-and-Go” traffic or
congestion during peak hours)
Initiator
Austrian highway operator (ASFINAG)
Decision makers
Austrian highway operator (ASFINAG), Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and
Technology, Federal Ministry of the Interior, local government of the municipality of Vienna
Costs
Capital costs are divided into costs for construction and maintenance costs; investments
into the construction of the Section Control are covered by the ASFINAG, whereas
operating costs are covered by the Federal Ministry of the Interior
Benefits
Benefits include reductions in accidents and savings in road traffic emissions. Running
costs of the system are cleared by fines from speed violators
Cost-Benefit Ratio
Cost-Benefit Ratio for tunnels on urban motorways: 5.4




                                                                                        Page 26
            SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




1          Problem
Exceeding the speed limit is probably the most common law violation among drivers. Yet,
only a small proportion of all traffic violators are detected, i.e. the risk of being
apprehended is usually very low. According to the Federal Ministry of the Interior,
inappropriate speed is responsible for more than a third of all fatal accidents occurring on
Austrian roads. Measures to reduce the percentage of speeders would therefore amount in
a significant reduction of both casualty accidents and severity of injuries. Speed limits are
usually set in accordance with road conditions, traffic volume, proximity to sensitive areas,
such as residential areas and schools, and a host of other factors. Motorists are expected
to obey posted speed limits at all times.
Traditional manual and stationary speed enforcement methods are limited in their effects
and require a lot of human resources. Automatic speed enforcement on the other hand is
intended to provide enhanced capacity for enforcement by applying technical solutions that
do not require the presence of police officers at the scene of an offence. Systems for
automatic speed enforcement (including Section Control) are designed to detect and
identify traffic violators automatically. Identification is solely based on photographs of the
vehicle or the driver, respectively.

2          Description of the measure

The Kaisermühlen Tunnel is an urban tunnel with separate tubes for each direction of
traffic. More than 90,000 vehicles use this part of the A22 motorway everyday; about 10%
consist of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV). Due to a nearby tank lot, the share of HGV
carrying flammable liquids (e.g. motor spirits, diesel oil) is extremely high. The tunnel
offers 3-4 lanes per direction with entrance and exit ramps within the tunnel.
               Figure 1: Site overview of the Section Control in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel




                                                                                           Page 27
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



              Table 5: Road characteristics of the Kaisermühlen Tunnel

                                               KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL
               Road classification                        Urban motorway (A22)
               Type of road                               Tunnel with two tubes
               Number of lanes per direction              3-4
               Width per lane                             3.5 m
               Length                                     2.3 km
                                                          Passenger cars, buses, motorcycles: 80
               Speed limit                                km/h
                                                          Heavy Goods Vehicles (>7,5 t): 60 km/h
               Daily traffic (20036)                      91,915 vehicles/24 hours
               Amount of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV)       10.0%
              Source: Vienna Municipal Department 34, own calculations


2.1           System description

In close cooperation with the Federal Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology,
the Federal Ministry of the Interior and the municipality of Vienna, the Austrian highway
operator (ASFINAG) introduced a new instrument of traffic surveillance to reduce
accidents and traffic delays in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel on one of Vienna’s most
frequented motorways (A22) in August 2003. This so-called Section Control does not
measure speed at a certain point in space and time, but calculates the average speed by
means of passage time in a defined area (see Figure 2). The aim is to force drivers not
only to slow down at certain points of stationary speed control (e.g. automatic speed
cameras), but also adhere to the speed limit over the entire distance. It also provides live
monitoring of traffic flow behaviour and thus contributes to harmonizing traffic flow
performance.

The system consists of two facilities, one for each driving direction. Vehicle detection is
carried out optically. A video system placed above the road on gantries (one camera
above each of the three lanes) takes two pictures of each passing vehicle, one at the
beginning of the tunnel and one at the end. These photographs provide details of the event
(passage time, use of lane) and the license plate number. Furthermore a laser scanner
installed adjacent to the video system is programmed to differentiate between passenger
cars and lorries (HGV), which is fundamental to keep different speed limits under
surveillance.

At the entrance and exit of the Kaisermühlen Tunnel, laser scanners are installed to obtain
the required data. The system continually looks for two matching license plates - if a match
is found, the average speed is calculated and if it exceeds a defined level, an image of the
license plate is transmitted to the traffic supervision department. This information is used
to establish the owner of the vehicle via the national motor vehicle and driver’s license
registration database. Data of vehicles not exceeding the pre-set speed limit (plus a


6
    Computed data by means of a linear regression model. Vehicle data related from the automatic counting
    station have been inadequate due to false HGV readings in one direction.

                                                                                                     Page 28
              SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



certain tolerance) are deleted immediately afterward. Only aggregated data is kept for
statistical reasons.
                    Figure 2: Scheme of Section Control in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel




                   Source: Vienna Municipal Department 34

The Section Control system is designed to operate with speeds up to 250 km/h and a
maximum traffic flow of 2 vehicles per second and lane. Vehicle detection is independent
of the position of a vehicle on or between lanes. There is no necessity for pavement
installations (like inductive loops) or disruption of the traffic flow.

2.2          Target accident group

The target accident group of this measure consists of accidents occurring in the
Kaisermühlen Tunnel. This survey concentrates on injury accidents because data for
material damage accidents could not be collected without enormous strains on budget and
working hours. Thus, the cost-benefit ratio computed in the following chapters
underestimates the real impacts on accidents to a certain extent. This should be kept in
mind whenever Section Control systems are considered for further use in traffic safety
programmes.

2.3          Objectives of the measure

The main task of Section Control is the measurement of average speed of motor vehicles
for the purpose of speed control and traffic enforcement. Contrary to the majority of
commonly used speed control systems, which mostly operate in combination with Doppler
radars, the Section Control system supervises the traffic performance along a defined road
section. It also offers a wide range of additional features regarding traffic surveillance.
Objectives
      • Monitoring different speed limits that apply to different vehicle classes
      • Harmonization of traffic flow (reduction of “Stop-and-Go” traffic or congestion
         during peak hours)
      • Surveillance of closed lanes (in combination with route information and
         management systems)

                                                                                          Page 29
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



       • Detection of wrong-way drivers (“ghost cars”)
       • Image triggering (including alarm release) for vehicles exceeding height limits
       • Detection of stolen vehicles
       • Traffic surveillance (for the tunnel operator)
       • Statistical data (traffic speed, loads, headways)

2.4           Impact of Section Control on average speed

According to the Federal Ministry of the Interior7, in 2003 more than 35% of fatal accidents
on roads in Austria occurred because of inappropriate speed. As mentioned in the
previous chapter, the main objective of Section Control is harmonization of speed, which
has a positive influence on accidents. In its first year of operation, a reduction in average
speed by more than 10 km/h was recorded (see Figure 3). Traditional mobile and
stationary speed surveillance (in use before the Section Control started operating) showed
the average speed of all vehicles to be 85 km/h, whereas this value decreased to about 70
km/h shortly after the introduction of the measure. Further speed measurements carried
out after a 6-month period revealed that average speed on this road section has levelled
off to 75 km/h due to the fact that drivers tend to follow regulations in a very strict manner
right after their implementation, but less some time afterwards due to unintended
behavioural adaptations (”kangaroo effect“).
Drivers started acting in accordance with the speed limit as soon as technical installations
were established, and reports about this new system of speed control appeared in the
media.
                         Figure 3: Effect of Section Control on average vehicle speed




                 Source: Vienna Municipal Department 34

In close cooperation with local police services and employees of the Institute for Driver
Education and Vehicle Technology of the Austria Road Safety Board (KfV), the following
distinction in average speed of passenger cars and HGV during daytime (5 am - 10 pm)
and night time (10 pm - 5 am) was made. This breakdown is essential for calculating
detailed traffic emissions and fuel consumption for different road users.



7
    KfV, 2004, page 50

                                                                                           Page 30
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



    Table 6: Average speed of passenger cars and lorries before and after implementation of Section Control

                                       Passenger cars                             HGV
                                    Before            After             Before            After
                    Daytime        85 km/h           75 km/h            70 km/h         55 km/h
                    Night time     95 km/h           75 km/h            75 km/h         55 km/h
                   Source: own estimates in cooperation with local police services



3             Cost-Benefit Analysis

3.1           Costs of the measure

Investment costs for the Section Control in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel add up to €
1,200,000 (2003 price). Construction work of gantries, cables and data lines to the Section
Control server are included in this price. Annual costs of operation and maintenance are
about € 60,000, covering a service contract of 4 service cycles per year plus additional
repairs if the system starts malfunctioning. In order to avoid disruption of traffic flow,
maintenance and repairs are done during night hours when traffic is usually very low.
According to the Austrian highway operator (ASFINAG), the Section Control system has a
10-year service life, beginning in 2003. After that period, software problems and missing
spare parts for the hardware are expected to affect full operation of the system. Investment
costs are incorporated in the form of an annual capital cost assuming a 4 percent interest
rate in real terms (see Table 7). For the sake of comparability, all costs were converted to
their 2002-price level. Total annual costs for operating the Section Control add up to €
204,272 per year.
                   Table 7: Total annual costs of Section Control in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel

                                           EURO                                     EURO
                                        (2003-price)                             (2002-price)

                                                                          Annual capital costs    Total annual
          Expense factors                    Costs            Costs
                                                                            [n=10, 4% p.a.]          costs

          Investment costs                   1,200,000    1,178,782                     145,333
                                                                                                      204,272
          Annual maintenance costs             60,000          58,939
         Source: Vienna Municipal Department 34, own calculations


3.2             Economic benefits due to reduced road traffic emissions

Road traffic is a major source of air pollution and emission of greenhouse gases in Austria.
Although improvements in vehicle technology, the introduction of exhaust treatment
systems (catalytic converters), and the development of higher quality fuels have to some
extent significantly reduced emissions from vehicles, this effect has levelled off by a still
ongoing increase in traffic performance. According to latest studies8, traffic volume in and
around Vienna will rise by more than 90% by 2035 due to a steady increase in resident
population, decentralization and daily distances covered.

8
    SAMMER et al, 2004, page 25

                                                                                                          Page 31
              SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



As stated in the previous chapter, a major effect of Section Control is harmonization of
velocity, i.e. vehicle drivers maintain a constant speed, reducing “Stop-and-Go” traffic and
congestion. The model9 used for computing the resulting changes in road traffic emissions
was created by the Austrian Umweltbundesamt, the governmental authority for protection
and control of the environment, in close cooperation with associated institutes in Germany
and Switzerland. The “Handbook of Emission Factors for Road Transport” provides
emission factors in g/km for all current vehicle types (passenger cars, Light Duty Vehicles,
Heavy Goods Vehicles and motorcycles), each divided into different categories for a
variety of traffic situations. The following parameters have been used to define the model:

      •   Type of emission: hot emissions, cold start emissions, evaporation
      •   Vehicle type: passenger car - Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV)
      •   Estimated changes in composition of the vehicle fleet (2003-2013)
      •   Air pollutants (CO, NOx, SO2, PM10, VOC) and carbon dioxide (CO2)
      •   Type of road: urban motorway
      •   Time of day: daytime/night time

Table 8 gives values for both air pollutants and CO2 as the most important greenhouse
gas emitted by road traffic. As can be seen from the annotations in the footnote, different
literature sources were used to obtain monetary estimations for the most important air
pollutants emitted during combustion. To arrive at 2002 prices, German Mark (DM) and
Norwegian Krona (NOK) were first converted into Austrian Shillings (ATS) and then
brought to a 2002 price level by using official inflation rates (see appendix). Values of
traffic emissions were finally converted to € by multiplication with 0.07267.
       Table 8: Valuation of environmental impacts for use in cost-benefit analyses

                                                                  Value per unit
       Air pollution      Unit of valuation
                                                      DM (1995)10 NOK (1995)11          € (2002)
                           Tons of NOx-
       CO                                                     1700                       974.64
                           Equivalent12
       NOx                 kg of NOx                                           115        14.90

       SO2                 kg of SO2                                            37         4.79

       Particle (PM10)     kg of PM10                                        1800        233.27

       VOC                 kg of VOC                                            15         1.94

       CO2                 Tons of CO2                                         220        28.51
      Source: own calculations

For quite some years, considerable efforts have been made by the European Commission
to reduce fuel consumption and, consequently, emissions of carbon dioxide. In 1992, the
Auto-Oil I Program was introduced within the European Union to define emission ceilings


9
  KELLER, HAUSBERGER, 2004
10
   EWS, 1997, page 41
11
   ELVIK, 1999, page 24
12
   Conversion factor: 1 ton of CO = 0.003 tons of NOx-Equivalent (EWS, 1997, page 41)

                                                                                                   Page 32
            SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



(EURO classes) for passenger cars as well as Heavy Goods Vehicles, and to set quality
standards for fuels for 2000 and beyond.

One key measure in this respect was a voluntary agreement with car manufactures to
reduce CO2 emissions from new passenger cars to 140 g/km by the year 2008/2009. For
the Kaisermühlen Tunnel, this boost in vehicle technology, along with a lower average
speed due to Section Control, results in more than 12,000 tons of saved CO2 emissions,
having a discounted monetary value of more than € 280,000 (see Table 9).


       Table 9: Monetary value of saved emissions due to Section Control (accumulated
                value 2003-2013)

                                   Changes in road        Discounted value of traffic
                                 traffic emissions (t)    emissions in € (2002-price)
         CO                                      - 14.9                           -137

         NOx                                     - 39.0                       -431,639

         SO2                                      - 0.4                         -1,552

         Particle (PM10)                          - 0.5                        -87,029

         VOC                                     + 7.3                        +11,247

         CO2                                - 12,879.6                        -281,973

         Accumulated value                                                    -791.084

         Monetary value of saved emissions per year                            -79,108
       Source: Austrian Umweltbundesamt, own calculations

Nitrogen oxide emissions are among the most harmful of all air pollutants. Thus, various
nitrogen oxide catalytic converters have been developed which will help to reduce
emissions of NOx significantly over the next 10 years. Expected changes can be seen in
Table 9, which states above all a constant decrease in saved nitrogen oxide emissions
because of improvements in vehicle technology. In the year 2003 nearly 6 tons of NOx
were saved through Section Control. This value decreases to one ton of NOx in 2013.
Calculated over the economic lifetime of the Section Control system, savings in NOx
emissions amount to a value of more than € 430,000.

Volatile organic compounds (VOC), in combination with nitrogen oxides, are responsible
for ground level ozone and smog. VOC are primarily produced when fuels are incompletely
combusted. Looking at the VOC traffic emissions in the period under observation, an
increase of one ton in 2003 and slightly less in the following years has been calculated.
This is due to the fact that most vehicle engines have their lowest VOC output between 80
and 100 km/h. A decrease in average speed to 75 km/h (passenger cars) or 55 km/h
(HGV) amounts to an increase of VOC emissions.




                                                                                         Page 33
                                                      SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



                                                        Figure 4: Changes in the emission of air pollutants due to Section Control
                                                                                                   VOC          CO       NOx      PM10        SO2

                                                 1




                                                 0
                                                        2003




                                                                   2004




                                                                               2005




                                                                                      2006




                                                                                                         2007




                                                                                                                      2008




                                                                                                                                   2009




                                                                                                                                                  2010




                                                                                                                                                         2011




                                                                                                                                                                      2012




                                                                                                                                                                             2013
                                                 -1
         Changes in road traffic emissions [t]




                                                 -2




                                                 -3




                                                 -4




                                                 -5




                                                 -6
                                                                                                            Period under observation



       Source: own calculations

3.3                                              Effect on accidents

In its first year of operation, a positive impact of Section Control concerning accidents in
the Kaisermühlen Tunnel was observed. Apart from the reduction in total numbers of
casualty accidents, the severity of injury was also positively affected. In a four-year period
prior to the start of the Section Control system (Ib-IVb), one fatality, one person severely
and 10 slightly injured have been recorded on average every year. Since August 2003 no
fatal or severely injured road user was observed in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel, while the
number of slightly injured drivers decreased to a total of 7 in the after-period (see
Table 10).
      Table 10: Injury accidents before and after the implementation of Section Control
                                                                                                                  Injury                                  Seriously          Slightly
                                                 From                     To          Period                                              Fatalities
                                                                                                                accidents                                  injured           injured
        12.08.1999                                                 12.08.2000                IVb                       7                      1                 0                   10

        12.08.2000                                                 12.08.2001                IIIb                      7                      0                 1                    9

        12.08.2001                                                 12.08.2002                IIb                       7                      1                 1                   11

        12.08.2002                                                 12.08.2003                Ib                        7                      0                 0                    9

        12.08.2003                                                 12.08.2004                Ia                        5                      0                 0                    7

                                                               Mean (IVb – Ib)                                       7.0                     0.5                0.5                 9.8
      Source: own calculations

Accidents are statistically rare events. Part of the nature of such events is that the precise
time and place of their occurrence, as well as the precise nature of their impacts, are
hardly predictable, i.e. in some periods the recorded number of accidents on given points
of the road network are greater (or less) than the average values expected for those
points. In Figure 5, the grey dots represent the recorded number of accidents and slightly

                                                                                                                                                                                          Page 34
                                          SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



injured road users in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel (fatal and serious injuries were omitted due
to small numbers). The white dots show the moving average of the annual counts. In the
first year, this is the same as the number of accidents or slightly injured for that year. In the
second year, it is the average of the first two years, in the third year, it is the average of the
first three years, etc.
It can be seen that the recorded number of slightly injured road users in a given year is not
necessarily representative of the mean annual number. The annual recorded number of
slightly injured, for example, varies between 9 and 11. Thus, if a safety inspection leads to
choosing these points for treatment, a selection bias occurs and, in the measurements
made after the treatment, an effect of diminution is registered (regression to the mean)
independent of the treatment. The average value of the four years prior to the installation
of Section Control (Ib-IVb) have been chosen as the base for a medium-long term trend.

        Figure 5: Recorded number of accidents and slightly injured in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel –
                  mean of the annual numbers
                                                               Recorded number of accidents                   Annual mean accidents
                                                               Recorded number of slightly injured            Annual mean of slightly injured

                                                   12




                                                        10,0                                                            11
                                                                                                                                                9,8
                                                   10                           9,5
                                                        10                                                             10,0


                                                                                 9                                                              9
            Number of accidents/slightly injured




                                                    8
                                                         7                       7                                      7                       7


                                                        7,0                     7,0                                    7,0                      7,0
                                                    6




                                                    4




                                                    2




                                                    0
                                                        IVb                     IIIb                                    IIb                     Ib
                                                                                             Before periods


        Source: own calculations

To properly quantify the safety effect of Section Control, a simple before/after comparison
of accidents is not suitable. It is necessary to compare the situation with Section Control
(“after”) with the anticipated situation that would have occurred without Section Control.
The latter presents a calculated value of a previously observed (“before”) situation.
Therefore, various types of risk indicators (fatality rate, rate of severely injured road users,
etc.) and their means and standard deviations were computed (see Table 11).
Traffic performance in the before period (Ib-IVb) increased in a linear manner, while in the
after-period (Ia) a slight drop in vehicle-km was observed. This phenomenon is due to the
fact that traffic capacity on this road section has apparently reached its limit. Without
further investments in additional lanes or route information and management systems, a
further increase in daily traffic is unlikely. Because numbers of fatal and serious injuries
are too low to produce meaningful results, these two categories were combined for further
calculations. Furthermore, some effects of serious injuries on the quality of life (e.g.
lifelong paraplegia) deem it necessary to ascribe these victims the same weight as
fatalities.


                                                                                                                                                      Page 35
                 SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




               Table 11:Traffic performance and accident rates [per million vehicle-km] in the
                        Kaisermühlen Tunnel

                                      Traffic
                                                                    Rate of fatal
                                 performance                                         Rate of slight
                 Period                             Accident rate   and serious
                                [million vehicle-                                      injuries
                                                                      injuries
                                       km]
                   IVb                 67.6             0.10             0.015            0.15

                   IIIb                70.3             0.10             0,014            0.13

                   IIb                 72.2             0.10             0,028            0.15

                    Ib                 74.8             0.09             0,000            0.12

                    Ia                 74.5             0.07             0,000            0.09

                            Mean (IVb - Ib)             0.10             0.014            0.14

                  Standard deviation (IVb - Ib)         0.004            0.011            0.015
               Source: own calculations
The corrected “before” value (number of accidents, fatalities or injured people without
treatment) results from multiplying the average number of accidents (per million vehicle-
km) in Table 11 with the traffic performance in the “after” period (Ia). The ratio of “after” and
(corrected) “before” values constitutes the actual safety effect of the measure.
                    Table 12: Corrected before and after values of accident severity due to Section Control

                                                Corrected before value     After value    Ratio13

                          Injury accidents                7                      5         0.71
                          Fatal and serious
                                                          1                      0         0.00
                          injuries
                          Slightly injured                10                     7         0.70

                    Source: own calculations
The analysis also controls for general trends in the number of accidents by using the total
number of accidents on motorways in the “before” and “after” period as a comparison
group (see Table 13). The mean number of comparison group accidents in the before
period was 2,485, respectively, and 2,540 in the “after” period. Thus, the number of
comparison group accidents is sufficiently large to be only minimally influenced by random
fluctuations. The effect of Section Control on the number of accidents (or fatalities or
injured road users) was estimated as follows:
                                     Safety effect [%] = 1- [Xa/E(m)b] / [Ca/Cb]
     whereas
       Xa = recorded number of accidents in the “after” period
       E(m)b = expected number of accidents (correct before value) in the “before” period
       Ca = number of comparison group accidents in the “after” period
       Cb = number of comparison group accidents in the “before” period



13
     Slightly different numbers due to round off errors in the computation of the ratio

                                                                                                        Page 36
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



      Table 13: Injury accidents and severity of casualties on Austrian motorways in the before/after period
                                                             Injury                     Seriously   Slightly
             From               To              Period                    Fatalities
                                                           accidents                     injured    injured
           12.08.1999       12.08.2000           IVb           2,535        134           1,218      2,847

           12.08.2000       12.08.2001           IIIb          2,468        165           1,255      2,703

           12.08.2001       12.08.2002            IIb          2,402        121           1,173      2,663

           12.08.2002       12.08.2003            Ib           2,534        124           1,133      2,819

           12.08.2003       12.08.2004            Ia           2,440        108           1,165      2,642

                        Mean (IVb – Ib)                        2,485        136           1,195     2,758
        Source: Road Accident Database of the Austrian Road Safety Board (KfV)

Statistical inference draws conclusions about a population based on sample data. It also
provides a statement, expressed in the language of probability, of how much confidence
we can place in the conclusions. The different values for the safety effect of Table 14 acts
as estimators of the (unknown) population parameter. The purpose of a confidence interval
is to estimate this parameter with an indication of how accurate the estimate is and how
confident we are that the result is correct. Any confidence interval consists of two parts: an
interval computed from the data and a confidence level. The confidence level states the
probability that the method will give a correct answer. That is, if you use a 95% confidence
interval, the probability that the true value is out of this interval is only 0.05.

Table 14 and Table 15 show estimates and 95% confidence intervals of the safety effects
of Section Control on accidents. Computing the Odds Ratio, note that if any value out of 4
numbers involved in the evaluation is zero, a correction must be applied, i.e. 0.5 should be
added to each number.14
                           Table 14: Safety effect of Section Control on accident severity

                                                               Odds ratio Safety effect [%]

                             Injury accidents                     0.69          -30.5

                             Fatal and serious injuries           0.34          -66.4

                             Slightly injured                     0.72          -28.4
                           Source: own calculations

       Table 15: Best estimate and confidence interval of the safety effect of Section Control on accidents

                                                   Percentage change in the number of accidents

                     Accident severity          Best estimate            95% confidence interval
                     Injury accidents                    -31                     (-35; -26)
                     Fatal and serious
                                                         -66                    (-82; +143)
                     injuries
                     Slightly injured                    -28                     (-39; -13)
                    Source: own calculations




14
     FLEISS, 1981, page 64

                                                                                                               Page 37
              SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



Table 16 gives an economic valuation of savings in the number of accidents and severity
of injury due to Section Control. The original values were obtained from a study on
economic costs of accidents15. Figures were then converted into EURO (€) and brought to
a 2002 price level by using official inflation rates (see appendix). As can be seen from the
bottom line of the table, the safety effect of the Section Control system amounts to annual
savings of more than 1 million €.

               Table 16: Valuation of savings in the number of accidents and
                          severity of injury due to Section Control

                               Amount of         € per unit
                  Category                                       Cumulated value
                                savings        (2002-price)

                Fatalities           1               949,897                949,897
                Seriously
                                     1                 51,439                51,439
                injured
                Slightly
                                     3                  4,359                13,077
                injured
                Property
                                     2                  5,745                11,490
                damage

                Total                                                      1,025,903
               Source: own calculations

3.4          Revenues due to speed violation
In the period under observation (13.09.2003 - 27.08.2004), more than 29 million vehicles
passed through the Kaisermühlen Tunnel and about 40,000 drivers were charged because
of excessive speeding (see Table 17). That is, only 0.14% or every 700th driver, does not
follow speed regulations on this road section and drives too fast. The top speed of a
vehicle heading north was 175 km/h and 154 km/h heading south. About 5% (2,161) of all
fines issued were acquired by HGVs. Keeping in mind that more than 10% of daily traffic is
due to HGVs, a possible explanation for this phenomenon can be found in the high
proportion of foreign vehicles among lorries. Due to the fact that mutual recognition of
financial penalties has only been established with Germany and Switzerland, most of the
foreign speed violators cannot be prosecuted.
              Table 17: Speed violations and charges in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel

                                Vehicles passing                       Fines
                                  the Section                                        All
                                    Control            Passenger cars      HGV
                                                                                   vehicles
               Heading
                                    13,450,345             19,162           951        20,113
               south (A23)
               Heading north
                                    15,973,473             19,558          1,210       20,768
               (Stockerau)
               Total                29,423,818             38,720          2,161       40,881
              Source: Federal Ministry of the Interior, own calculations




15
     BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR WISSENSCHAFT UND VERKEHR, 1997, page 136-141

                                                                                                Page 38
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



At the Tampere European Council (15 and 16 October 1999), the Heads of State or
Government of the EU-Member states and the President of the Commission agreed that
mutual recognition of criminal and financial matters should be a cornerstone of judicial
cooperation within the European Union. Thus, France, the United Kingdom and Sweden
initiated the adoption of a Council Framework Decision that enables member states to
execute criminal and financial offences against citizens of other member states. Although
this proposal is far from reaching legal status due to objections from several countries, it
can be expected to pass legislation within the next 3-5 years. Obtaining fines from foreign
speed violators should then be possible and benefits will be maximized.

According to Austrian law16 80% of the fines from speed violations belong to the operator
of the infrastructure, which (in case of the Section Control) is the Austrian highway
operator (ASFINAG). The remaining 20% are used to cover the maintenance costs of the
system settled by the Federal Ministry of the Interior.

Table 18 gives fines for different levels of speeding. Drivers exceeding the speed limit by
more than 50 km/h have their driving licences revoked. During the observation period, this
happened in 46 cases.
                      Table 18: Revenues due to excessive speeding in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel

                                                                      Revenues due to
                                            Fine         Violators
                                                                       speed violation
                           0 – 9 km/h        € 21          16,176                  339,696

                         10 – 19 km/h        € 42          22,048                  926,016

                         20 – 29 km/h        € 56            2083                  116,648

                         30 – 39 km/h        € 70             409                   28,630

                         40 – 50 km/h       € 140             119                   16,660

                                 Total                     40,881              1,427,650
                      Source: Federal Ministry of the Interior, own calculations


3.5            Computation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio

The Cost-Benefit Analysis is based on the principle of economic efficiency, i.e. to estimate
if a measure is worth being implemented, the benefits and costs of the treatment are
computed and brought into relationship. The benefit term includes all positive (monetary)
effects of the measure. In the case of Section Control, benefits consist of reductions in
accidents and road traffic emissions. Revenues from speed violators were omitted in the
calculation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio because of the fact that in an economic point of view,
it is irrelevant if the money belongs to consumers buying goods and therefore increasing
their personal benefits or the highway operator that uses the fines for additional safety
campaigns. The Cost-Benefit Ratio will be the same at both events.
Different benefits are added to obtain a total benefit. The cost term on the other hand
denotes implementation and maintenance costs.


16
     StVO, Article 100, Paragraph No.10

                                                                                                Page 39
                SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



The Cost/Benefit-Ratio (CBR) is defined as:

                          Present value of all benefits
             CBR =
                      Present value of implementation costs

Combining the benefits and costs calculated in the previous chapters, a net present value
of all benefits (without fines from speeders) of € 1,105,011 and costs of € 204,272 is
obtained (see Table 19). Both values amount to a Cost/Benefit-Ratio of 5.4. According to
analyses of safety measures in Work Package 1 of ROSEBUD17, measures with a CBR
larger than 3 are ranked “excellent”.
                     Table 19: Present value of benefits and costs in € (2002-price) due
                                to Section Control
                     Components of the CBA                      Benefits           Costs

                      Road traffic emissions                     79,108

                      Accident costs                          1,025,903
                      Installation and maintenance
                                                                                204,272
                      costs
                      Total                                   1,105,011         204,272

                     Source: Austrian Umweltbundesamt, Federal Ministry of the
                             Interior, Vienna Municipal Department 34, own calculations


4              Conclusions

The results of the Cost-Benefit Analysis lead to the following conclusions:
      •   Although accidents rates in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel were already well below
          average (0.12 injury accidents per million vehicle-km on Austrian motorways), a
          positive safety effect of Section Control was achieved. It can be estimated that the
          effect would be even more convincing if this safety measure had been implemented
          to road sections with accident rates above the average. In the weeks to come,
          another Section Control system will start operating on the motorway A2 near mount
          “Wechsel”. Previous studies showed that this road section has an accident rate
          three times above the average. Thus, an even better safety performance than the
          Section Control in the Kaisermühlen Tunnel can be expected.
      •   This survey concentrates on injury accidents because data for material damage
          accidents could not be collected without enormous strains on budget and working
          hours. Thus, the Cost-Benefit Ratio computed underestimates the real effects to a
          certain extent. This should be kept in mind whenever Section Control systems are
          considered for further use in traffic safety programs.
      •   Due to the fact that mutual recognition of financial penalties only exists with
          Germany and Switzerland, most of the foreign speed violators cannot be
          prosecuted. As soon as the Council Framework Decision on mutual recognition of


17
     Road Safety and Environmental Benefit-Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Use in Decision-making.
      ROSEBUD is a thematic network funded by the European Commission to support users of efficiency
      assessment tools at all levels of government.

                                                                                                    Page 40
             SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL



        criminal and financial matters has reached legal status, obtaining fines from foreign
        speed violators should be possible and benefits will be maximized.
    •   With the instrument of Cost/Benefit Analysis, it is possible to incorporate various
        effects of this safety measure into the evaluation process, i.e. not only reductions in
        casualty accidents and severity of injuries, but also impacts on the environment,
        such as road traffic emissions. A major problem of road traffic, which has been
        neglected due to the special situation of the Kaisermühlen Tunnel, is traffic noise.
        Regional governments in Austria have already expressed their intention to use
        Section Control as a means to reduce traffic noise in residential areas. Such an
        application of Section Control will raise the Cost-Benefit Ratio even more.
    •   The effects of Section Control are closely related to outside influences such as
        annual average daily traffic (AADT), accident rates, amount of HGVs, etc. That is, if
        you change the site you will probably get different results than the ones present in
        this case study.


5           Decision-Making Process

The results of Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) on Section Control were presented to officials
of the Austrian highway operator (ASFINAG) to answer the question whether this method
will be taken into consideration in the future.
Regarding the use of Efficiency Assessment Tools (EAT) such as CBA in the decision
making process, it was stated that at the time being, such instruments were too complex.
Candidates for the introduction of further Section Control systems on the existing road
network will initially be detected by comparing accident and fatality rates of road sections
with the motorway average of this type of road. The decision whether or not Section
Control is an appropriate instrument to reduce accident risk is then made after thorough
analysis of cause and type of accidents on this specific section.
Further concerns were expressed that the results and methodology of EAT are hard to
communicate to the public. The more complex the decision making process, the more
likely it would be that people mistrust those findings. Another aspect regarding the use of
EAT is politically motivated. In the aftermath of catastrophic accidents, such as the fire in
the Tauern Tunnel (1999), political pressure concerning a second tube became so high
that even if a CBA had led to a negative Cost-Benefit Ratio, this measure would have been
implemented nonetheless.
Although it is unlikely that CBA will be used in decision making in the near future, officials
of the ASFINAG considered Efficiency Assessment Tools an adequate instrument in those
cases where decisions cannot be made solely based on accident statistics.
Changes in ASFINAG policy could also lead to an increased demand of Efficiency
Assessment Tools in the decision making process. As soon as environmental aspects,
such as traffic emissions and traffic noise, are considered as important as improving traffic
safety, instruments including those aspects are to become an essential part in decision-
making. Till then the most influencing factors are accidents and fatality rates and the
amount of daily traffic, respectively.




                                                                                         Page 41
           SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




References

[1]   AUSTRIAN FEDERAL ECONOMIC CHAMBER (WKO), Inflation rates in Austria in
      the years 1996-2002, http://wko.at/statistik/prognose/inflation.pdf, Date of inquiry:
      29.09.2004
[2]   AUSTRIA ROAD SAFETY BOARD (KfV): “Road Traffic Accidents in Austria”, In:
      Verkehr in Österreich, Edition No. 36. Vienna, 2004
[3]   BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR VERKEHR, WISSENSCHAFT UND VERKEHR:
      “Österreichische Unfallkosten- und Verkehrssicherheitsrechnung Straße“, In:
      Forschungsarbeiten aus dem Verkehrswesen, Band 79. Wien, 1997
[4]   ELVIK, R.: “Cost-benefit analysis of safety measures for vulnerable and
      inexperienced road users”, Work package 5 of EU-Project PROMISING, TØI-
      Report 435, Institute of Transport Economics. Oslo, 1999
[5]   EUROPEAN UNION (EU): „Screening of efficiency assessment experiences“,
      Report “State of the Art”, Work package 1 of EU-Project ROSEBUD. July 2003
[6]   FLEISS, J.: „Statistical methods for rates and proportions“. New York, 1981
[7]   FORSCHUNGSGESELLSCHAFT FÜR STRASSEN- UND VERKEHRSWESEN,
      Arbeitsgruppe Verkehrsplanung: “Empfehlungen für Wirtschaftlichkeitsunter-
      suchungen an Straßen (EWS) - Entwurf, Aktualisierung der RAS-W 86. 1997
[8]   KELLER, M.; HAUSBERGER, S.; et al: „Handbuch der Emissionsfaktoren des
      Straßenverkehrs in Österreich“, Version 2.1 erstellt im Auftrag von Umwelt-
      bundesamt, Ministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasser-
      wirtschaft sowie dem Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie.
      Vienna, 2004
[9]   OANDA.COM – The currency site, FXHistory: historical currency exchange rates,
      http://www.oanda.com/convert/fxhistory, Date of inquiry: 26.07.2004
[10] ROAD ACCIDENT DATABASE of the Austrian Road Safety Board (KfV), Date of
     inquiry: 18.10.2004
[11] SAMMER, G.; ROIDER, O.; KLEMENTSCHITZ, R.: “Mobilitäts-Szenarien 2035 -
     Initiativen zur nachhaltigen Verkehrsentwicklung im Raum Wien”, Editor: Shell
     Austria GmbH. Vienna, 2004
[12] STRASSENVERKEHRSORDNUNG (StVO) 1960, Article 100, Paragraph No. 10,
     Website of the Austrian Federal Chancellery: http://www.ris.bka.gv.at, Date of
     inquiry: 19.10.2004
[13] VIENNA MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT 34 - Building and Facility Management, City
     Administration of Vienna




                                                                                       Page 42
           SECTION CONTROL – AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT IN THE KAISERMÜHLEN TUNNEL




Appendix

                     Table A1: Inflation rates in Austria in the years 1996-2002

                                     Year        Inflation [%]
                                     1996              1.9
                                     1997              1.3
                                     1998              0.9
                                     1999              0.6
                                     2000              2.3
                                     2001              2.7
                                     2002              1.8
                        Source: http://wko.at/statistik/prognose/inflation.pdf


            Table A2: Average currency exchange rates for different European countries

                                                             Exchange rate
                        From         To        Period
                                                             (annual mean)
                         DM         ATS         1995            7.04001
                        NOK         ATS         1995            1.59133
                        ATS        EURO         2002            0.07267
                          Source: http://www.oanda.com/convert/fxhistory




                                                                                         Page 43
CASE B2: Automatic Speed enforcement on the A13 motorway (NL)




                                         ROSEBUD
                                   WP4 - CASE B REPORT


               AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON
                   THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)




                                                  BY CHRISTIAN STEFAN

                  AUSTIAN ROAD SAFETY BOARD (KFV), AUSTRIA
                         AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)




TABLE OF CONTENTS



1     INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 47
2     DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE.....................................................................47
2.1   System description................................................................................................ 48
2.2   Objectives ............................................................................................................. 49
2.3   Improving traffic safety .......................................................................................... 49
2.4   Harmonisation of traffic flow .................................................................................. 50
2.5   Reduction of air pollution....................................................................................... 50
2.6   Reduction of traffic noise....................................................................................... 51
3     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS................................................................................. 51
4     CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 51




                                                                                                                        Page 45
                     AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Automatic Speed Enforcement (Section Control) on the A13 motorway in Overschie

Problem
Traffic accidents, noise and air pollution due to excessive speeding
Target Accident Group
All accidents on the A13 motorways
Objectives
Reducing accidents and harmonization of traffic flow (reduction of traffic emissions and
traffic noise due to lower speed limit)
Initiator
National Police Service Agency KLPD
Decision-makers
National Police Service Agency KLPD, Ministry of Transport
Costs
No data available
Benefits
Benefits are reductions in accidents, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic noise
Cost-Benefit Ratio
Could not be calculated due to missing data




                                                                                      Page 46
                        AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)




1           Introduction
In the Netherlands, speed enforcement is the most important task of the motorway police.
Since the implementation of general speed limits and the beginning of structural speed
control in May 1988 (by the National Police Service Agency KLPD), motorists have been
acting at a level of major violation. In December 1993, a pilot for Continuous Applied
Speed Enforcement (CASE1) was started by the KLPD and the Ministry of Transport on
the A2 between Utrecht and Amsterdam. Before the implementation of the pilot, the speed
limit was violated by 35% of the motorists, increasing to almost 70% during the night. After
CASE1 started operating, speed violations decreased to almost 3%. This result led to an
institutionalization of Automatic Speed Enforcement in 1995, becoming a part of daily
operational procedure.

2           Description of the measure
In May 2002, the Dutch authorities introduced a Section Control system on the motorway
A13 aimed at maintaining the maximum speed limit at 80 km/h. One of the main purposes
of this measure was to improve the air quality in Overschie, a municipality of Rotterdam.
About 124,000 vehicles use this motorway everyday, which includes almost 10% of Heavy
Goods Vehicles (HGV). As the A13 crosses through a densely populated area, noise and
air pollution have become a major cause of distress for local residents.

Another objective of the Section Control system was to reduce the number of accidents
and severity of injury, respectively. The National Traffic Safety Policy of the Netherlands
aims at reducing the number of fatalities by 50% and injuries by 40% (in comparison to
1985) by the year 2010.
Figure 6: Site overview of Section Control on the A13 motorway




Source: MALENSTEIN, 2003, page 3




                                                                                      Page 47
                           AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)



                             Table 20: Road characteristics of the A13 motorway

                                                A13 MOTORWAY
           Road classification                           Urban motorway
           Number of lanes per direction                 3
           Width per lane                                3.5 m
           Length                                        2 km
           Speed limit                                   80 km/h (all vehicles)

           Daily traffic                                 124.000 vehicles/24 hours
           Amount of Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV)          10%
          Source: MALENSTEIN, 2003, page 10; TNO, 2003, page 5


2.1       System description

A Section Control system was set up over a 2 km stretch on the A13 in Overschie. A video
system placed on gantries on both sides of the control zone captures and stores an image
of each passing vehicle. These images are reduced to a limited amount of information,
providing a digital fingerprint for every vehicle. The Section Control server continually
searches for two matching fingerprints. If a match is found, the computer calculates the
average speed and stores both images as one object on a permanent medium if this value
is above a pre-set margin. A nearly invisible flashlight on the gantries allows the system to
function during low light conditions without blinding the drivers.

Recognition of the license plate is handled by a separate application. Checking the
vehicles’ categories (passenger car, lorry, motorcycle, etc.) is done via a special license
database in the Ministry of Transport. The length of each passing vehicle is measured by
inductive loops.

Before the Section Control was set in force, it had to be guaranteed that fines could not be
appealed in court. Thus, a police patrol of the Traffic and Transport Division deliberately
committed a speed offence, which was registered by the Section Control system. This
offence was taken to a Dutch court as a test trial. During the process, technical details and
the mode of operation of Section Control were explained and accepted as evidence by the
judges. When the patrolman was convicted, he appealed and matters were taken to the
next higher court. When he was convicted again, legislation was achieved.




                                                                                       Page 48
                            AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)



                   Table 21: Statistics of the Section Control system on the A13 motorway

                                                    A13 MOTORWAY
               Accuracy of measurement                   < 1% error
               Accuracy of vehicle identification        99.75%
               Accuracy of license plate recognition     84.8%
               Detection of speed                        up to 250 km/h certified (156 mph)
               Start of Section Control                  11.05.2002
                                                         Fully automated (15.6% of the violators have
               Processing of violators                   to be processed manually due to errors in
                                                         license plate recognition)

                                                         Before implementation of Section Control
                                                          ⇒ 6,000 violators/day (4.8% of daily traffic)
               Violations                                After implementation of Section Control
                                                          ⇒ 700-800 violators/working day (0.6%)
                                                          ⇒ 1,000-1,100 violators/weekend (0.9%)
              Source: MALENSTEIN, 2003, page 17

Questionnaires among motorists showed a surprisingly high rate of acceptance of Section
Control. 75% of the interviewees considered this system to be more reasonable than
traditional speed enforcement (radar traps). Combined with sufficient information on the
road, the methodology of Section Control was appreciated because of its structured
approach. Motorists experienced that there was no escape and obediently followed speed
regulations. The major effects of this measure were slowing of traffic and a better use of
the infrastructure.

2.2           Objectives

The main task of Section Control is the measurement of average speed of motor vehicles
for the purpose of speed control and traffic enforcement. This objective was triggered by
the National Traffic Safety Policy to reduce the number of fatalities by 50% by the year
2010. Due to harmonization of traffic flow, Section Control allows for a better use of the
existing infrastructure and reductions in traffic emissions and traffic noise.
Objectives
      •   Improving road safety
      •   Harmonisation of traffic flow
      •   Reduction of air pollution
      •   Reduction of traffic noise

2.3           Improving traffic safety

Accident data before and after the implementation of Section Control on the A13 was not
available. According to Jan Malenstein from the Dutch National Police Agency (KLPD), the
safety effect of continuous speed enforcement (implemented in the Netherlands in 1993)

                                                                                                          Page 49
                     AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)



accounts for -20% in injury accidents and -25% in the number of fatalities over a period of
10 years.

2.4       Harmonisation of traffic flow

Based on loop detectors at the beginning and the end of the control zone, average speed
and traffic flow before and after the implementation of Section Control was monitored.
Analysis of the measurements showed a clear decrease in average speed and v85 after
Section Control started operating - speed fluctuations became smaller and extreme peaks
occurred less often. Speed measurements carried out after several months revealed a
slight increase in average speed. Traffic behaviour was adapted due to continuous speed
control, resulting in a harmonized traffic flow (reduction of “Stop-and-Go” traffic) and less
congestion. Calculations showed a decrease of congestion during peak hours by 30%.

2.5       Reduction of air pollution

The assessment of air quality before and after the introduction of Section Control was
based upon measurements and modelling. An hour-to-hour line-source model was applied
to compute the contribution of traffic emissions on the A13 to air quality in Overschie.
Continuous monitoring of NO, NO2 and PM10 was performed at three different locations:
one 500m west of the A13 (“background location”) and the other two 50m and 200m east
of the motorway. Measurements were carried out between April 2001 and April 2003,
including periods of one year before and one year after the implementation of Section
Control. Furthermore, NO2 concentrations were monitored with passive samplers at more
than 30 locations in Overschie between April 2002 and April 2003.

At a limited number of locations, black smoke and concentrations of elemental and organic
carbon (ES and OC) were measured. Meteorological data and traffic data on the A13 were
obtained from the Meteorological Services KNMI and the Netherlands Road Directorate
(RWS). Data from road loops provided information on the number, category and speed of
vehicles before and after the measure. In addition, TNO provided emission factors
specifically derived for the A13 before and after the implementation of Section Control.

The main findings and conclusions are as follows:

Section Control has been effective in reducing fluctuations in traffic flow and speeding
(especially during the night). Traffic moving at a constant, moderate speed emits less air
pollutants compared to traffic with high speed fluctuations. Measurements carried out after
Section Control started operating on the A13 showed that traffic flowed more efficiently
through Overschie, although the number of vehicles has increased drastically in the past
years. Compared to a motorway with the same amount of traffic, this measure is estimated
to reduce NOx emissions by 15-25% and PM10 by 25-35%, respectively (see Table 22).

Measurements of NO2 concentrations in Overschie with passive samplers indicate that at
a distance of 250m from the A13, impacts of traffic emissions were no longer detectable.
Model calculations were used to assess the effect of Section Control on air quality. NO2 -
concentrations in a distance of 200m east of the motorway decreased by 25% and 34% for
PM10, respectively. It has to be emphasized that these results are specific for Overschie.
At other locations different ratios of passenger cars and HGV, or different traffic dynamics
and congestion conditions, would influence the impacts of continuous speed control in a
way that might be quite different from the situation in Overschie. Thus, it is recommended

                                                                                       Page 50
                        AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)



to perform specific research for each location before implementing a Section Control
system.
      Table 22: Changes in the emission of air pollutants on the A13 motorway due to Section Control

                                                                         Changes in
                                                     Air pollutants
                                                                         emissions

                   Traffic emissions                      NOx             -15 – 25%

                   Traffic emissions                     PM10             -25 – 35%
                   Concentration of air pollutants
                                                          NO2               -25%
                   at a distance of 200m
                   Concentration of air pollutants
                                                         PM10               -34%
                   at a distance of 200m
                  Source: TNO, 2003, page 6

Regarding environmental aspects, continuous speed control is an important instrument to
reduce traffic emissions as long as more source-orientated measures (e.g. less polluting
vehicles, “clean” fuels, less road traffic) are not available.

2.6         Reduction of traffic noise

In addition to environmental and safety aspects, Section Control also reduced traffic noise
by forcing drivers to follow the reduced speed limit of 80 km/h. Research on traffic noise
before and after the measure was implemented and showed a significant reduction in the
noise level by 5.6 dB(A). However, this result cannot be solely attributed to the reduction in
maximum speed, but also to the changing of the top layer of the A13. Local authorities
recommended new test trails along a 25m pathway on both carriageways to eliminate this
influence.

3           Cost-Benefit Analysis

The Cost-Benefit Ratio (CBR) could not be calculated due to missing data (costs of the
measure). Concerning the benefits of Section Control, most of the information (accident
data, reduction of greenhouse gases, etc.) was available in aggregated form only. In order
to compute monetary values for those benefits, original data would have to be used.

4           Conclusions

The Section Control on the A13 was highly successful in achieving the preset objectives.
Speed violations have been reduced, average speed decreased and extreme speed
violations have become an exception. Based on model calculations, the reduction of
average speed also had a positive impact on traffic emissions and traffic noise. 75% of the
motorists approve of Section Control because they experience less traffic congestion
during peak hours.




                                                                                                   Page 51
                   AUTOMATIC SPEED ENFORCEMENT ON THE A13 MOTORWAY (NL)




References


[1]   MALENSTEIN; J.: Madrid ITS Japan Session Segment Control, Presentation
      documents of the Section Control System on the A13. Madrid, 2003
[2]   MALENSTEIN; J.: VERA2 – The issue of cross border enforcement in the
      Netherlands, Presentation for the European Commission on speed enforcement.
      2003
[3]   The Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO): “Onderzoek
      naar effecten van de 80 km/u- maatregel voor de A13 op de luchtkwalitweit in
      Overschie”, TNO Report 258. Apeldoorn, 2003




                                                                                 Page 52
CASE C1: Daytime Running Lights in The Czech Republic




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE C REPORT


                                    DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
                                     IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




                                                        BY PETR POKORNÝ

            TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE, CDV, THE CZECH
                           REPUBLIC
                             DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ......................................................................................... 56
2   DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................... 57
3   TARGET GROUP ................................................................................................. 57
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ..................................................................................... 57
5   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION ...................................................................... 58
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................... 61
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND BARRIERS .............................................. 61
8   CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION............................................................................... 62




                                                                                                                Page 54
                          DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




CASE OVERVIEW
Measure
Implementation of Daytime Running Lights (DRL) during the entire year
Problem
The high number of casualties in daytime multi-party accidents (target accident group)
Target Group
Drivers and owners of motor vehicles
Targets
Implementation of DRL, which will lead to the significant reduction of casualties in daytime
multi-party accidents
Initiator
The first initiator will be the Transport Research Centre, which will provide the results of
this CBA to the Ministry of Transport
Decision Makers
In case of potential implementation of the measure, the Ministry of Transport will elaborate
and incorporate a relevant amendment into the Road Act; the Parliament will then have to
authorise it.
Costs
All costs are calculated for a 12-year period, which is the lifetime of DRL automatic
switches. All monetary values are converted to 2002 prices. The following costs were
calculated:
•   the cost of automatic light switches
•   maintenance and repair costs of these switches
•   additional replacement costs of bulbs due to wear
The total costs are € 70,410,000 for 12 years
Benefits
Positive benefit
• reduction in casualties (48 fatalities are estimated to be prevented due to DRL
   annually)
Negative benefits
• extra fuel costs due to DRL
• environmental effects
The total benefits are calculated to be € 303,570,000 for 12 years
Cost-Benefit Ratio
1/4.3




                                                                                      Page 55
                             DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




1          Problem

The Czech Republic has a high number of casualties caused by the road accidents
(compared to most other EU countries). The implementation of DRL would contribute to
the decrease of this number. The implementation of DRL will improve the visibility of motor
vehicles in daytime, which will lead to a decrease in multi-party daytime accidents. It will
also contribute to lower collision speeds in accidents involving DRL-equipped motor
vehicles. The vehicles will be more visible; drivers will be able to react faster in the case of
a potentially dangerous situation and can start to slow down earlier. This will also have a
significant effect on the number of casualties.
          Figure 7: Comparison of total numbers of road accident fatalities in selected European
                                       countries from 1980 – 2003



.




Source: CDV


                   Table 23: Numbers of casualties (until 30 days after accident), 2002

                                     Fatalities                    1,431
                                 Severely injured*                 5,492
                                  Slightly injured                29,013
                        Source: Summary of accidents data, the Traffic Police Directorate of CZ, 2003
*The definition of severely injured is a person who spends a minimum of 7 days in hospital
due to a road accident.




                                                                                                   Page 56
                          DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




2          Description


2.1        Definition of DRL

This measure is a legal obligation for all motor vehicles to drive with low beam headlights
on or with special DRL lamps during the whole year [ETSC, 2003].
For this calculation the use of special DRL lamps is not considered. For the calculation it is
assumed that an automatic light switch is installed in all new vehicles from January 2002
onwards. This means that in all older vehicles, low beam headlights have to be switched
on manually or the automatic light switch will be installed additionally. Mopeds and
motorcycles are not considered in this calculation because DRL has already been
obligatory for them. Another aspect to consider is the current use of DRL, which will have
an effect on the calculation.
The following calculation assumes the effect of DRL on target accident fatalities to be
20%. The DRL effect on the number of casualties is higher than on the number of multi-
party daytime accidents, which can be explained because of lower collision speeds [ETSC,
2003].
The number of fatalities in the target accident group (multi-party daytime accidents) was
estimated to be 30% of all fatalities. Because it was not possible to find the relevant
number in Czech national statistics, the estimation was made based on Austrian statistics.

2.2        Legal situation

DRL has been obligatory for mopeds and motorcycles throughout the whole year since
1.1.2001. For other motor vehicles, DRL is obligatory in winter (from the last Sunday in
October to the last Sunday in March – for this study the winter time lasts 5 months). This
obligation is stated in the National Road Act [§ 32, law 361/2000].


3          Target Group
The target group is drivers and owners of motor vehicles.

4          Assessment method

CBA was applied in the calculation because it enables on to evaluate the monetary
valuation of the measure’s benefits and costs. CBA provided in 2003 by ETSC [“Cost
Effective Transport Safety Measures”] was used as the basis, and was also an important
source of information and assumptions. In order to make the costs and benefits
comparable, the duration of effect was formulated. The duration of the measure is
determined for 12 years – this is the entire lifetime of DRL automatic switches in cars.
The effects of DRL are calculated for 7 months in a year. The fact, that a lot of road users
use DRL on a voluntary basis is also considered. The estimation that 10% of drivers have
already been using DRL was made. It is also assumed, that 90% of drivers will use DRL
when it becomes obligatory.



                                                                                        Page 57
                              DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC



For the sake of comparability of the evaluation results, the monetary values are converted
to € at 2002 prices. To calculate the present value of benefits and costs, the accumulated
discount factor of 5% is assumed.
The safety effect of DRL is calculated for fatalities prevented; target accidents are multi-
party daytime accidents.
The impacts of DRL are as follows:
•     Safety effects – using DRL will lead to a 20% reduction in the number of fatalities of
      target accidents. The proportion of injuries and property damage is included in the cost
      of one fatality prevented. It is estimated that 30% of total fatalities occur in DRL-
      relevant accidents.
•     Environmental effects – using DRL will lead to extra fuel consumption. The additional
      contribution to air pollution due to DRL use for all vehicles is about 1% of the total cost
      of pollution arising as a result of fuel emissions in road transport [ETSC, 2003].
•     Additional fuel costs due to DRL (price of fuel excluding tax and VAT) – for passenger
      cars this consumption is estimated to be 0.1 l/hour in traffic, while for trucks it is 0.12
      l/hour in traffic.
Costs considered:
•     The price of automatic light switches in new cars is estimated at € 5. The price of
      retrofitting amounts to € 40 including installation costs per vehicle. It is estimated that
      10% of old vehicles will install the automatic light switch [own estimation].
•     Maintenance and repair costs of automatic light switches during its lifetime are
      estimated at € 10 [own estimation].
•     Additional replacement costs of bulbs related to ‘wear and tear’ of the bulbs during
      daytime – additional bulb costs are € 2 per car per year [own estimation].
It is assumed that the costs do not affect mobility.


5            Assessment Quantification


5.1          Safety effect

Safety effects are calculated only for reduction of the number of fatalities. The reduction of
injuries and property damage is included in the calculation of the cost of one fatality
prevented.
The cost of one fatality prevented was determined to be € 1,076,000. This amount was
calculated based on “Socio-economy losses caused by accidents in CZ in 2002”
[KOŇÁREK, 2002]. The cost of one fatality prevented includes medical costs, costs of lost
productive capacity (lost output) and administrative costs. The proportional share of the
costs of minor and serious injuries and property damage is also considered in the cost of
one fatality.


                                                                                             Page 58
                             DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC



It is estimated that 30% of the total fatalities occur in DRL-relevant accidents and that DRL
will lead to a 20% reduction in the number of fatalities. The reduction of fatalities is
calculated as follows:
The number of fatalities * the average 90% use of DRL * the 30% of the DRL-relevant
accidents * the 20% effect of DRL for fatalities [ETSC, 2003].

                      Table 24: Numbers of fatalities (until 30 days after accident), 2002

                                                             1.4.2002 – 30.10.2002
                             Number of fatalities                    899
                             DRL-related fatalities                  270
                         Fatalities prevented by DRL                  48
                      Source: Summary of accidents, the Traffic Police Directorate, 2003
In 12 years, the total cost of fatalities prevented (including proportional costs of injuries
and property damage) is € 460,230,000.

5.2          Cost of extra fuel

Due to the large differences in fuel consumption it is not suitable to calculate average fuel
consumption. As the extra DRL fuel consumption is independent of the standard fuel
consumption of vehicles, the time that a vehicle participates in traffic was calculated. The
extra fuel consumption by DRL is 0.1 l/h (0.1 litre of fuel during 1 hour of drive) for
passenger cars and 0.12 l/h for trucks. The average distance driven in one hour is
estimated at 50 km on all types of roads. The share of km driven during the daytime is
55% of the total sum of vehicle km [ETSC, 2003].
Required data:
•     Number of vehicles and million vehicle-km
The number of passenger cars was 3,650,000 in 2002 and number of trucks was 460,000
in 2002 [Czech Ministry of Interior]. Number of vehicle-km is not known, so the estimation
had to be done – on average, a passenger car drives 10,000 km a year and a truck 30,000
km a year [ETSC, 2003].
                       Table 25: Numbers of cars and mill. Vehicle-km in 7 months, 2002

                                  Passenger cars                  3,650,000
                                      Trucks                       460,000
                         Daytime mill. vehicle-km - cars            11,700
                         Daytime mill. vehicle-km - trucks          4,430
                       Source: The Czech Statistical Office, own estimation
Average 2002 price of fuel excluding tax and VAT.
                                    Table 26: Price of fuel excluding tax and VAT, the year 2002

                                        Diesel          € 0.315
                                        Petrol          € 0.308

                                    Source: CDV



                                                                                                   Page 59
                           DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC



5.2.1      The calculation of extra fuel consumption due to DRL

The correction due to the voluntary use of DRL is 20%. A correction is needed because
10% of car users already use DRL on a voluntary basis and 90% will use DRL after the
law is set. The correction value is 0.8.
Passenger cars - 11,706 mill. Vehicle-km / 50 km * 0.8 * 0.1 l = 18,730,000 litres
Trucks – 4,430 mill. Vehicle-km / 50 km * 0.8 * 0.12 l = 8,500,000 litres
The fuel costs for cars and trucks are € 8,300,000 in 2002.
In 12 years, the total cost is € 73,960,000.

5.2.2      Environmental costs

The cost of pollution arising as a result of DRL extra fuel emission is about 1% of total
pollution costs caused by fuel emissions in road transport [ETSC, 2003]. In the Czech
Republic, the average estimation price of external costs from road emissions for 2002 is
calculated to be € 1,600,000,000 [CDV]. A cost of € 82,700,000 is calculated for the 12-
year period due to DRL use.

5.3        Calculation of other costs


5.3.1      Automatic light switch

The price of an automatic light switch in new cars is estimated at € 5. The number of new
cars sold in 2002 was 170,000. The price of retrofitting amounts to € 40, including
installation costs per old vehicle. It is estimated that 10% of old vehicles will install the
automatic light switch [ETSC, 2003, own estimation]. The total costs for 12 years are €
23,700,000.

5.3.2      Maintenance and repair costs of automatic light switches during its
           lifetime

The costs are estimated at € 10 for one car equipped with a light switch [ETSC, 2003, own
estimation].
The total cost for 12 years is € 17,100,000.

5.3.3      Additional costs as a result of the wear of the bulbs during daytime use

The replacement rate for bulbs increases by a factor of 1.4 for the Czech Republic. The
additional bulb costs are € 2 [ETSC, 2003, own estimation]. The correction of 0.8 is
needed. The total cost for 12 years is € 29,610,000.




                                                                                       Page 60
                          DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




6          Assessment Results
                              Table 27: Costs and benefits – 12-year period

                                   Fatalities     460,230,000 €
                                   prevented
                                   Extra fuel      -73,960,000 €

                                Emission costs     -82,700,000 €
                                Total benefits     303,570,000 €

                                 Light switches    23,700,000 €

                                 Maintenance       17,100,000 €
                                     Bulbs         29,610,000 €
                                  Total costs      70,410,000 €
                                Cost / benefit         1/4.3



7          Decision-Making Process and Barriers

In case of potential implementation of DRL, the measure has to be part of the Road Act
and must be ratified by the national parliament. This situation is the main barrier – some
decisions of parliament members are not based on rational reasons (e.g. CBA), but on
political or personal opinions. Especially in the case of DRL (and other road-related laws),
some members of parliament assume themselves to be road experts just because they
drive many kilometres per year.
The role of CDV in this process is vital – CDV should introduce the results of this CBA
(and other related CBAs) to the members of the Subcommittee on Road Safety and to
disseminate the results between the experts.
Based on a survey amongst decision makers (members of the parliament of the Czech
Republic: Ms Soňa Paukrtova - Chairman of the Subcommittee on Road Safety of the
Senate of the Czech Parliament, Mr Miroslav Fejfar - also member of this Subcommittee,
Ms Ivana Večeřová - Secretary of the Economical Committee of the Senate), the following
general conclusions could be drafted:

•   CBA could be one of the most important tools to force implementation of road safety
    legislative measures in relatively short amount of time.
•   CBA could play a key role in the decision-making process, especially at present when
    there is a lack of public finance sources in the Czech Republic.
•   To increase the usage and to widespread CBA amongst decision-makers, wider
    dissemination of information on CBA is vital. Research institutes should play a more
    active role in this process.
Nevertheless, processes in the parliament are mostly political ones so one could also
expect negative reactions, or not taking CBA into account due to the political reasons.




                                                                                      Page 61
                          DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC




8          Conclusion/Discussion

The calculation has shown that the use of DRL would significantly contribute to improving
the road safety situation in both countries and that making DRL obligatory would bring
significant benefits to the whole society. The difference in the CBA-results in Austria and in
the Czech Republic is caused by the lack of some data for the Czech Republic, which
therefore had to be estimated.
The main barrier in Austria preventing the obligatory use of Daytime Running Lights
consisted of objections by stakeholders (e.g. drivers’ unions) in technical and social
aspects of this measure. Additional fuel consumption and the fear of elderly drivers getting
stranded because of dead batteries have been major arguments in past discussions.
Recent developments in vehicle technology (automatic switches for DRL) could dispel
most of those objections.
In the Czech Republic, the wider discussion regarding making DRL obligatory during whole
year has not started yet. There is a common understanding that the current situation (DRL
obligatory only in the winter season) is sufficient enough. The introduction of results of
several international studies (including this one) to the relevant decision-makers seems to
be the first step in the process of constant DRL implementation. Barriers in the
implementation process are expected. These barriers could occur from political reasons
and also from the technical point of view (like in Austria). Therefore, providing independent
and current information regarding benefits of DRL is vital for a potential beginning of the
implementation process.



REFERENCES

ETSC (2003): Cost Effective Transport Safety Measures
The Czech Statistical Office: www.czso.cz
The Czech Ministry of Interior: http://www.mvcr.cz/statistiky/crv.html
KOŇÁREK (2002): Socio-economy losses caused by accidents in CZ
The Traffic Police Directorate of CZ (2003): Summary of accidents data




                                                                                        Page 62
CASE C2: daytime running lights in AUSTRIA




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE C REPORT

                DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




                                             BY PETR POKORNÝ

             TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE, CDV, THE CZECH
                            REPUBLIC
                                    DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ......................................................................................... 66
2   DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................... 67
3   TARGET GROUP ................................................................................................. 67
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ..................................................................................... 67
5   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION ...................................................................... 68
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................... 71
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND BARRIERS .............................................. 71




                                                                                                                Page 64
                                  DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Implementation of Daytime Running Lights (DRL) during a whole year period
Problem
High number of casualties in daytime, multi-party accidents (target accident group)
Target Group
Drivers and owners of motor vehicles
Target
Implementation of DRL, leading to a significant reduction of casualties in daytime multi-
party accidents
Initiator
Ministry of Transport, Austrian Road Safety Board (KfV)
Decision-makers
Ministry of Transport
Costs
All costs are calculated for a 12-year period, which is the usual lifetime of a DRL automatic
switch. All monetary values have been converted to 2002 prices. The following costs were
calculated:
• the cost of automatic light switches
•   maintenance and repair costs of switches
•   additional replacement costs of burned out bulbs
The total costs are € 195,300,000 for 12 years.
Benefits
“Positive” benefits
•   reduction of casualties (53 less fatalities per year are estimated due to DRL in Austria)
“Negative” benefits
•   extra fuel costs due to DRL
•   environmental effects
The total benefits are calculated to be € 695,000,000 for 12 years.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
1/3.6




                                                                                        Page 65
                                     DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




1            Problem

In Austria, the number of accidents (especially fatalities) looks more favourable than
relevant data in the Czech Republic. However, any further decrease in these numbers is
desirable. DRL is a measure that could contribute to a significant reduction of human
fatalities in traffic accidents. Figure 8 shows different trends in Austria and the Czech
republic from 1989 – 2002.
            Figure 8: Trends of development in the Czech Republic and Austria from 1989 – 2002


     140%
                                                126%
     120%                                                   Czech Republic

     100%

      80%
              Road accident fatalities
      60%

                32%                                         37%
      40%
                                                                                    Population
      20%
                                                                                             5%
       0%
                                                Passenger cars                   -1,5%
     -20%

     -40%
                          - 39%
     -60%

    Source: CDV and KfV

The following Table 28 shows the number of casualties in the year 2002.

               Table 28: Numbers of casualties (fatalities until 30 days after accident) in 2002

                             Fatalities                                956

                             Severely injured                        14,628

                             Slightly injured                        42,056

                             Source: KfV
Definition of severely injured
Whether an injury is severe or slight is determined by §84 of the Austrian criminal code
[StGB]. A severe injury is one that causes a health problem or occupational disability
longer than 24 days, or one that "causes personal difficulty". An injury or health problem
that "causes personal difficulty" is one that affects an "important organ", if it results in a
"health disadvantage", if the "healing process is uncertain", or if it leads to the fear of
"additional effects”.

                                                                                                   Page 66
                               DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




2         Description


2.1       Definition of DRL

This measure is a legal obligation for all motor vehicles to drive with low beam headlights
or special DRL lamps during the whole year [ETSC, 2003]. In the following calculations,
the use of special DRL lamps has not been considered. It is assumed that an automatic
light switch is installed in all new vehicles from January 2002 onwards. This means that in
all older vehicles, low beam headlights have to be switched on manually or the automatic
light switch will be installed on them additionally. Mopeds and motorcycles are not
considered in this calculation, because DRL is already obligatory for those vehicles.
Another aspect needing consideration is the current use of DRL, which has an effect on
the calculation. The following calculations assume the effect of DRL on the target accident
fatalities to be 20%. The DRL effect on the number of casualties is higher than on the
number of multiparty daytime accidents, which can be explained due to lower collision
speeds [ETSC, 2003].

2.2       Legal situation

Except for mopeds and motorcycles, DRL is not obligatory in Austria. Austrian law [§ 99
KFG] states certain conditions for using driving lights: running lights have to be switched
on at dusk, nightfall and during the night, in fog, or when the overall weather conditions
deem it necessary.


3         Target Group
Drivers and owners of motor vehicles.

4         Assessment method

CBA was applied in the calculation because it enables the monetary valuation of the
measure’s benefits and costs. CBA provided in 2003 by ETSC [Cost Effective Transport
Safety Measures] was considered as the main source for information and assumptions.
In order to make costs and benefits comparable, a duration of the effect was needed. The
duration of the measure is determined for 12 years – which is the lifetime of DRL-
automatic switches in passenger cars.
The fact that a lot of road users switch on DRL voluntarily has also been considered. In
Austria, nationwide surveys from 1999 and 2003 showed that about one third (1999: 29%,
2003: 37%) of all drivers have already been using DRL. Thus, a share of 35% is used in
this calculation. It is also assumed, that 90% of drivers would use DRL when it is
obligatory.
For the sake of comparability of the evaluation results, the monetary values are converted
to € at 2002 prices. To calculate the present value of benefits and cost, an accumulated
discount factor of 5% is estimated.



                                                                                     Page 67
                                   DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA



The safety effect of DRL is calculated for the number of fatalities saved, target accidents
are multiparty daytime accidents. The number of target accident group fatalities was 296
(31% of all fatalities) in the year 2002 [KfV].
The impacts of DRL are as follows:
•     Safety effects – using DRL will lead to a reduction of 20% in the number of target
      accident fatalities. The proportion of injuries and property damage is included in the
      cost of one fatality saved.
•     Environmental effects – using DRL will lead to extra fuel consumption. For passenger
      cars this consumption is estimated to be 0.1 l/hour in traffic, while for trucks it is 0.12
      l/hour in traffic. The additional contribution to environmental pollution due to DRL use
      for all vehicles is about 1% of the total cost of pollution arising as a result of fuel
      emissions in road transport [ETSC, 2003].
•     Additional fuel costs due to the DRL (price of fuel excluding tax and VAT).

Considered costs:
•     The price of an automatic light switch in a new car is estimated at € 5. The price of
      retrofitting amounts to € 50, including installation costs per vehicle. It is estimated that
      15% of old vehicles will install the automatic light switch [ETSC, 2003].
•     Maintenance and repair costs of automatic light switches during its lifetime are
      estimated to be € 15 for Austria [ETSC, 2003].
•     Additional replacement costs of bulbs related to the “wear and tear” of bulbs during
      daytime – the additional bulb costs are € 6 per car and year [ETSC, 2003].
It is assumed that the costs do not affect mobility.


5            Assessment Quantification


5.1          Safety effect

The safety effects are calculated only in reduction of number of fatalities. The reduction of
injuries and property damage is included in the calculation of the cost of one fatality saved.
The cost of one fatality saved was determined to be € 2,200,000. The cost of one fatality
saved includes medical costs, costs of lost productive capacity (lost output) and
administrative costs. The proportional share of the costs of minor and serious injuries and
property damage is also considered in the cost of fatality. DRL will lead to a 20% reduction
in the number of fatalities in the target accident group. The reduction of fatalities is
calculated as follows: The number of target accident group’s fatalities * the average 90%
use of DRL * the 20% effect of DRL on fatalities [ETSC, 2003].




                                                                                              Page 68
                                     DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA



                Table 29: Numbers of fatalities (until 30 days after accident), the year 2002

                                   Number of fatalities               956
                                  DRL related fatalities              296
                                 Fatalities saved by DRL              53
                            Source: KfV
In 12 years, the total cost of fatalities saved (including proportional cost of injuries and
property damage) is € 1,040,000,000.

5.2          Cost of extra fuel

Due to the large difference in fuel consumption it is not suitable to use an average fuel
consumption in the following calculations. As the extra DRL fuel consumption is
independent on the standard fuel consumption of vehicles, the time that a vehicle
participates in traffic was calculated. The extra fuel consumption by DRL is 0.1 l/h (0.1 litre
of fuel during one hour of driving) for passenger cars and 0.12 l/h for trucks. The average
distance covered in a one-hour drive is estimated at 50 km on all types of roads. The
share of km driving during the daytime is 55% from the total sum of vehicle-km [ETSC,
2003].
Required data:
•     Number of vehicles and million vehicle-km
The number of passenger cars was 4,000,000 in 2002 and number of trucks was 330,000
in 2002. The total number of vehicle-km is known – 75 060 mill. vehicle km for passenger
cars and 12.528 mill. vehicle km for trucks.
                      Table 30: Numbers of cars and mill. vehicle km, the year 2002

                                     Passenger cars                   4,000,000
                            Trucks                                      330,000
                            Daytime Mio. vehicle km - cars               41,283
                            Daytime Mio. vehicle km - trucks                6,890
                            Source: KfV

•     Average 2002 price of fuel excluding tax and VAT.
                       Table 31: Price of fuel excluding tax and VAT, the year 2002

                                        Diesel             € 0.316
                                        Petrol             € 0.293

                                     Source: KfV


The calculation of extra fuel consumption due to DRL

A correction factor of 45% has been made for Austria. The correction is needed because
35% of car users already use DRL on a voluntary basis and it is assumed that 90% of car
users will use DRL after the obligation. The value for the correction is then 0.55.
Passenger cars – 41.283 mill. vehicle km / 50 km * 0.55 * 0.1 l = 45,000,000 litres
Trucks – 6.890 mill. vehicle km / 50 km * 0.55 * 0.12 l = 9,100,000 litres
                                                                                                Page 69
                                 DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA



The fuel costs for cars and trucks are € 16,100,000 in 2002.
In 12 years, the total cost is € 145,000,000.

5.3          Environmental effects

The cost of pollution arising as a result of DRL extra fuel emission is about 1% of the total
costs of pollution caused by fuel emission in road transport [ETSC, 2003]. The estimated
costs of road emissions in 2002 are € 2,232,385,000 [KfV]. Due to DRL use, the cost of €
200,000,000 is calculated for a 12-year period.

5.4          Calculation of other costs


5.4.1        Automatic light switch

The price of an automatic light switch in new cars is estimated at € 5. The number of new
cars was 280,000 in 2002. The price of retrofitting amounts to € 50, including installation
costs per old vehicle [ETSC, 2003].
The total cost for 12 years is € 44,000,000.

5.4.2        Maintenance and repair costs of automatic light switches during its
             lifetime

The costs are estimated to be € 15 per light switch [ETSC, 2003].
The total cost for 12 years is € 47,000,000.

5.4.3        Additional costs as a result of the wear of the bulbs during daytime use

•     The replacement rate for bulbs increases by a factor of 2 due to DRL. The additional
      bulb costs are € 6 per car per year [ETSC, 2003]. The correction of 0.55 is needed.
The total cost for 12 years is € 104,300,000.




                                                                                       Page 70
                               DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS IN AUSTRIA




6         Assessment Results
                          Table 32: Costs and benefits – 12-year period
                              Fatalities saved   1,040,000,000 €
                                 Extra fuel       -145,000,000 €
                               Emission costs     -200,000,000 €
                               Total benefits     695,000,000 €
                                Light switch       44,000,000 €
                                Maintenance        47,000,000 €
                                   Bulbs          104,300,000 €
                                Total costs       195,300,000 €
                               Cost / benefit         1/3.6



7         Decision-making process and barriers

In the mid 1990’s, the Austrian Road Safety Board [KfV] started its first awareness
campaign for Daytime Running Lights (DRL) with information boards along streets with
unusually high numbers of casualty accidents caused by passing. At that time,
international studies in countries already using DRL indicated that about 30 fatalities could
be saved in Austria every year due to such a safety measure. In 1996, the Federal Ministry
of Transport launched a bill for a 2-year field test of DRL. During the following legislation
process, several stakeholders voiced severe objections concerning additional fuel costs
and stranded vehicles due to empty batteries.
It was not till 2001 when the Austrian Road Safety Programme 2002-2010 was passed that
DRL once again became a public agenda. In a comprehensive EU study based on the
growing number of international studies, it was proven that DRL has a positive effect on
reducing accidents. The introduction of daytime running lights in rural areas during winter
was seen as a suitable way to overcome still existing concerns and objections. Besides
the established safety effect of DRL, another aspect proved to be even more convincing.
Most European countries have already established DRL, thus arguments finding a
harmonized solution for the whole of Europe became more and more convincing. During a
press conference in October 2004, the Austrian Minister of Transport, Hubert Gorbach,
announced a new bill for DRL in the early months of 2005. Up to now, the main barrier in
Austria preventing the obligatory use of daytime running lights consisted of objections from
stakeholders (e.g. drivers’ unions) in technical and social aspects of the measure.
Additional fuel consumption and the fear of elderly drivers getting stranded because of
dead batteries have been major arguments in past discussions. Recent developments in
vehicle technology (automatic switches for DRL) could dispel most of those objections.


REFERENCES

ETSC (2003): Cost Effective Transport Safety Measures




                                                                                       Page 71
CASE E1: four-arm roundabouts in urban areas In the czech republic




                                           ROSEBUD
                                     WP4 – CASE E REPORT


 FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS IN
           THE CZECH REPUBLIC




                                                           BY PETR POKORNÝ

             TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE, CDV, THE CZECH
                            REPUBLIC
                                 FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ......................................................................................... 75
2   DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................... 76
3   TARGET GROUP ................................................................................................. 77
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ..................................................................................... 77
5   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION ...................................................................... 79
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................... 80
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS........................................................................... 80
8   CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 81




                                                                                                                Page 73
                              FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Implementation of four-arm roundabouts instead of four-arm intersections (without traffic
lights) in urban areas (in cities with less than 100,000 inhabitants)
Problem
High number of accidents, high speeds
Target Group
All accidents at the treated sites
Targets
To reduce the number of accidents; traffic calming
Initiator
The initiator is mostly relevant local authorities, the owner of the infrastructure
Decision-makers
Members of city council, local authorities
Costs
Roundabout design costs and costs of implementation
Benefits
The only expected benefit is the reduction of accidents. Other impacts (on mobility and
environment) were not calculated because of the lack of the available data.

Cost-Benefit Ratio
1/1.5




                                                                                      Page 74
                                                   FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS




1                                 Problem

In the Czech Republic, more than 70% of accidents take place in urban areas and about
10% of them occur on four-arm intersections [Summary of Czech Accident Data, 2003].
One of the measures aimed at reducing the number of these accidents is to rebuild
“dangerous” intersections into roundabouts. There are several reasons for implementation
of roundabouts: their effects on improving road safety, on capacity, and on traffic calming.
In some cases the roundabout can also be a significant architectural element of city
design. The positive effects of properly designed and built roundabouts are well known
from studies in many countries.
In Czech traffic engineering, roundabouts are still quite a new element. In some cases
there are still doubts on the use of roundabouts. Nevertheless, the number of roundabouts
in the Czech infrastructure network is increasing (the quality of the design is problematic in
some cases), but there are still a lot of barriers during the decision-making phase.
There is not enough available data and studies evaluating the roundabouts in Czech
infrastructure. One available source of information is the BESIDIDO project. It is a
research project funded by the Ministry of Transport and elaborated by CDV and the
Czech Technical University in Prague; its aim is to evaluate the affectivity of various
infrastructure measures.

                            Figure 9: Number of road accidents on four-arm intersections in urban areas, 1999–2003


                                   Number of accidents on four-arms intersection in urban areas
                                                          (1999 - 2003)

                          17600
                                                        17409
                          17400


                          17200
    number of accidents




                          17000

                                       16947
                          16800

                                                                          16726             16726            16695
                          16600


                          16400


                          16200



Source: CDV; Summary of Czech Accident Data 2003




                                                                                                                     Page 75
                                                FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS



    Figure 10: Numbers of road accidents casualties on four-arm intersections in urban areas, 1999–2003


                                                Number of casualties (1999 - 2003)

                                3500

                                                                    2898
                                3000
                                                2698
                                                                               2938
                                       2813               2840
                                2500
        number of casualities




                                2000                                                  fatalities
                                                                                      seriously injured
                                1500                                                  slightly injured


                                1000

                                          360   347       360        378       338
                                 500
                                          49     50        43        47         51
                                   0
                                       1999     2000      2001      2002      2003


        Source: CDV; Summary of Czech Accident Data 2003


2                               Description
2.1                             General

Description of the sample
There are eight roundabouts in the evaluated sample. All of them are four-arm
roundabouts that were constructed instead of four-arm intersections between the years
1998–2002 in the urban areas of cities with population less than 100,000 inhabitants.
Picture 1: Examples of roundabouts in the sample: Lázně Bohdaneč (left), Ždírec (right)




Source: CDV (project Besidido, 2004)


The brief description of the sample is in Table 33.


                                                                                                          Page 76
                                FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS



                                  Table 33: Description of the sample

     Site Number/City      Population     “ Before”         Year of         “After”      Price (€)
                                        accident data   implementation   accident data
 1.Česká Lípa                40,000      1995-1997           1998         1999-2000      unknown
 2.Chlumec nad Cidlinou      5,000          2000             2002            2003        unknown
 3.Chrudim                   25,000      2000-2001           2002            2003        unknown
 4.Lázně Bohdaneč            3,500       2000-2002           2003            2004        350,000
 5.Litomyšl                  10,000     1999 - 2000          2001            2002        unknown
 6.Most                      70,000         1999             2000         2001-2003      200,000
 7.Tábor                     37,000      1996-1997           1998         1999-2000      unknown
 8.Ždírec                    3,000       2000-2001           2002         2003-2004      unknown
Source: CDV (Project Besidido, 2004)
All roundabouts in the sample are “typical“ four–arm roundabouts designed in accordance
with Czech technical standards. The reason for their implementation was mostly the
demand for more capacity and for improving the safety situation.


3             Target Group

The implementation of a roundabout has mostly a positive effect on the safety level of the
treated site. This is based on the fact that the roundabout geometry reduces the number of
collision points, decreases the speed of vehicles, and improves the safety of pedestrian
crossing. The only negative phenomenon is a possible lower safety level for cyclists.
Therefore, the target accident group was defined as “all accidents occurring on the treated
sites”.
The sample contains 8 sites, where the original four-arm intersections without traffic lights
were rebuilt into the four-arm roundabouts. Based on accident data before the
implementation of roundabouts, an “average” intersection accident is determined. This is
an accident with 0.004 fatality, 0.04 severely injured, 0.19 slightly injured and with property
damage valued at 27,000 CZK. The value of one average accident is calculated to be
€ 7,500 (at 2002 prices) [based on the socio-economic evaluation of road accident;
Koňárek, 2003].


4             Assessment method

The ideal method of assessment would be to provide the complete CBA (with calculation
of roundabout effects on environment and mobility). The quality of available data does not
allow for such a complete analysis, so only the safety effects are calculated in the
analyses.
The suitable method for such calculation is a method combining before/after comparison
with a control group of sites (sites which are similar in most characteristics to the treatment
sites, but left untreated). In this calculation, the total number of accidents on four-arm
urban intersections in the whole country is used as a control group, so the general trends
in accident number development are taking into account.
The aim of the calculation is to find the number of accidents prevented by the
implementation of roundabouts instead of four-arm intersections in the evaluated sample
                                                                                               Page 77
                              FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS



of eight sites. The “before” and “after” accident data of treated sites and of all four-arm
intersections in the Czech Republic were known.
An evaluation of the treatment effect θi at each site by means of the odds-ratio with the
comparison group is calculated. A correction due to changes in traffic volumes is not
performed, so δ = 1. The formula is:
                           Xa
Estimated effect (θ ) =         δ
                             Ca
                          Xm
                             Cb
 h
where
Xa – the number of accidents observed at the treatment site in the “after” period,
Xm – the number of accidents at the treatment site in the “before” period,
Ca – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “after” period,
Cb – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “before” period,

Weighting the effects found for separate treatment sites is done by means of a standard
method for weighting odds-ratios, where a statistical weight of separate result is defined by
the sizes of data sets, which provided the following result:

                                   ∑ w ln(θ )  i       i
Weighted mean effect (WME ) = exp(     i
                                              )
                                     ∑w    i
                                                   i


             1                   1
wi =                   =
       VAR (log(θ i ))    1    1   1   1
                             + i + i + i
                         X ia X b C a C b
where
θi - estimate of effect for site i,
wi - statistical weight of estimate for site i,
Xia – the number of accidents observed at treatment site i, in the “after” period,
Xib – the number of accidents at treatment site i, in the “before” period,
Cia – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “after” period,
Cib – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “before” period.
The 95% confidence interval for the weighed effect is estimated as follows:
            zα            z α 
                          1−  
WME exp      2
                  , WME exp   2
                                   


        
            ∑ wi 
                            ∑ wi  
                                  
           i              i    

The applicable value of the safety effect, i.e. the best estimate of accident reduction
associated with the treatment (in percent), is calculated as (1-WME)*100.




                                                                                          Page 78
                                        FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS




5             Assessment Quantification

The unit of implementation
A four-arm roundabout was determined to be the typical unit of implementation.
The typical cost of the unit of implementation
The typical cost was estimated to be € 300,000 (at 2002 prices). The estimate was based
on results found in the BESIDIDO project. The cost of maintenance was not calculated due
to an assumption that the cost of maintenance is similar for four-arm intersections as it is
for the four-arm roundabout.
The duration of the effect
The duration of the effect was estimated to be 20 years.
The discount rate
The discount rate was determined to be 5%. This is based on the recommended value of
discount rate used in the Rosebud project. All prices are converted to Euro; the price level
is as of the year 2002.
Price of a typical four-arm intersection accident
The price of a typical four-arm intersection accident was calculated to be € 7,500 (at 2002
prices). The calculation is based on accident statistics of the intersections from the sample
before the implementation of roundabouts.

5.1           Safety effect

The aim was to find the number of accidents, which will be prevented by the
implementation of roundabouts instead of four-arm intersections, in an evaluated sample
of eight sites.
                                             Table 34: Data for calculations
      site           site accidents      comparison group        estimated            statistical weight
    number           before    after     before      after        effect θi            of estimate wi
      1                85       24       57810      34356          0,475                    18,699
      2                5         5       17409      16695           1,04                      2,5
      3                36        3       34135      16695           0,17                    2,768
      4                13        5       50861      16600          1,178                     3,61
      5                2         1       34356      16726          1,027                    0,666
      6                10        4       16947      50147          0,135                    1,428
      7                27       29       38810      34356          1,213                    13,971
      8                19        1       34135      33295          0,054                    0,949

                                  Table 35: Safety effect of evaluated roundabouts
 Estimated effect (WME)                WME confidence          Number of treatment    Number of accidents at
                                          interval              sites in the sample     the treatment sites
             0.624                      (0.465, 0.836)                   8                      197



The average accident reduction associated with the treatment is calculated as (1-WME) x
100 = (1- 0,0,624) x 100 = 37.6%.

                                                                                                           Page 79
                              FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS




                                    Table 36: Accident reduction

                             Site      Average annual       Reduction of
                           number    number of accidents     accidents

                              1               28.3                 10.64
                              2                 5                   1.88
                              3                18                   6.77
                              4                4.3                  1.62
                              5                 1                   0.37
                              6                10                   3.76
                              7               13.5                  5.08
                              8                9.5                  3.57


The total sum of accidents prevented annually multiplied by the average accident costs
(the total benefit) is 33.7 x 7,500 = € 253,000. The annual average sum of money saved
for one treated site is € 31,625.


6           Assessment Results

The total cost of prevented accidents in a period of 20 years at one treated site is
calculated to be € 444,000. Because the cost of one unit of implementation is estimated at
€ 300,000, the cost/benefit ratio is 1/1.5.
                            Table 37: Costs and benefits – 20-year period

                                  Accidents prevented   € 444,000
                                    Cost of one unit    € 300,000

                                    Cost / benefit         1/1.5



7           Decision-Making Process

The cost-benefit calculation of the roundabout implementation in urban areas is not a
common tool in decision-making processes in the Czech Republic (it has probably never
been used). The decisions regarding implementation of roundabouts are usually made by
the relevant local authority, which is the owner of the urban infrastructure. The criteria for
decisions and implementations are mostly as follows:
    •   Traffic engineering – capacity issues, traffic calming
    •   Safety of all road users
    •   Town planning
It is generally agreed among the experts and decision-makers that roundabouts are a
“safe” type of intersection. The fundamental arguments against their implementation are
mostly based on the general feeling of decision-makers that the capacity of roundabouts is
rather limited. The reason for it could be the fact that some of the already-implemented
roundabouts have been causing traffic congestions, with obvious impacts on mobility and
environment. Wrong roundabout design mostly causes these problems.



                                                                                        Page 80
                             FOUR-ARM ROUNDABOUTS IN URBAN AREAS



The CBA, which would compare the safety effects of roundabouts with their effects on
environment and mobility, could thus be a very useful tool to improve the decision-making
process.


8          Conclusion

Due to the limited sources of available data, it was not possible to calculate a complete
CBA. A “mini-CBA” was thus calculated - only the safety effects of roundabouts were taken
into account. The effects on environment and mobility were not taken into account. The
result showed that the four-arm roundabouts in urban areas have a positive effect (-37.6%)
on the reduction of all accidents.




REFERENCES

The Czech Statistical Office: www.czso.cz
The Czech Ministry of Interior: http://www.mvcr.cz/statistiky/crv.html
Koňárek (2002): Socio-economy losses caused by accidents in CZ
The Traffic Police Directorate of CZ (2003): Summary of accidents data
WP3 (2004): Improvements in efficiency assessment tools, ROSEBUD




                                                                                    Page 81
CASE E2: Speed humps on local streets




                             Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
                                Transportation Research Institute




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE E REPORT



                      SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




                BY VICTORIA GITELMAN AND SHALOM HAKKERT,

         TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE, TECHNION,
                           ISRAEL
                                          SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1     THE PROBLEM TO SOLVE ................................................................................. 85
2     DESCRIPTION OF MEASURE............................................................................. 85
2.1   General ................................................................................................................. 85
2.2   Current installation ................................................................................................ 87
3     TARGET ACCIDENT GROUP.............................................................................. 88
4     ASSESSMENT TOOLS ........................................................................................ 88
4.1   Method for estimating safety effect ....................................................................... 88
4.2   Safety effect of speed humps................................................................................ 90
4.3   Accident costs ....................................................................................................... 91
5     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS................................................................................. 92
5.1   General ................................................................................................................. 92
5.2   Values of costs and benefits ................................................................................. 92
5.3   Cost-Benefit Ratio ................................................................................................. 93
6     DECISION MAKING PROCESS........................................................................... 93
7     DISCUSSION........................................................................................................ 94




                                                                                                                         Page 83
                                 SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Installation of speed humps on a section of urban street
Problem
High travel speeds along the road section and accident occurrences
Target Group
All injury accidents on the treated road
Targets
Reducing travel speeds and the number of injury accidents along the road
Initiator
Local authorities – for the measure’s application; Ministry of Transport – for the evaluation
of safety effect
Decision-makers
Local authorities
Costs
Speed humps’ design and installation costs, paid by the local authority
Benefits
The benefits are expected from the savings in injury accidents along the treated road. The
costs of time losses due to lower vehicle speeds are subtracted from the benefits. The
residents of the area and the national economy will benefit from the measure’s application.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
May range from 1:4 to 1:2, depending on the type of speed humps installed.




                                                                                       Page 84
                                 SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




1         Problem

In Israel, similar to many other countries, more than 70% of injury accidents and about half
of fatal accidents occur in built-up areas (Gitelman, Hakkert, 2003). Previous research
indicates that, as to the location of road accidents in towns, there is a somewhat equal
subdivision of those occurring on arterials, and in central city districts and residential
areas. Following this, the number of injury accidents in the residential areas throughout the
country amounts to some 5,000 per year, with 9,000 injuries involved. Due to the scattered
pattern of accidents in residential areas, on the one hand, and the high proportion of
vulnerable road users on the residential streets, on the other hand, traffic calming is known
as the best safety solution for such areas. Safety effects of traffic calming measures stem
mostly from reduced travelling speeds and also from a reduction in traffic volumes on
residential streets.
Traffic calming measures are engineering solutions that change the regular road layout.
These measures can be subdivided into two groups: those creating a horizontal diversion
from a regular road lane and those creating a vertical diversion from a regular road
surface. The latter group includes speed humps.
Speed humps may serve as one of the design elements when a traffic calming area ("30-
km zone") is established. In this case, speed humps are usually combined with other
measures, e.g. road narrowings, chicanes, pedestrian refuges and roundabouts.
Regarding the maintenance and improvement of existing roads, speed humps are
frequently applied by the authorities when the street design does not satisfy safety
demands, i.e. when actual vehicle speeds are higher than they should be for the given
road type and surroundings, or when road accidents occurred on the street or in the area
considered. Sometimes a demand for the installation of speed humps comes from the
residents, who are worried about the high travel speeds or of near-accidents that were
observed on the street.
Speed humps are frequently chosen as a typical solution when there is a need to reduce
travel speeds on a local street and to provide the street with a calmer and safer character.


2         Description of measure


2.1       General

Speed humps are defined as raised areas over the road surface, which are installed over
the whole road width or part of it, and present a physical measure for reducing travel
speeds (Guidelines, 2002). The humps consist of a raised road pavement and can be
made of asphalt, concrete or paving blocks.
The main advantages of speed humps are in their self-enforcing nature and in creating a
visual impression that the street is not designated for high speeds or for passing traffic
(e.g. ITE, 1997).
Over the last three decades, safety effects of speed humps were examined and proven in
many countries. Those are associated with two basic reasons: typically, a reduction in
travel speeds and, frequently, a reduction in traffic volume, following the humps'
installation. The safety effect is usually observed provided that the installation parameters


                                                                                       Page 85
                                SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



and the density of the humps are proper, i.e. strict enough in order to dictate the desired
travel speeds on the street.
The speed humps' installation may have one of two purposes (Guidelines, 2002):
   a) reducing travel speeds along a road section;
   b) reducing travel speeds near a problematic point, e.g. a pedestrian crossing,
      a school, or another public place with a high concentration of pedestrians.
The first case is considered as the typical one and demonstrating major advantages of the
measure.
Speed humps are known in the world since 1973, when the first systematic study aimed at
developing speed humps was conducted in the UK (Watts, 1973). The first humps had a
circular profile and, until today, it is the most widespread form of speed hump in many
countries. Several years later, another form of speed humps - a trapezoidal profile, was
independently developed in two countries: Australia and the USA.
While a circular hump resembles a segment of a circle, a trapezoidal hump consists of
three components: an incline ramp, a flat head and a decline ramp.
Figure 11 illustrates typical parameters of circular and trapezoidal humps, which are called
using their historical names: "Watts profile" for a circular hump (after the name of the
researcher who developed the first humps), and "Seminole profile" for a trapezoidal hump
(after the name of the county in Florida, USA, where the humps were developed). The
circular and trapezoidal humps are the basic (regular) types of speed humps that are in
use today around the world.
Over the last decades, many variations of basic humps were developed in the UK, the
Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and other countries (e.g. Gitelman et al, 2001). Among
other types, speed cushions (narrow trapezoidal humps allowing for easy passing by
buses and large vehicles), sinusoidal profile humps and combi-humps (a combination of
speed cushion and regular humps) were introduced and tested in some European
countries.
In Israel, the updated edition of guidelines for design and installation of speed humps was
published by the Ministry of Transport in 2002 (Guidelines, 2002). The types of speed
humps that are recommended for the use in urban areas in Israel are:
   1. Circular humps, of 3.5-4 m in length, with a height of 8-10 cm for a street with
      a 30 kph speed limit and a height of 6-8 cm for a 50 kph speed limit;
   2. Trapezoidal humps, with a height of 8-10 cm for a 30 kph speed limit and a
      height of 6-8 cm for a 50 kph speed limit. The flat head of the humps should
      be of 2.5-3 m in length and the slope of the ramps not steeper than 1:10-
      1:15.
   1. Speed cushions, for the streets with a 50 kph speed limit. These should be 6-
      8 cm in height, 1.9-3.7 m in length, and 1.6-2.0 m in width. The slope of the
      incline/ decline ramps should be 1:8-1:10.




                                                                                         Page 86
                                      SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




   Figure 11: Basic profiles of speed humps in the historical perspective: circular (Watts) and trapezoidal
                                                (Seminole).




                                  Sources: Ewing (1999); Weber and Braaksma (2000).


2.2         Current installation

In the current study, we consider the installation of regular speed humps (i.e. circular or
trapezoidal humps) on a typical urban street with a 50 kph speed limit. The road section for
the treatment is about 500 m in length. To note, according to the Guidelines (2002), 500 m
is the maximum recommended length of road section which can be treated by continuous
speed humps only, whereas a longer road section needs a combination of speed humps
with other traffic calming measures.
For the street with the 50 kph speed limit the parameters of speed humps can be as
follows:
Circular hump – 8 cm in height, 3.7 m in length;
Trapezoidal hump – 8 cm in height, the flat head of 2.5 m in length, slopes of 1:10, total
length of 4.1 m.
The purpose of the installation of speed humps on the road section is to provide that the
level of actual speeds (85%) be below the speed limits (50 kph). Based on the known
relationships between the density of speed humps and the actual travel speeds along the
road (Guidelines, 2002), the recommended distances between the humps considered
should be 100-130 m for circular humps and 90-110 m for trapezoidal humps. Therefore,
over the road section considered, five speed humps should be installed.




                                                                                                       Page 87
                                  SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




3          Target Accident Group

Considering the speed humps' installation, the safety effect usually refers to all injury
accidents (e.g. Webster and Layfield, 1996). This is based on the assumption that
reducing actual speeds creates a moderating effect on all accident types, i.e. single-
vehicle accidents, multiple-vehicle collisions and pedestrian accidents. Therefore,
estimating a safety effect of speed humps' installations on urban roads in Israel, the target
accident group was defined as all injury accidents on the treated roads.
A slightly different consideration is accepted when a single site is considered for a speed
hump installation. For example, according to Guidelines (2002), a warrant for the
installation of speed humps suggests to account for a weighted number of accidents,
where a severe accident of any type has the weight of 5; a pedestrian accident – the
weight of 1; other accidents – weights of 0.5. Such an approach was chosen in order to
strengthen the consideration of the speed factor in accident occurrences. Examining the
warrant, the accident numbers for the last 3-5 years are weighted and an average annual
number is considered.
On the urban street considered in this study, three injury accidents occurred over the three
last years, of which one was a pedestrian accident and two were vehicle collisions; all
accidents produced slight injuries. Using the warrant's approach, the weighted number of
accidents on the street of treatment will be 1 * 1 + 2 * 0.5 = 2 injury accidents in 3 years, or
0.67 accidents per year.


4          Assessment tools

4.1        Method for estimating safety effect

The safety effect from the installation of speed humps on urban roads in Israel was
estimated in a recent study, which was initiated by the Ministry of Transport and conducted
by the T&M Company in association with the Technion (Hakkert et al, 2002). The study
aimed at developing a uniform methodology for evaluating potential safety effects of
projects on road infrastructure improvements and estimating safety effects of some 30
types of safety treatments, which were introduced on Israeli roads through the 90s.
For the estimation of safety effects of road infrastructure improvements, a method
combining an after/before comparison with a control group with an empirical correction due
to selection bias, was proposed. The outline of the method resembles that described in
Elvik (1997), whereas in the Israeli study an extension accounting for changes in traffic
volumes was developed. Besides, the reference group statistics that are necessary for
correction of the selection bias were estimated by the method of sample moments and not
on the basis of a regression model.
The reference group included sites which are similar to the treatment sites in most
engineering characteristics but left untreated (unchanged) during the “before” periods of all
the sites in the treatment group. The demands for the control (comparison) group were as
follows: it should be large (to strengthen the significance of the findings) and demonstrate
some similarity with the treatment group from the engineering viewpoint.
For a treatment type considered, evaluation of the safety effect included three steps:
1) A correction of “before” accident numbers with the help of reference group statistics for
each site in the treatment group (WP3, 2004 – see Appendix to Chapter 3).

                                                                                          Page 88
                                                  SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



2) An evaluation of the treatment effect at each site by means of the odds-ratio with the
comparison group, where for the “before” period the corrected accident numbers (from the
first step) are applied. Besides, a correction due to changes in the traffic volumes is
performed. The formula has the form:
                                         Xa
Estimated effect (θ ) =                       δ
                                           Ca
                                        Xm
                                           Cb
where
                  1
δ=               βc                βt
      Vcb            Vt a   
     
      Vc    
                     
                       Vt     
                               
      a              b      
where
Xa – the number of accidents observed at the treatment site in the “after” period,
Xm – the corrected number of accidents at the treatment site in the “before” period,
Vta – traffic volume at the treatment site in the “after” period,
Vtb – traffic volume at the treatment site in the “before” period,
Ca – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “after” period,
Cb – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “before” period,
Vca - traffic volume in comparison group sites in the “after” period,
Vcb - traffic volume in comparison group sites in the “before” period,
βt – the parameter of safety performance function (a power of relation between traffic
volume and the accident number), for treatment sites,
βc – the parameter of safety performance function, for comparison-group sites.
3) Weighting the effects found for separate treatment sites. This is done by means of a
standard way known for weighting odds-ratios, where a statistical weight of separate result
is defined by the sizes of data sets, which provided this result:

                                   ∑ w ln(θ )                  i       i
Weighted mean effect (WME ) = exp(            )        i

                                     ∑w                    i
                                                                   i


             1                   1
wi =                   =
       VAR (log(θ i ))    1    1   1   1
                           i
                             + i + i + i
                         X a X b Ca Cb
where
θi - estimate of effect for site i,
wi - statistical weight of estimate for site i,
Xia – the number of accidents observed at treatment site i, in the “after” period,
Xib – the number of accidents at treatment site i, in the “before” period,
Cia – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “after” period,
Cib – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “before” period.
                                                                                          Page 89
                                 SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



The 95% confidence interval for the weighed effect is estimated as follows:
            zα            z α 
                          1−  
WME exp      2
                  , WME exp   2
                                   


        
            ∑ wi 
                            ∑ wi  
                                  
           i              i    


The applicable value of the safety effect, i.e. the best estimate of accident reduction
associated with the treatment (in percent), is calculated as (1-WME)*100.
In the cases of large samples of treatment sites (that diminishes a threat of selection bias
and also limits the practical possibility of building a comparable reference group), only
steps 2-3 were applied for the evaluation.

4.2        Safety effect of speed humps

In the study Hakkert et al. (2002), the data on the road infrastructure improvements were
collected by means of written applications and meetings with the representatives of road
and municipal authorities in different country areas. A special database on the issue was
established. The data were sought mostly on projects performed in the mid 90s, to have a
two-year “before” and two-year “after” period for observation.
To represent a specific project in the database, three information elements were defined
as crucial: site of treatment, type of treatment and the period of treatment. For the project
to be involved in the evaluation, all three pieces of information had to be thoroughly
verified. To provide a minimum but comprehensive presentation of a specific project in the
database, a special reporting form was devised which enabled to classify the site and the
treatment in accordance with the road layout, area specifics, etc. The data were obtained
from the authorities and accomplished by information from detailed maps, field surveys
and the publications of the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).
Within each treatment type for the analysis, a strict definition of the periods “before” and
“after” the treatment was provided for each site; a relevant definition of both periods for the
comparison-group sites was also attached. The next stage in data preparation was filtering
the CBS accident files for the sites and periods required. For each treatment type, files
with series of accident numbers were produced for every treatment and comparison group
of sites and then processed using the method described in Section 4.1.
For the treatment type "installation of speed humps on a local street", the data were
collected on the majority of projects, which were performed by 3 municipalities: Tel-Aviv,
Netanya and Haifa. Over the years 1994-1998, speed humps were installed on 94 streets
of these towns. The time period for the consideration was 1991-1999, both for the
treatment and comparison group roads. For the treatment roads, all injury accidents
observed on these roads were considered, whereas for each treated street a two-year
"before" period and a two-year “after” period were separately defined. All injury accidents
observed on urban road sections throughout the country (excluding junctions and fitting
"before" and "after" periods for each site of treatment) served as a comparison group.
Table 38 details the number of sites (projects) involved in the evaluation, the number of
accidents observed at the treatment sites in “before” and “after” periods, the mean value of
the safety effect estimated and the confidence interval for this value. As can be seen from
Table 1, a significant accident reduction was observed following the treatment. (A
reduction is significant when the whole WME confidence interval is below one.)
                                                                                         Page 90
                                       SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



                    Table 38: Safety effect of speed humps estimated for Israeli conditions
      Treatment type            Estimated      WME                Number of          Number of
                                effect         confidence         treatment sites    accidents at the
                                (WME)          interval           in the sample      treatment sites
      Speed humps on               0.603        (0.44, 0.828 )           94                129
      urban road sections
      Source: Hakkert et al, 2002

The average safety effect of speed humps installed on urban roads in Israel was a 40%
reduction in injury accidents. This result is comparable with the international value reported
by Elvik et al (1997) – a 48% reduction in injury accidents.

4.3         Accident costs

In the current Israeli practice, the average accident cost is estimated as a sum of injury
costs and damage costs of an average accident in the target accident group. The injury
costs are a sum of injury values multiplied by the average number of injuries, with different
severity levels, which were observed in the target accident group. The road accident injury
values are usually taken as $ 500,000 per fatality, $ 50,000 per serious injury, $ 5,000 per
minor injury; the damage value is stated as 15% of the injury costs (Guidelines, 2002).
Table 39 illustrates the calculation of accident costs for an average injury accident
observed on urban Israeli roads over the period 1996-2000. The injury costs of an average
accident are NIS 77,490; with the addition of damage-costs, the value of average injury
accident is NIS 89,114 (at 2000 prices).
The above values of injury should be treated as conservative because a recent evaluation
of losses from road accidents in Israel recommended a higher estimate of the fatality value
of $ 930,000 (MATAT, 2004). The latter accounts for both lost output and human costs, i.e.
applies the willingness-to-pay approach.
              Table 39: Estimating costs for an average injury accident on urban Israeli roads

            Value                                    Fatality       Serious injury   Minor injury
            Average number of injuries per           0.01           0.11             1.59
            accident*
            Injury-values, $                         500,000        50,000           5,000
            Total injury-costs of average            $ 18,450 or NIS 77,490
            accident**
            Damage costs                             NIS 11,624
            Total costs of an average accident       NIS 89,114
            (at 2000 prices)
           *over the period 1996-2000 **$ 1 = 4.2 NIS




                                                                                                        Page 91
                                 SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




5         Cost-Benefit Analysis


5.1       General

In this section, a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of the installation of speed humps on a local
street is performed. The CBA compares the measure's benefits with the measure's costs,
where both values are brought to the same economic framework.
The main benefit from the installation of speed humps stems from the accident reduction
that is expected after the treatment. However, due to a reduction in vehicle speeds that will
be attained on the treated road, a loss in travel time by the vehicles passing the road
should be accounted for, too. The economic value of the time lost should be subtracted
from the value of benefits.
The costs of the measure are a direct result of the initial investment, which is required for
the design and installation of speed humps along the street considered. No special
maintenance expenses are required as this is supposed to be a part of regular road
maintenance.
Both the costs and benefits are considered for 5 years, with a 7% discount rate; the
accumulated discount factor (D) is 4.10.

5.2       Values of costs and benefits

The cost of speed humps' installation should account for the expenses on: the hump's
design and its approval process, a dismantling of the road surface, building the hump, road
signing and marking. When more than one unit of speed humps is installed, the unit cost
times the number of the installed units should be taken into account.
Using the typical cost values of the regular speed humps, which are provided by the
Guidelines (2002) and the Israeli study of the road infrastructure improvements – Hakkert
et al (2002), the cost value of one unit may range from 3,000 to 6,000 NIS (NIS – New
Israeli Shekel). Therefore, the costs of installation of speed humps on the street
considered will be NIS 15,000-30,000 (at 2000 prices).
The one-year value of benefits from the expected accident reduction is estimated as a
product of the annual number of "before" accidents, the accident reduction factor (the
safety effect) and the accident cost. This value is:
0.67 accidents * 0.4 * 89114 NIS/ accident = 23,883 NIS (at 2000 prices).
The one-year value of time losses due to the humps' installation is estimated as a product
of the time lost by one vehicle, the average daily traffic volume, the time costs and the
number of working days over the year. Comparing the time required for a vehicle to pass
the street with a higher speed (before the humps' installation) with the time required to
pass the same street with a lower speed (after the humps' installation), one can conclude
that the average delay will be of 4 sec/vehicle. (To note, a similar value was provided by
Atkins and Coleman (1997), who measured the values of time lost by one vehicle due to a
regular hump and found that even for large vehicles it is 1 sec per hump, on average.)
The daily traffic volume on the street of treatment is 8000 vehicles. The cost of a delay of
an average vehicle on a local street can be estimated as 3.96 NIS/hour (as some 20% of
typical costs of delay for the economy - see Guidelines, 2002). Over the year, there are

                                                                                       Page 92
                                       SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



260 working days (52 weeks * 5 working days); only working days are considered for time
costs, so weekends may be neglected.
Therefore, the one-year value of time lost due to the humps' installation on the street
considered is:
4 sec/vehicle * 1/3600 hours * 8000 vehicles * 3.96 NIS/hour * 260 days = 9,152 NIS (at
2000 prices).

5.3         Cost-Benefit Ratio

Table 40 illustrates the calculation of the cost-benefit ratio (CBR) of the speed humps'
installation. The value of the measure's costs is 15,000-30,000 NIS (at 2000 prices) or
3,600-7,200 Euro (at 2002 prices).
The total value of benefits is calculated as the difference between the costs of accidents
prevented and the costs of time losses, multiplied by the accumulated discount factor (D =
4.10). The total value of benefits is 60,397 NIS (at 2000 prices) or 14,408 Euro (at 2002
prices). Depending on the measure's costs, the CBR ranges from 1:4 to 1:2.
For the local street considered, the installation of speed humps appears to be cost-
effective.
                                 Table 40: Calculation of the cost-benefit ratio

 Costs                                             Benefits                   Costs of       Losses: Costs
                                                                              accidents      of vehicle
                                                                              prevented in   delays in one
                                                                              one year,      year, NIS
                                                                              NIS
 Costs of one speed hump, NIS       3,000-6,000                                    23,883        -9,152
                                                   Total benefits in one           14,731
                                                   year, NIS
 Costs of a series of 5 humps,        15,000-      Total benefits in 5             60,397
 NIS (2000)                           30,000       years, NIS (2000)
 Total costs, Euro (2002)*          3,578-7,156    Total benefits, Euro            14,408
                                                   (2002)*
                                                   Cost-benefit ratio         From 1:4.0
                                                                              to 1:2.0
*Change of price index over 2000-2002 is 1.0687. In 2002: 1 Euro = 4.48 NIS.


6           Decision-Making Process

The cost-benefit analysis of the installation of speed humps is not common in Israel as this
treatment is considered by local authorities as a low-cost measure and therefore, generally
does not require an economic justification.
As a result of more than 20 years of practical experience with their application, the safety
effect of speed humps is widely accepted by the professional community and the local
authorities. Typical questions usually concern the humps’ installation parameters and the
suitability of the measure to the road’s layout, and much less – the economic effect of the
measure.


                                                                                                      Page 93
                                 SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS



Besides, pressure to install speed humps sometimes comes from the residents of the area
who are interested in calming the traffic and in preventing accidents that might occur.
Being under public pressure, the authorities feel they do not need an economic evaluation
to promote the measure’s application. On the contrary, the economic evaluation of the
speed humps’ installation might sometimes be helpful to demonstrate the lack of efficiency
of the measure considered, allowing to rank the sites to be treated and the measures to be
applied.


7          Discussion

In this study, a CBA of a typical example of a speed humps’ installation on an urban street
was considered. The measure was found to be beneficial, mostly due to the fact that injury
accidents were observed on the road in the “before” period.
The economic consideration accounted for the humps’ installation costs, the safety effect
expected and the costs of time losses due to lower travel speeds. The environmental
impact of the measure, e.g. changes in the level of pollution or noise over the street, was
not considered, as it is not essential in such a kind of installation. For instance, as
indicated by different studies (Gitelman et al, 2001), the positive and negative pollution
effects of speed humps usually compensate each other, especially where the parameters
and the density of their installation are proper (i.e. keeping a certain speed level over the
whole road section).
The safety effect of speed humps was significant under Israeli conditions, in line with the
findings reported by studies in other countries.
The current study accounted for the time losses due to speed humps, which does not
present a common component in the economic evaluation of this measure. One should
remember that under certain conditions (e.g. for a road with higher traffic volume) the
measure not be beneficial.
The CBA presented in this study can be characterized as follows:
    •   the evaluation findings support the measure's implementation;
    •   to estimate the safety effects, statistical models were fitted to the accident
        data, and the evaluation was in line with the criteria of correct safety
        evaluation (WP3, 2004);
    •   the accident costs were fitted to the accident type considered, however, they
        should be treated as conservative as the injury costs did not account for the
        willingness-to-pay component;
    c) the evaluation of the safety effect was initiated by the Ministry of Transport.
       However, the CBA of the measure was not required by the decision-makers.




                                                                                         Page 94
                                SPEED HUMPS ON LOCAL STREETS




References

Atkins C. and Coleman, M. (1997) The influence of traffic calming on emergency response
  times. ITE Journal, August, pp. 42-46.
Gitelman V., Hakkert A.S. et al (2001). Speed humps in towns. A literature survey. Ami-
   Matom Company and the Technion, Haifa (in Hebrew).
Gitelman V., Hakkert A.S. (2003). A wide-scale safety evaluation of traffic calming
   measures in residential areas. European Transport Conference, Strasbourg, France.
Guidelines (2002). Design and performance of speed humps. Ami-Matom Company,
  Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
Elvik, R. (1997). Effects on Accidents of Automatic Speed Enforcement in Norway.
   Transportation Research Record 1595, TRB, Washington, D. C., pp.14-19.
Elvik, R., Borger-Mysen, A. and Vaa, T. (1997) Trafikksikkerhekshandbok (Traffic Safety
   Handbook). Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo, Norway.
Ewing, R. (1999) Traffic Calming. State of the Practice. Federal Highway Administration,
  US Department of Transportation, and Institute of Transportation Engineers,
  Washington, DC.
Hakkert, A.S., Gitelman, V., et al (2002) Development of Method, Guidelines and Tools for
  Evaluating Safety Effects of Road Infrastructure Improvements. Final report, T&M
  Company, Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
ITE (1997). Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps. A recommended
  practice of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Publication No. RP-023A,
  Washington, DC.
MATAT (2004). Road Accidents in Israel: the scope, the characteristics and the estimate
  of losses to the National Economy. MATAT - Transportation Planning Center Ltd,
  Ministry of Transport.
Weber, P.A. and Braaksma, J.P. (2000). Towards a North American Geometric Design
 Standard for Speed Humps. ITE Journal, January.
Webster, D. and Layfield, R. (1996). Traffic calming – Road hump schemes using 75mm
 high humps. TRL Report 186, Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, UK.
WP3 (2004). Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.




                                                                                     Page 95
CASE E3: TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES




                  National Technical University of Athens
           Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering




                                   ROSEBUD
                             WP4 - CASE E REPORT


                        TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES

      IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC
   ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




               BY GEORGE YANNIS AND PETROS EVGENIKOS

                                    NTUA / DTPE, GREECE
            IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1       PROBLEM ............................................................................................................ 99
2       DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................... 99
2.1     Speed humps and woonerfs description ............................................................... 99
2.2     Description of areas where traffic calming measures were implemented............ 101
3       TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 102
4       ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 102
4.1     General ............................................................................................................... 102
4.2     Estimation of safety effect ................................................................................... 102
5       ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 105
5.1     Traffic calming measures implementation cost ................................................... 105
5.2     Traffic calming measures benefits....................................................................... 105
5.2.1   Number of accidents prevented .......................................................................... 105
5.2.2   Accident cost....................................................................................................... 107
5.2.3   Estimation of cost for time lost ............................................................................ 108
6       ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 109
7       DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................110
8       IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS ........................................................................ 110
9       CONCLUSION / DISCUSSION........................................................................... 111




                                                                                                                          Page 97
            IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Implementation of low cost road traffic engineering measures (speed humps and
woonerfs) in one direction - one-lane roads in the Municipality of Neo Psychiko in the
Greater Athens Area in Greece
Problem to solve
In Greece 72% of the total number of road accidents occur in urban areas and speed is
the most significant factor leading to their continuous increase. Increased travel speeds
along urban roads affect not only the road accident causation, but also the accident
severity.
Target Group
Inhabitants of residential areas (pedestrians, children, two-wheelers, drivers, passengers)
Targets
a) Creation of calm driving areas
b) Decrease in the number of road accidents and related casualties
Initiator
Municipality of Neo Psychiko, Ministry of Public Works
Decision-makers
Municipality of Neo Psychiko.
Costs
Implementation costs (design and installation/construction) for speed humps and woonerfs
provided by municipal funds from the Municipality of Neo Psychiko.
Benefits:
Fatal and injury accidents prevented
Cost/Benefit Ratio
1:1.14 to 1:1.2




                                                                                            Page 98
            IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




1           Problem
In Greece, less than 1,600 persons killed and 19,000 persons injured are recorded in more
than 16,000 road accidents annually (DTPE, 2004). More specifically, 76% of the total
number of road accidents occurs in urban areas. Speed is the most significant factor
leading to the high increase of road accidents. High speed is a major factor in road
accidents, as it affects both their occurrence and their severity (KANELLAIDIS et al, 1995).
The majority of Greek drivers exceed the speed limit in urban areas, and therefore road
accidents in urban areas present a continuously increasing trend (KANELLAIDIS, et al,
1999).
There are a wide variety of methods and techniques used for reducing road accidents in
urban areas, such as enforcement, intensive campaigns, specific traffic management
techniques etc. However, Low Cost Traffic Engineering Measures (LCTEM) (or traffic
calming measures) are deemed to be the most efficient measures towards tackling one of
the most significant problems that communities face nowadays: urban road accidents.

2           Description

2.1         Speed humps and woonerfs description

Speed humps are raised paved areas on the surface of road, extended across its width.
They are constructed by different types of materials, as asphalt, concrete, bricks or plastic
(caoutchouc) and are usually designed for travel speeds between 20 - 30 km/h [KAPICA
C.J, 2001]. Their length is usually larger than the distance between the wheels of vehicle
(usual length 3.6 m), their height oscillates between 7.5 - 10 cm and the recommended
distance between successive humps varies from 60 to 100 m. (ZAIDEL et al, 1992). The
main advantages and disadvantages deriving from the use of speed humps in the road
network of an urban area are shown in the following Table 41.
                       Table 41: Advantages and disadvantages of speed humps
                       Advantages                                     Disadvantages


      1. Decrease of the number of conflicts of      1. Obstruct the movement of heavy
          vehicles at junctions                          vehicles
      2. Travel speed reduction                      2. Require additional traffic signing
      3. Do not prohibit the movement of             3. Create potential deviation of traffic in
          vehicles                                       near roads
      4. Provide aesthetics of environment for       4. Influence traffic islands
          pedestrians and pedal cyclists
                                                     5. Require maintenance
      5. Positive effects in multi-sectoral nodes
      6. Low construction costs
                                  Source: Jacksonville Florida City, 2000
The implementation of speed humps in several developed countries resulted in
considerable improvement of road safety at the local level. In Denmark, a reduction in road
accidents and road casualties by 24% and 45% respectively was attributed to the
introduction of such traffic calming measures (ENGEL, THOMSEN, 1992). Some types of
speed humps that can be used at urban areas are presented in Figure 12.

                                                                                                   Page 99
IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



          Figure 12: Typical dimensions of basic types of speed humps




     Source: ZAIDEL et al, 1992




                                                                                Page 100
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




 Woonerfs, another widely applied traffic calming
measure, are roads with special characteristics,
which allow safe walking. Vehicles, although
allowed in, move with very low travel speeds (up to
30 km/h) and the priority is yield to pedestrians.
Such measures are constructed in one-way roads,
as well as in roads of two directions, and the
respective road widths are 3 m and 5 m.
The above-mentioned road types impend the free
flow of vehicles; consequently traffic volumes are
significantly reduced. However, they do not cause
feelings of annoyance to the drivers, as it happens
with speed humps. The construction and
maintenance costs are much higher.
Figure 13 presents the ground plan of a road with
mixed circulation of vehicles and pedestrians
(woonerf). The possibility of parking is very limited,
while the presence of trees is intense. In this way,
the aesthetics of the local environment is upgraded
and the green in the urban regions is increased.
Finally, as indicated in Figure 13, vehicles are not
allowed to move straight ahead, but are
constrained to follow an “S” manoeuvre.                            Figure 13: Ground plan of a
Consequently their speed does not exceed the                                  woonerf.
relevant speed limit that is in                                    Source: Magee, 1998
effect for such roads, i.e. 30
km/h.
Woonerfs are constructed in most developed counties together with speed humps (or
bumps), roundabouts, traffic circles, raised intersections, median barriers or islands, curb
extensions and chokers, chicanes or street closures.

2.2        Description of areas where traffic calming measures were implemented

In Athens, the capital of Greece, a limited number of traffic calming measures has been
constructed. The Municipality of Neo Psychiko is the only area in the Greater Athens Area,
which inaugurated an extensive road traffic calming programme at the beginning of 1990’s
in an attempt to improve road safety in this area. A wide range of traffic calming measures
was carefully implemented, according to technical specifications. These measures mainly
included speed humps and woonerfs and were basically implemented between the years
1991 and 1999. (Municipality of Neo Psychiko, 2001).
Neo Psychiko is the area of investigation of the impact of Low Cost Traffic Engineering
Measures on road safety in urban areas and the methodology used is the “before and after
accidents analysis with large control group”. The control group chosen consists of the
neighbouring Municipalities of Holargos and Agia Paraskevi in the Athens Greater Area. It
is important to mention that in this research only streets with one direction and one lane
are examined, as in this type of streets traffic calming measures were primarily
implemented.


                                                                                                 Page 101
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




3          Target group

The inhabitants of the Municipality of Neo Psychiko mainly benefit from the implementation
of the traffic calming measures in the area. Especially the vulnerable road users groups
(pedestrians, children, two-wheelers, pedal cyclists) are considered as the target group,
but the reduction of road accidents also concerns the drivers and passengers circulating in
the area.

4          Assessment method

4.1        General

Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is the financial tool used for the economic appraisal of the
installation of speed humps and woonerfs in the Municipality of Neo Psychiko. Generally,
CBA provides a logical framework for evaluating alternative courses of action when a
number of factors are highly conjectural in nature. Essentially, it takes into account all the
factors that influence either the benefits or the cost of a project, even if monetary value can
not be easily assigned [SMITH, 1998].
For the purpose of this research, the main benefit (safety effect) considered in the
calculations is the number of prevented accidents in the area, after the implementation of
traffic calming measures. Social and environmental effects for the residents of the area are
not taken into account in this study, as it is difficult to be quantified and moreover, their
benefits are not essential comparing to the accident reduction. However, the time lost (for
the road users) due to the reduction of travel speed should be incorporated into the
benefits calculation.

4.2        Estimation of safety effect

Although there is a wide variety of methodologies used for the examination of road safety
in an area, for the estimation of the safety effect in the Municipality of Neo Psychiko,
deriving from the implementation of speed humps and woonerfs in the area, the “before
and after methodology with large control group” was considered. This is the methodology
with the highest degree of accuracy, as the size of control group is quite large and
moreover, when there is a sufficient number of years “before” and “after” the
implementation of traffic calming measures (as it is in this case study), the phenomenon of
the regression to the mean is eliminated, making the “before and after methodology with
large control group” the most appropriate and reliable methodology for the estimation of
the potential safety effect.
The effects observed in the treated area and the control group area, are weighted by
means of Odds-ratio of the total number of road accidents in “before” and “after” treatment
period. This results to the estimated effect:




                                                                                           Page 102
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



Estimated effect (θ i ) = [Xa/Xm]/[Ca/Cb]
where
Xa - the number of road accidents observed at the treatment area in the “after“ period
Xm - the number of road accidents observed at the treatment area in the “before“ period
Ca - the number of road accidents observed at the control group area in the “after“ period
Cb - the number of road accidents observed at the control group area in the “before“ period


The statistical weight of the estimate is:
                1
wi =
       1     1   1   1
         i
           + i + i + i
       A    B   C   D
Where A, B, C, D are the four numbers of the odds-ratio calculation.
The weighted mean effect is :

                                   ∑ w ln(θ )       i       i
Weighted mean effect (WME ) = exp(          i
                                              )
                                     ∑w         i
                                                        i


with 95% confidence interval for the weighed effect estimated as follows:


            zα               z α 
                             1−  
WME exp       2
                     , WME exp   2
                                      


        
             ∑  wi           ∑ wi  
                                     
            i                i    


The applicable value of the safety effect, i.e. the best estimate of accident reduction
associated with the treatment (in percents), is calculated as (1-WME)*100.
The control group should include large areas with similar characteristics to the area
considered, where traffic calming measures were not implemented. The Municipalities of
Holargos and Agia Paraskevi in the Athens Greater Area present similar road network,
population density, land use and traffic volumes characteristics with the Municipality of
Neo Psychiko (area considered), as indicated in Table 42 and were therefore chosen as
the large comparison group (Georgopoulou, 2002).




                                                                                           Page 103
        IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




Table 42: Road network, land use and other characteristics for the area considered and the control
           group
                                       Municipality
 Characteristics
                                       Neo Psychiko       Agia Paraskevi       Holargos
 Road network characteristics
 Area’s extent                      1,200,000 m2          7,000,000 m2         2,735,000 m2
 Population                         16,000                87,500               39,000
 Density                            130 res/acre          125 res/acre         142 res/acre
 Number of blocks                   174                   514                  250
 Average surface of each block      6.90 m2               13.62 m2             10.94 m2
 Road network length                19,000 m              120,000 m            42,000 m
 Basic road network length          3,700 m               25,000 m             7,000 m
 Secondary road network length      15,300 m              95,000 m             35,000 m
 Road surface percentage            12.63%                13.79%               12.03%
 Number of streets                  75                    288                  95
 Number of one direction streets    67                    260                  85
 Number of two directions streets 8                       28                   10
 One direction streets
                                    89.33%                90.28%               89.47%
 percentage
 Two directions streets
                                    10.67%                9.72%                10.53%
 percentage
 Number of secondary streets        8                     15                   11
 Land use and other characteristics
 Over-regional business land use 16.21%                   14%                  12%
 Regional business land use         1.44%                 1.02%                1.2%
 Land for cultural events etc.      3.8%                  4%                   3.3%
 Education + Sports                 4.93%                 4.2%                 3.5%
 Residence                          73.62%                76.78%               72%
 Monthly family average income      1350 €                1100 €               1100 €
                                    49% with
                                                          45% with public      55% with public
                                    public
                                                          transport            transport
 Number of trips (to the centre of transport
 Athens)                            51% with
                                                          55% with private     45% with private
                                    private
                                                           vehicles             vehicles
                                    vehicles
 Average residents’ vehicle
                                       300 – 350          350 – 400            350 – 400
 property (vehic/1000 resid.)




                                                                                               Page 104
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




5         Assessment Quantification


5.1       Traffic calming measures implementation cost

The total cost for the implementation of traffic calming measures in the Municipality of Neo
Psychiko can be distinguished into implementation costs for speed humps and
implementation costs for woonerfs. The cost of speed humps includes the designing and
construction/installation costs, depending on the type of material used (asphalt or plastic)
as well as the respective road markings. In the case of Neo Psychiko, 49 speed humps
were installed in 21 one-lane, one-direction roads and the total cost was 117.390€ (1998
prices).
The implementation cost of woonerfs is considerably higher than the respective of speed
humps, as it concerns larger areas and includes the design cost, cost for the configuration
and pavement of the respective areas, cost for hydraulic works, electrical works and
sewage pipelines installation. In the case of Neo Psychiko, a total area of 100,000 m2 in 40
local roads was transformed into woonerfs between 1991-1999. According to the data
provided by the technical department of the Municipality of Neo Psychiko, 4,402,054 € (at
1998 prices) was the total cost for the implementation of woonerfs, which is considered
quite high. Generally, increased construction cost is a particularity of the Greek tendering
system. The above-mentioned implementation costs are shown in Table 43.
                       Table 43: Traffic calming measures implementation cost

              Traffic calming measures               Amount               Cost
              Speed humps                            49 units          € 111,518
                                                                2
              Woonerfs                             100,000 m          € 3,081,438
              Total Implementation Cost                       € 3,192,956
             *1998 prices


5.2       Traffic calming measures benefits

In the framework of this research, the benefits examined exclusively concern safety
benefits deriving from the reduction of all injury accidents in the examined area, as no
significant social or environmental costs were expected from the implementation of speed
humps and woonerfs in the Municipality of Neo Psychiko. The available results of previous
research allowed for the direct calculation of the number of accidents prevented by the
measures, as described in detail in the following sections.

5.2.1     Number of accidents prevented

After the resemblance of the area examined and the control group was proved, the “before
and after” methodology was applied to examine the statistical significance of the reduction
of road accidents in the area where traffic calming measures were implemented.
The evaluation of the safety effect, which in this case study is the number of all injury
accidents prevented, is based on the Test X2. The number of accidents occurring in the
area examined is compared with the accidents occurring in the control group. More
specifically, X and Ψ represent, respectively, the total number of accidents that occurred in
the period before and after the implementation of the measures in the area considered.

                                                                                           Page 105
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



Similarly, XE and ΨE represent, respectively, the total number of accidents that occurred in
the control group area, where traffic calming measures were not implemented.
The Test X2 gives that:


                                     (Ψ - ΧΑ)2
                              Χ2 =                           (1)
                                     (Χ + Ψ)Α

                                              ΨΕ
                              where      Α=                   (2)
                                              ΧΕ


Then, the estimated X2 value is compared with the X2α value for a given probability
standard α and for n = 1 freedom standard (n = k–1, where k = 2 are the observations, one
before and one after the implementation of the measures), as they are given in relevant
tables.
When the estimated X2 value is higher than the Χ2α (for a predetermined probability
standard α), the reduction in the number of accidents is considered statistically significant
and in all likelihood is attributed to the implementation of speed humps and woonerfs. The
pre-determined probability standard (α) used in this research is 95%, which can be
considered as conservative.
The total number of accidents occurred in one direction: one-lane streets in the area of
Neo Psychiko during the years 1985-1990 and during the years 1994-1999 are 36 and 33,
respectively. Similarly, the total number of accidents recorded in the control group is 101
and 149, respectively. According to the previous symbolism, X = 36, Ψ = 33, ΧΕ = 101 and
ΨΕ = 149, as indicated in Table 44.

           Table 44: number of accidents “before” and “after” in one direction - one lane streets

                                                                    Area
 Time period                               Area examined                         Control group
                                           (Neo Psychiko)                (Xolargos and Agia Paraskevi)

 Before (1985-1990)                              Χ = 36                              ΧΕ = 101

 After (1994-1999)                               Ψ = 33                              ΨΕ = 149

 Proportion                                      -8.3%                                47.5%



After applying equation (1), it is estimated that:
X2 = 3.972 > 3.84 (X2 value for 95% probability standard), so that a statistical significant
reduction in the total number of accidents is noticed.
A reduction of 8,3% in the total number of accidents was observed in the area considered,
while an increase of 47,5% was recorded in the region of control group. In Table 5 the
mean value of the estimated safety effect and the confidence interval for this value are
presented.

                                                                                                    Page 106
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



            Table 45: Safety effect of speed humps and woonerfs estimated for Neo Psychiko
            Treatment type                  Estimated effect (WME)            WME confidence
                                                                                  interval
 Speed humps and woonerfs in the                      0.621                    (0.363, 1.061 )
 Municipality of Neo Psychiko


The average safety effect of speed humps and woonerfs implementation in Neo Psychiko
is a 38% reduction in of the total number of road accidents, thus, 14 accidents were
prevented by the presence of these traffic calming measures, as no other road safety
measure occurred in the area at the same period.

5.2.2      Accident cost

The estimation of average accident costs was carried out on the basis of a recent study on
accidents cost in Greece [LIAKOPOULOS, 2002]. This study concerned the estimation of
the costs of various components of accident costs (material damage costs, generalized
costs, human costs) for fatal accidents, injury accidents and material damage accidents,
including:
•   Material damage costs
•   Police costs
•   Fire brigade costs
•   Insurance companies costs
•   Court costs
•   Lost production output
•   Pain and grief
•   Rehabilitation costs
•   Hospital treatment costs
•   First aid and transportation costs
The various costs were calculated by means of an exhaustive data collection process
addressed to various organizations (National Statistical Service of Greece, National Police,
Fire Service of Greece, Emergency Medical Service of Greece, hospitals, courts,
insurance companies etc.). Additional parameters were adopted on the basis of
estimations from experts in each field, as well as the existing international literature.
It should be noted, however, that the above study did not adequately account for the
human cost component, as the pain and grief parameters (reported in the Courts) are not
sufficiently representative of the human cost. On that purpose, a separate investigation for
human costs in Greece was carried out in the framework of the present research. In
particular, human costs was estimated according to the following formula:
                                   VoSL = (NAEIS) / (LSE)
Where:
 VoSL: Value of Statistical Life
 NAEIS: National Annual Expenditure on Improving Safety
 LSE: Expected Lives Saved from this Expenditure Annually
                                                                                             Page 107
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



In particular, the calculations included parameters such as the percentage of the family
annual income that each person is willing to pay in his/her entire life in order to reduce the
probability of accident involvement of himself/herself or of any family person by 50%, the
average members per family in Greece, the proportion of families with an economically
active member, the average family annual income in Greece, the national population, the
life expectancy in Greece and the current and new accident risk.
With regards to the percentage of the family annual income that each person is willing to
pay in his/her entire life in order to reduce the probability of accident involvement by 50%,
the results of a recent "willingness-to-pay" survey in Greece were used [AGGELOUSI,
KANELLOPOULOU, 2002]. In this survey, drivers were asked to state the percentage of
annual income they are willing to pay to reduce the probability of a fatal accident, an injury
accident and a material damage accident involvement by 50%.
Furthermore, they were also asked to rate various types of accidents and injuries, in order
to identify their perception on injury severity. On the basis of the results, in the present
research the value corresponding to injury accidents is considered to adequately represent
serious injury accidents, whereas the value for material damage accidents is considered to
adequately represent both minor injury and material damage accidents.
On the basis of the above, the human cost of accidents in Greece was estimated as
follows:
  VoSL = 612,140.72 €/person for fatal accidents
  VoSL = 467,703.02 €/person for serious injury accidents
  VoSL = 206,339.57 €/person for slight injury and material damage accidents
It should also be underlined that the calculations concern prices for 1999. In order to
calculate the average accident cost in Greece, the costs of fatal and injury accidents were
weighted in relation to the average distribution of accident casualties per casualty severity
in urban areas in Greece.
In the following Table 46, parameters concerning accident costs in Greece are
summarized on the basis of the previous research used and the additional calculations
carried out.
                Table 46: Calculation of average accident cost in Greece (1999 prices)

 Cost of Accidents with:                       Killed         Seriously Injured          Slightly Injured
                Material Damage cost (€)       28,769.42              18,174.91                 13,904.19
                    Generalised cost (€)      442,466.54              23,906.66                  6,960.30
                          Human cost (€)      612,140.72            467,703.02                 206,339.57
 Total cost (€)                             1,083,376.68            509,784.59                 227,204.06
 Proportion of casualties in urban areas           3.70%                  9.11%                    87.19%
 Average accident cost                                            284.666,63 €

5.2.3      Estimation of cost for time lost

The implementation of traffic calming measures in an area results to reduced travel
speeds (a reduction of 8 km/h – 15 km/h is usually observed). The time lost (for the road
users) due to this speed reduction could also be incorporated into the benefits calculation
as a negative effect and its value is estimated according to the following equation:
        T=D*Q*V*P

                                                                                                  Page 108
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



Where
T: the value of time lost due to delays resulting traffic calming measures implementation
D: average delay per vehicle
Q: average daily traffic volume in the area considered
V: average value of time (hourly) per vehicle
P: period
The average delay per vehicle (time lost due to implementation of speed humps and
woonerfs) when circulating in the area of Neo Psychiko is approximately 60 seconds. This
estimation is based on field measurements, which took place in the area considered. The
average daily traffic volume in the Municipality of Neo Psychiko was 8,680 vehicles. The
hourly cost of the delay of an average vehicle is 4.5 €/hour (1999). This calculation takes
into account the average value of time per person (hourly) for 1999, which is 3 €, as well
as the average vehicle occupancy, which is 1.6 € [ATTIKO METRO, 1997]. Finally, the
examined period is the number of working days over a year (260 days).
Consequently, the value of time lost in the area considered due to traffic calming
measures implementation is:
T = 60 sec/vehicle * 8,680 vehicles/day * 4.5 €/hour * 260 days * 1/3,600 hours = 180,544
€ (1999 prices).


6          Assessment Results

The cost-benefit ratio calculation follows the identification and quantification of the costs
related to the implementation of traffic calming measures and their benefits, described in
the previous sections. An accumulated discount factor was applied to the implementation
cost calculation on the basis of an interest rate of 4% [National Statistical Service of
Greece, 2003]. Two scenarios are developed, according to the calculation of the value of
benefits. In the first scenario, the value of benefits derives only from the number of
accidents prevented in the area (scenario 1) and in the second scenario the yearly value of
time lost in the area due to traffic calming measures implementation is also considered
(scenario 2). On that purpose two ratios are calculated:
                             Table 47: Calculation of the cost-benefit ratio
                                                         Scenario 1                Scenario 2
                                                     Safety benefits only      Including time lost
 Present value of benefits
              Number of accidents prevented                     14                     14
             Average accident cost - 1999 (€)             284,666.63               284,666.63
                 Accumulated discount factor                   1.0                    1.0
                  Value of time lost - 1999 (€)                  -                  180.544
                                       Total (€)         3,985,332.82             3,804,788.82
 Present value of costs
               Implementation cost - 1998 (€)            3,192,956.71             3,192,956.71
                 Accumulated discount factor                  1.04                    1.04
               Implementation cost - 1999 (€)            3,320,674.98             3,320,674.98
 Cost-benefit ratio                                           1.2:1                  1.14:1

                                                                                                Page 109
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



The yielded cost-benefit ratio indicated in the above Table 47 proves that the
implementation of speed humps and woonerfs in a broad local area can be cost-effective.


7          Decision-Making Process

The results of this research were presented to Head Officers of the Technical Department
of Neo Psychiko. As these decision-makers are mainly civil engineers, they are familiar
with efficiency assessment in terms of cost-benefit analyses and they responded positively
towards this work from the first stages, contributed with data and other available
information and were very helpful in dealing with lack of data when necessary.
Furthermore, decision-makers were very interested in the results. The cost-benefit ratios,
although not very high, were received as a confirmation of the important role of the local
authorities in road safety improvement of urban areas and a validation of their systematic
efforts to contribute in the reduction of road accidents and casualties in their municipality.
Even though the implementation cost of the traffic calming measures are considered
relatively increased, they believe that the reduction in accidents and the respective lives
that can be saved are worth every possible effort. Consequently, they intend to continue
the implementation of similar road safety measures and they would like to communicate
these results to the residents of Neo Psychik, to the press, as well as to other
municipalities so they can also benefit.
They also added that if the results were negative or even less encouraging, they would try
to identify the more cost-effective cases among the results and focus their efforts
accordingly, or consider alternative and more efficient road safety related activities.
Decision-makers also expressed a high interest for more analyses and results, concerning
implementation of other traffic calming measures, in more road types than one-lane - one
direction, or the results concerning specific types of road users (e.g. pedestrians, two-
wheelers and elderly people).
They also underlined that these results would have been even more useful if they were
available at earlier stages of the implementation of the speed humps and woonerfs and
they expressed their strong willingness to mutually co-operate with any responsible
authorities in order to further improve the road safety of their area.


8          Implementation barriers

As far as the implementation of traffic calming measures is concerned, the basic barrier
refers to the reactions from all drivers using the streets where the speed humps and
woonerfs were installed. The reduced travel speeds, as well as the negative impact of
such measures on the suspension system of the vehicles and the relevant annoyance to
the drivers, lead very often to complaints. Some of these road users are residents of the
area and some others are just passing through.
Moreover, the elaboration of guidelines and standards for the construction and
maintenance of the road network in Greece (even at the local level) is a task for the
Ministry of Public Works. In the case of traffic engineering measures, such guidelines and
technical specifications do not exist and consequently their development by the technical
department of Neo Psychiko and the relevant governmental authorities resulted in delays
during the implementation phase. These parameters were the main difficulties
encountered during the early implementation period.

                                                                                           Page 110
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



Additionally, it should be emphasized that such a research should be complemented with
other studies concerning other disadvantages stemming from the implementation of traffic
calming measures. More specifically, it is very essential that the negative impact of these
measures on the traffic flow of vehicles should be examined. Speed humps or woonerfs in
urban streets result in reduced car speeds, which in turn, affect adversely the traffic flow of
streets and causes the undesirable “immigration” of accidents to adjacent streets
[FRANTZESKAKIS, GOLIAS, 1994].
Furthermore, the possible negative impacts of speed humps on the suspension system of
cars should be considered while calculating the value of benefits. The extent of this
damage is highly dependent on the size and geometrical characteristics of those devices,
as well as the speed of passing cars through them, and it comprises one of the most
controversial aspects related to the implementation of traffic calming measures in urban
areas.
The lack of appropriate data for cost-benefit evaluation purposes and the fact that neither
local, nor governmental authorities have used any economic evaluation tools so far to
demonstrate the correctness of decision-making, were overcome by means of interviews
with transport engineers from the technical department of the Municipality of Neo
Psychiko, who were also actively involved in both the decision-making process and the
monitoring of the traffic calming measures influence on road accident reduction.
Additionally, existing research in Greece was further used to yield the necessary
parameters for the computation of cost/benefit ratios.


9          Conclusion / Discussion

There is a certain correlation between low cost traffic engineering measures in urban
areas and the respective number of road accidents. International experience in many
developed countries has shown that several of the traffic calming measures (speed
humps, woonerfs, raised intersections, road narrowing, etc.) are deemed to be the most
efficient measures towards tackling one of the most significant problems that communities
face nowadays: urban road accidents. In Greece such measures were implemented only
in few municipalities and in most cases the implementation was either incomplete or not
well prepared.
A first approach for reliable and comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of those
measures in reducing accidents, speeds or casualties is attempted through this research,
as no evaluation studies have been undertaken so far in Greece.
The present research revealed very limited use of assessment methods in the overall
decision-making process in Greece. Only a small number of cost-effectiveness studies on
road safety measures in general were conducted systematically by independent
institutions and organisations. These occasional research initiatives provide some insight
on the existing activities, but scarcely lead to interesting conclusions and thus are not
usually transferred to policy-makers.
In this study, the cost-benefit analysis was applied to an urban area (a municipality) in
order to evaluate the economic effectiveness of certain traffic calming measures (speed
humps and woonerfs). The safety effect (reduction of number of road accidents in the
area) deriving from the implementation of such measures was calculated and statistically
evaluated by applying the “before and after” methodology with large control groups.
Monetary value was assigned to this safety effect by calculating the average accident cost.


                                                                                           Page 111
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL



Special consideration was given to the estimation of human costs, which is an ambiguous
component of the total accident cost for different casualty types.
Data on the measures’ implementation costs were provided by the technical department of
Neo Psychiko and the cost-benefit ratio was calculated for two different scenarios,
according to the calculation of the benefits’ value. However, the incorporation of the time
lost in the value of benefits (scenario 2) did not really affect the result, as according to
scenario 1 the estimated ratio was 1:1.8, whereas in scenario 2 the ratio was calculated as
1:1.7. In both cases the ratio shows that traffic calming measures’ implementation is cost-
effective.
The fact that the cost-benefit ratio is not very high could be attributed to the high
implementation cost of the traffic calming measures, a particularity of the project tendering
system in the Greek construction sector.
Finally, it was worth mentioning that the absence of national and co-ordinated road safety
programmes aiming at accident reduction can be overcome by the successful
implementation of several road safety actions at the local level, like the traffic calming
measures in urban areas. Generally, close cooperation of governmental and regional or
local authorities can be very effective in road accident improvement at the local level.
The cost-benefit analysis indicates that traffic calming measures could be a useful tool in
the hands of decision-makers when considering road accident reductions in urban areas,
although the implementation cost is high in several cases and there are several complaints
from the road users concerning the reduced travel speeds. However, it is society who has
to choose between speed and safety.




                                                                                           Page 112
           IMPLEMENTATION OF LOW COST TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MEASURES AT MUNICIPALITY LEVEL




REFERENCES

AGGELOUSSI, K., KANELLOPOULOU, A., (2002): Estimation of the human cost of road
 accidents and drivers' sensitivity towards accident risk - A willingness-to-pay technique
 and a stated-preference technique, Diploma Thesis, NTUA, School of Civil Engineering,
 Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
ATTIKO METRO SA. (1997): Land use characteristics and socio-economical parameters.
 (03). P.S: Land use characteristics and density of the Greater Area of Athens.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING, (2004):
 Accident risk investigation of categories of drivers with high accident involvement -
 second report, Ministry of Transportation and Communication.
ENGEL U, THOMSEN L., (1992): Safety effects of speed reducing measures in Danish
 Residential Areas, Accident Analysis & Prevention. Vol. 24, No 1, pp. 17 -28.
FRANTZESKAKIS G., GOLIAS G., (1994): Road Safety, Papasotiriou Publications.
GEORGOPOULOU X., (2002): Investigation of Low Cost Engineering Measures’ Impact
 on road safety in urban areas, Diploma Thesis, NTUA, School of Civil Engineering,
 Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA CITY, (2002): Neighbourhood Traffic Calming Manual, Traffic
 Engineering Division.
KANELLAIDIS G. et al., (1999): Attitude of Greek drivers towards road safety,
 Transportation Quarterly.
KANELLAIDIS G, et al., (1995): A survey of drivers’ attitude towards speed limit violations.
 Journal of safety Research.
KAPICA C., (2001): Pilot Study Report on Speed humps, Columbia Avenue Hartsdale,
 New York. (www.town.greenburgh.ny.us/Speedhump.pdf)
LIAKOPOULOS D., (2002): Development of a model for the estimation of the economic
 benefits from accident reduction in Greece, Diploma Thesis, NTUA, School of Civil
 Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
MUNICIPALITY OF NEO PSYCHIKO, (2001): Regional Development Programme,
 Technical Division of the Municipality of Neo Psychiko.
NATIONAL STATISTICAL SERVICE OF GREECE, (2003): "Greece in figures, Official
 Publication of the National Statistical Service of Greece, Athens (www.statistics.gr).
SMITH N., (1998): Engineering Project Management, Blackwell Publication.
ZAIDEL D. et al., (1992): The Use of road Humps for Moderating Speeds on Urban
 Streets, Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 24, No 1, pp. 45 - 56.




                                                                                           Page 113
CASE F1: Grade-separation at railroad crossings




                                            ROSEBUD
                                      WP4 - CASE F REPORT


GRADE-SEPARATION AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS




                                                  BY MARKO NOKKALA,

                           VTT BUILDING AND TRANSPORT, FINLAND
TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ....................................................................................... 117
2   DESCRIPTION OF MEASURE...........................................................................118
3   TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 118
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 118
5   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 121
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 124
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................124
8   ROLE OF BARRIERS ........................................................................................ 125
9   DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 125
                             GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS


CASE OVERVIEW


Measure:
Grade-separation of at-grade rail-road crossings
Problem to solve:
Train-vehicle collisions at the crossing (and vehicle delays due to crossing's closures)
Target Group:
Train-vehicle accidents
Targets:
Diminishing accidents and traffic delays
Initiator
VR, the Finnish national Railway Authority (also linked to National Road Administration)
Decision-makers
Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications (on the level of targeting specific
measures), Road Authorities, Railway Authorities
Costs:
Investments in grade-separation construction; by the Railway Authority
Benefits:
The benefits are accident savings and a reduction in traffic delays. Driving public will
benefit.
Cost/Benefit-Ratio:
For a rural crossing the CBA ratio is 0.65; for the urban crossing the ratio is 0.25.




                                                                                        Page 116
                                  GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS


1            Problem to solve

The large majority of rail-road crossings in Finland, like in any country, are level (at-grade)
crossings. In general, at-grade rail-road crossings are associated with economic losses
due to vehicle delays and train-vehicle collisions. In the Finnish context, level crossings
have been considered the cost-effective measure to construct crossings, due to the fact
that traffic volumes at points of crossings have been small. However, in the late 1990s the
awareness of need to upgrade existing crossings, either through increased safety
measures or construction of grade-separation crossing increased rapidly, following some
severe accidents at the crossings.
To illustrate the situation in numeric figures, over the past years, 1999-2003, Table 48 lists
the statistics of deadly and severely injured accidents. As the statistics show, there has
been an observable increase in deaths per 1 million passengers in 2000 and 2001. In
2003 a total of 17 persons were killed in rail accidents, with the following breakdown:
    •   Level crossings with warning signals: 2
    •   Level crossings without warning signals:4
    •   Other, non specified: 11

Table 48: Accident statistics in Finnish rail, 1999-2003

 TYPE OF ACCIDENT                          1999            2000   2OO1     2002       2003
 Death and seriously injured                0,72           1,00    1,03    0,57       0,71
 per 1 million passenger kms
 Accident cases per 1 million               2,10           2,01    2,18    1,72       2,00
 passenger kms
 Deaths    per          1     million       0,02           0,04    0,04
 passengers
 Seriously injured per 1 million            0,11           0,05    0,09    0,02       0,02
 passengers


There has been a significant research program of the VTT Building and Transport to study
the needs to upgrade the out-of-date crossings facilities in Finland. It has been found that
a significant part of locations with accident occurrences are at-grade crossings which are
equipped with automatic safety gates (i.e. have the highest form of safety protection for at-
grade crossings), but in some cases there have been no safety gates due to the low
volume of crossings. Due to high train frequencies and significant road traffic volumes at
some crossings, the economic losses because of vehicle delays might be high. Therefore,
the question was to point out the sites where a grade-separation is warranted.
The process of grade-separation is expensive. It is therefore essential to provide a
systematic approach for decision-makers that will lead to a considered decision on the
benefits and costs associated with grade-separation.
However, a detailed investigation of a specific crossing is time-consuming and costly
(Tustin et al. 1986; Taggart et al. 1987), and cannot be reasonably performed for a large
number of sites. Thus, at the initial stage, screening tools are required that will assist in

                                                                                        Page 117
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

choosing, from the whole set of locations (i.e. from the whole railway network), those
warranting further consideration.
There is a set of screening tools for crossings’ consideration for grade-separation
developed by the study Gitelman, Hakkert (2001) in Israel. The tools consist of a safety
model, a formula for estimating the economic loss due to vehicle delays at a crossing and
a qualification criterion. The tools are based on economic principles, comparing the
economic loss due to an at-grade crossing with the average cost of grade-separation. In
this study we will combine the information of delays from the Israel model with other data
and methods used in Finnish standard appraisal.
In this report present a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of grade-separation of two
representative rail-road crossings, from rural and urban settings in Finland.


2          Description of measure

A grade-separation of a rail-road crossing means building a bridge or a tunnel instead of
existing at-grade crossing. A grade-separation eliminates existing railway-road crossing
and consequently, removes the problem of train-vehicle collisions at the site considered.
Besides, the grade-separation considerably diminishes the amount of road traffic delays at
the site which previously stemmed from the crossing’s closures due to trains’ movements.
A grade-separation is usually considered for rail-road crossings which are already
protected by automatic gates and where the frequency of accidents due to, for instance,
exceptional circumstances, is high.


3          Target Group

The target accident group are train-vehicle collisions at level crossings.
The project aimed at developing screening tools for selecting crossings with high potential
for grade-separation, i.e. those crossings where the costs of vehicle delays and safety
problems associated with the at-grade crossings are sufficiently high in order to justify
building a grade-separation. Such tools are needed for decision-makers as they both
stimulate an objective policy and a systematic approach to the issue, and define a priority
for grade separation at crossings.
The tools are applied to perform a CBA of a grade-separation of two typical types of
crossings.


4          Assessment method


4.1        Assessment tools developed

The economic losses associated with the current situation, i.e. at-grade crossing, stem
from two main factors: vehicle delays and safety problems. These losses represent the
economic benefits which can be attained due to eliminating at-grade crossing. The CBA
should compare these potential benefits with the costs of building a grade-separation.
The assessment tools developed for estimating potential benefits from a grade-separation
include (Gitelman, Hakkert, 2001):

                                                                                    Page 118
                                GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

1.      An accident prediction model, which, along with accident costs, supplies a
     basis for evaluating losses due to safety problems at level crossings.
2.      A model for evaluating economic losses due to vehicle delays at any
     crossing, based on its parameters.
3.      A quantitative criterion for grade separation which combines the results of
     both models.
The principles, designed for the Israel, also apply for the Finnish case, despite using
different tools for evaluation and modelling in Finland. In Finland, the common tool for
economic appraisal of transport projects is socio-economic profitability calculations, which
are based on calculating the vehicle costs, time savings (or losses), accident changes,
pollution and noise costs of the investment project. This method is applied in this study to
ensure compatibility with other appraisals in Finland.

4.1.1       Evaluating economic losses due to safety problems

Safety concerns at level crossings frequently provide the main reason for grade-separation
(Europe@ 1998; US GAO 1995). The evaluation of the safety factor needs two inputs: an
estimate of the expected number of accidents per crossing and the cost of an average
crossing accident. The expected number of accidents per crossing represents the annual
number of accidents which will be saved due to grade-separation, whereas their costs
demonstrate the economic value of safety benefits expected. In Finland rail statistics
collect data on annual accidents and for each type of accident there is a specified value to
be used in estimating the monetary loss resulting from the accident.
In Finland both the Railway and Road authorities have systems to collect accident data
with location-specified. This means that for each of the crossings it is possible to collect
history data on accidents, traffic volumes and other relevant information.
There is a model called TARVA in use in Finland to estimate the accidents data. TARVA
can be used to calculate the probabilities of accidents on the specified location on the
roads network. However, the calculation of accidents and their prevention in the selected
crossings proved difficult as there were only minor accidents on the locations.
The following Table 49 summarises the unit values used for various types of accidents.
The unit values are confirmed by the Finnish Ministry of Transport and
Telecommunications and the figures were last revised in 2000. Particularly the
compensation for severe accidents has risen over time, reflecting changes in the method
to shift towards willingness-to-pay method.

         Table 49. Unit values for accidents. (Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications 2003).

                Accident with severe injury damages, €                      386,832.00
                Accident leading to death, €                              2,430,316.00
                Average value of the accident, €                             84,094.00

4.1.2       Evaluating economic losses due to vehicle delays

We utilise the evidence from Israel to supplement the Finnish evaluation method of
transport project to estimate the vehicle delays. This is useful since there are no accurate
Finnish values available for this type of delay (which is often considered too small an item

                                                                                                     Page 119
                                    GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

to be accurately measured). In Israel, a sample of 20 crossings was selected for detailed
measurement. The crossings were selected from among the busier lines of the rail
network.
At each crossing, the parameters measured were as follows: vehicular traffic volumes;
closure times and queue release times; and vehicle speeds. For traffic volumes, hourly
distribution was attained, along with the traffic subdivision into three vehicle classes: cars,
trucks and buses. Prior to the evaluation, the hours were divided into three time intervals,
according to the traffic volumes observed: peak, low (night) and intermediate volumes. The
closure times (of the automatic gates) were estimated for three types of trains: passenger
trains, freight trains and operational trains. Vehicle speeds were measured at a “free”
distance from the crossing and emmediately before the crossing. Besides, for each
crossing, the number of train transitions per each hour was calculated based on the
railway line operative time-table.
The analysis revealed that the closure times depend on the train type, train speed and the
vicinity of station, whereas for the times for queue release no clear dependence was seen
between this parameter and the average traffic volume or closure time (Gitelman, Hakkert,
2001).
The annual cost of vehicular delays at a crossing was estimated from:
D = 260 ⋅ [ N ⋅ d1 + (V − N ) ⋅ d 2 ]                                                  (1)
where
D=annual cost of vehicular delays, euros (for 260 working days a year),
V = vehicular daily traffic volume, vehicles,
N = number of vehicles stopped at the crossing per day,
d1 = average cost of a vehicle’s stopping at the crossing, euros,
d2 = average cost of a vehicle’ slowing down at the crossing, euros.
The economic losses sustained from traffic delays ensue from additional consumption of
fuel and other vehicle expenses and from the time lost to vehicle occupants because of
“velocity cycles” when passing the crossing. Estimating d1 and d2 in the above formula, the
losses due to different vehicle and train types at a specific crossing were weighted, in
accordance with the shares of these types in daily vehicle/ train traffic at this site.
The detailed calculation of vehicle delay costs at a specific crossing consists of various
and multiple data considerations. Hence, for a rapid screening of sites, an approximate
formula was developed which allows estimation, based on the crossing’s parameters and
without prolonged calculations. The model fitting was performed by means of the SAS
multiple linear regression module, where the parameters and estimates of the sample
crossings served as a database. The approximate formula recommended for application
was (Gitelman, Hakkert, 2001):
Y/3.79 = -0.656044 + 0.000108*V + 0.0023038*Trains + 0.094042*Slowdown                       (3)
where
Y/3.79 = annual economic loss due to vehicle delays at a crossing, million euros (where
3.79 is the exchange rate of NIS/euro),
V – daily traffic volume (vehicles),
Trains – daily number of trains (trains),
Slowdown – average vehicle speed reduction due to a crossing (km/h).
                                                                                        Page 120
                                   GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS


4.2            Considering cost of the measure

Summing up the costs of vehicle delays and of safety problems provides a value of annual
economic loss at the level crossing, i.e. the magnitude of economic benefits, which could
be attained due to a grade-separation. This value should be compared with the
construction costs. Urban grade separations tend to be larger projects and have higher
costs than rural crossings, with a range of € 5.0 million to urban and € 2.9 million for rural
crossings, at 2000 prices, would be a reasonable average for the construction of a grade
separation at a Finnish crossing.
Considering the net present value of the construction costs, with a 5 per cent discount rate
used in the Finnish project appraisal and a 20-year project life18, supplies a value of
benefits (or annual economic loss at a level crossing) that would justify a grade-separation.
We note that the cost of the project is considerably higher in the rural context when
calculated per crossing vehicle as opposed to urban crossings.
In Finland the decision-making on grade-separation appears to be non-linked to the
economic benefits of the upgrading, but rather on the comfort and safety of travel,
expressed in non-monetary terms. This is evident from the fact that the costs tend to be
reasonably high in the rural context, which is itself a factor hindering the developments but
also leads to decision-making where crossings are built independent of their costs.


5              Assessment Quantification


5.1            General

In this section we consider a CBA of grade-separation of two different types of crossings.
To note, a cost-benefit and not cost-effectiveness analysis was chosen, due to following
reasons:
      2. Standard project appraisal in Finland on transport sector is based on cost-benefit,
         not cost-effectiveness analysis.
      3. Monetary valuations of all benefits and costs should be applied (inter alia, to justify
         the implementation of the measure).
The main data elements to be provided for the CBA performance are (WP3, 2004):
•     A definition of unit of implementation for the measure;
•     An estimate of the number of accidents are expected to prevent per unit
      implemented of the measure, through: identification of target accidents, estimate of
      the number of target accidents expected to occur per year, estimate of the safety
      effect of the measure on target accidents;
•     Accident costs;
•     Other monetary values depending on the effects considered;
•     An estimate of the costs of implementing the measure;
•     The economic frame for the evaluation (length of service life, interest rate).


18
     According to Finnish recommendations for economic evaluation of transport projects
                                                                                          Page 121
                              GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

In our case of grade separation of at-grade crossings, the above data elements will be as
follows:
•     The unit of implementation is one at-grade crossing;
•     Target accidents are all train-vehicle accidents at the at-grade crossings. The
      number of target accidents expected to occur per year can be estimated using a
      prediction model, TARVA. The safety effect of the measure is 100% reduction in
      target accidents, as a grade-separation implies the elimination of all train-vehicle
      collisions. Thus, in this case, the number of accidents are expected to prevent
      following implementation of the treatment is equal to the number of target accidents
      which are expected to occur at the site, prior to implementation of the treatment.
•     Accident costs – see Section 4.1.1;
•     Other monetary values include costs of travel time and vehicle operating costs; they
      can be estimated using formulae from Section 4.1.2;
•     The average cost of implementing the measure – see Section 4.2;
•     The economic frame for the evaluation: 20-year project life, with 5% discount rate.
The CBA is performed for two at -grade crossings: one in the rural context (Outinen) and
one in the urban context (Hennala).

5.2          CBA of a rural crossing

Crossing at Outinen is a rural rail-road crossing, which is situated on the Kouvola-
Pieksämäki railroad section. The area is sparsely populated and Outinen serves as a
perfect example of a rural crossing in the Finnish context. The original setting of the
crossing gates, as shown in the Figure 1. While the speed limit on the road was 80 km/h,
this crossing was considered extremely dangerous as people did not slow down sufficiently
to ensure they could stop before a train approached the crossing.




                                                                                        Page 122
                                GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




Figure 14: Outinen crossing prior to changes.



The site has the following characteristics:
Frequency of car traffic is low – 126 vehicles, with 95% private cars and 5% trucks.
Number of trains – 13 passenger trains daily, an estimate of 7 freight trains, total of 20
daily trains
There have not been any accidents at the crossing during the period of 1990-2000, so we
estimate that despite the dangerous location of the crossing there is no annual
monetarised safety impact of the grade separation.
The average free speeds measured on the road were 61-66 km/h, the average crossing
speeds were 44-48 km/h. Thus, the average slowdown at the crossing is 17-18 km/h.
Providing the socio-economic profitability calculus for the crossing yields us the CBA
results. A comparison of the net present values of the benefits (from both safety and
mobility improvements) with the average cost of building a grade-separation, provides the
benefit-cost ratio of as follows: 0.65 from using the approximate formula.




                                                                                       Page 123
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS


5.3        CBA of an urban crossing

Crossing at Hennala is an urban rail-road crossing, which is situated on the railroad
between Riihimäki and Kouvola at Lahti, a city with population of around 100,000
inhabitantis.
The site has the following characteristics:
Daily vehicle traffic – 4,328 vehicles, with 94% of private cars, 5% of trucks and 1% of
buses;
Number of trains per day – estimated at 70, with 53 passenger trains and 17 of freight
trains.
There average cost of the accident on the crossing is evaluated at 84094 euros, based on
the fact that there were no severe accidents at the crossing during the period 1990-2000-
The annual loss due to accidents, or the economic value of safety benefits due to
implementation of the measure, is therefore equal to 8.410 euro at 2000 prices.
The average free speeds measured on the road were 48-53 km/h, the average crossing
speeds were 25-31 km/h. Thus, the average slowdown at the crossing is 36-40 km/h.
Providing the socio-economic profitability calculus for the crossing yields us the CBA
results. A comparison of the net present values of the benefits (from both safety and
mobility improvements) with the average cost of building a grade-separation, provides the
benefit-cost ratio of as follows: 0.25 from using the approximate formula.


6          Assessment Results

For the rural case, the CBA results yield a non-profitable CBA ratio of 0.65. This is in
particular due to the savings in both average waiting times (which are abolished) and the
increase in speed in the absence of level crossing as the accidents data did not support
major savings from accident costs.
The cost-benefit ratios for a grade-separation of the urban crossing was 0.25, which is not
generally considered a profitable level for a project. However, given that there were no
observed safety impacts to be added (which could be obtained from larger data of similar
types of crossings to estimate the probability of severe accident and the associated
monetary value) adding these elements to the case would most likely yield a higher
benefit-cost ratio.
The safety aspects play no role in economic analysis, due to the fact that there was only
one minor accident at the urban crossing and none in the rural during the period 1990-
2000. However, one should remember that safety problems of the at-grade crossings are
usually the main reason for consideration of grade-separation.


7          Decision Making Process

The study has utilised data from Finnish Rail Administration, which has an on-going
evaluation program of railroad system, including level crossings. It is hoped that the results
from economic analysis of safety measures could be applied in the future decision-making.
For these purposes, the more analytical Israel model could be applied and, if needed,
calibrated to fit the Finnish situation.


                                                                                       Page 124
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

The project's results – a list of crossings warranting a grade-separation, were adopted by
the Planning Department of the Ministry of Transport, which is responsible for financing
and planning of improvements of public road networks.
The CBA provided a firm basis for the evalution's performance and for selecting crossings
which have higher priorities for future investments.


8          Role of barriers

Considering the main groups of barriers to the use of EAT or to the implementation of
evaluation results (WP2, 2004), one can conclude that none of them played a serious role
in the project's performance. Authorities were very helpful in providing data and given that
the analysis are ex post, in the sense that the projects were implemented without a CBA,
the results are considered useful for future evaluations.


9          Discussion

A grade-separation of an at-grade crossing can be beneficial under certain conditions. The
daily number of trains and daily road traffic volume are the main crossing parameters in
this consideration as they influence both the accident frequencies and the extent of traffic
delays, at the crossing. In some cases, conditions caused by weather or visibility
consideration can create need to construct the level-crossing, even if the appears to be
economically disadvantageous.
In the study, the evaluation tools of standard road transport CBA were applied to grade-
separation. Examples of a CBA of two typical crossings were provided. The crossings
warrant a grade-separation while both safety and mobility benefits are accounted for in the
rural setting, in the urban setting more detailed review of statistically meaningful safety
impacts should be considered. In the rural context, the speed and delay impact starts to
dominate the calculation when there are sufficient speed gains from the construction of the
grade-separation. This is something that should be made clear as it may imply careless
driving in the first instance.
The CBA presented in this study was satisfactory from many viewpoints, such as:
    1. the evaluation findings supported the measure's implementation, at least partially;
    2. the evaluation performed was in line with the criteria of correct evaluation (WP3,
       2004), as special data were collected for different evaluation tasks and statistical
       models were fitted to the data;
    3. the accident costs were fitted to the accident type considered;
    4. the evaluation study was initiated by the authorities and the results were accepted
       by the decision-makers.
In general, in the case presented, the majority of technical and institutional barriers for the
CBA's performance were overcome. It should be noted, though, that in general the railway
crossings in Finland do not require black spot management, since the phenomena does
not exist in Finland. Distribution of accidents is random and cannot be assigned to certain
spots in the network.
The evaluation results had a number of limitations, such as:

                                                                                        Page 125
                        GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS

1. The implementation costs include mostly initial investments. Maintenance costs
   were not explicitly considered neither for at-grade nor for grade-separated
   crossings.
2. The average value of implementation costs was applied for all sites considered.
   Providing specific values will need for detailed feasibility studies of specific
   locations.
3. No confidence interval was provided for the safety effect value. As explained
   previously, the safety effect in this case is stable (i.e. eliminating all accidents),
   whereas the safety benefits from the measure depend on the number of accidents
   expected at the site, per year. The latter was predicted by a model. However, safety
   impacts played almost no role in the analysis.
4. The contribution of safety factor to the benefits from the measure implementation
   was relatively low. This is the usual problem in calculating the socio-economic
   profitability of investment projects, where time savings dominate other impacts,
   including safety. These case studies suggest that the implementation of crossings is
   not related to safety assessment but other decision-making criteria.
5. Environmental impact was not quantified by the CBA performed.




                                                                                  Page 126
                           GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




REFERENCES

Ahonen, T., A. Seise and E. Ritari (2003). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Porin ympäristön
                             rataosilla. Research Report RTE3815/03. 48 pages. VTT,
                             Espoo.
Ahonen, T., A. Seise and E. Ritari (2004). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Seinäjoki-Kaskinen-
                             rataosalla. Research Report RTE2208/04. 87 pages. VTT,
                             Espoo.
Ahonen, T., A. Seise and E. Ritari (2004). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Seinäjoki-Oulu-
                             rataosuudella. Research Report RTE742/04. 71 pages. VTT,
                             Espoo.
Ahonen, T., A. Seise and E. Ritari (2004). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Pieksamäki-
                             Joensuu-rataosuudella. Research Report RTE154/04. 68
                             pages. VTT, Espoo.
Gitelman V., Hakkert A.S. (2001) Updating procedures for the consideration of grade-
                             separation at road-rail crossings in Israel. Research Report
                             No 285/2001, Transportation Research Institute, Haifa, Israel
                             (in Hebrew).
Hytönen, J., T. Ahonen and A. Seise (2004). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Joensuu-
                            Uimaharju-rataosuudella. . Research Report RTE2207/04. 47
                            pages. VTT, Espoo.
Hytönen, J., T. Ahonen and A. Seise (2004). Tasoristeysten turvallisuus Niirala-Säkäniemi
                            rataosalla. . Research Report RTE776/04. 39 pages. VTT,
                            Espoo.
Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications (2003). Guidelines for project appraisal.
Ratahallintokeskus (2004) Suomen rautatietilasto 2004. The Finnish Railway Statistics.
WP3 (2004) Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.
WP2 (2004) Barriers to the use of efficiency assessment tools in road safety policy.
                             ROSEBUD.




                                                                                       Page 127
CASE F2: Grade-separation at ROAD-RAIL crossings




                             Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
                                Transportation Research Institute




                                         ROSEBUD
                                   WP4 - CASE F REPORT


                    GRADE-SEPARATION AT ROAD-RAIL
                             CROSSINGS




                BY VICTORIA GITELMAN AND SHALOM HAKKERT,

         TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE, TECHNION,
                           ISRAEL
                                     GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1       PROBLEM ..........................................................................................................131
2       DESCRIPTION OF MEASURE...........................................................................131
3       TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 132
4       ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 132
4.1     Assessment tools developed...............................................................................132
4.1.1   Evaluating economic losses due to safety problems........................................... 132
4.1.2   Evaluating economic losses due to vehicle delays.............................................. 134
4.2     Considering the cost of the measure................................................................... 135
5       ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 136
5.1     General ............................................................................................................... 136
5.2     CBA of a rural crossing ....................................................................................... 137
5.3     CBA of an urban crossing ................................................................................... 138
6       ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 138
7       DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................139
8       ROLE OF BARRIERS ........................................................................................ 139
9       DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 139




                                                                                                                         Page 129
                             GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Grade-separation of at-grade road-rail crossings
Problem
Train-vehicle collisions at the crossing (and vehicle delays due to crossing's closures)
Target Group
Train-vehicle accidents
Targets
Diminishing accidents and traffic delays
Initiator
Planning Department of the Ministry of Transport
Decision-makers
Planning Department of the Ministry of Transport, Road Authorities, Railway Authorities
Costs
Investments in grade-separation construction; paid by the Ministry of Transport
Benefits
The benefits are accident savings and a reduction in traffic delays. Driving public will
benefit.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
For a rural crossing: from 1:1.9 to 1:2.8; for an urban crossing: from 1:1.0 to 1:1.4.




                                                                                         Page 130
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




1          Problem

The large majority of road-rail crossings in Israel, like in any country, are level (at-grade)
crossings. In general, at-grade road-rail crossings are associated with economic losses
due to vehicle delays and train-vehicle collisions. The problem becomes urgent when a
rapid increase in train traffic occurs as happened with the Israeli railways since the mid
90s. This necessitated a policy concerning the need and priorities for grade separation at
such crossings.
To illustrate the situation in numbers over the past years (1995-2000), a rapid increase in
train frequencies occurred on most railway lines in Israel: the total number of passenger
trains per day changed from 80 to more than 200, with an annual average increase of 21
percent. This was accompanied by a jump in rail-highway crossing accidents in 1997-
1999. Besides, a steady increase in road traffic over the years took place, as well as the
doubling of railway lines along the main train corridors. All these developments stimulated
the Ministry of Transport to re-examine the state of road-rail crossing safety.
A preliminary analysis demonstrated that a significant part of locations with accident
occurrences are at-grade crossings that are equipped with automatic safety gates (i.e.
have the highest form of safety protection for at-grade crossings). Due to high train
frequencies and significant road traffic volumes at some crossings, the economic losses
because of vehicle delays might be high. Therefore, the question was to point out the sites
where a grade-separation is warranted.
The process of grade-separation is expensive. It is therefore essential to provide a
systematic approach for decision-makers that will lead to a considered decision on the
benefits and costs associated with grade-separation.
However, a detailed investigation of a specific crossing is time-consuming and costly
(Tustin et al. 1986; Taggart et al. 1987), and cannot be reasonably performed for a large
number of sites. Thus, at the initial stage, screening tools are required that will assist in
choosing from the whole set of locations (i.e. from the whole railway network) those
warranting further consideration. Therefore, the Ministry of Transport initiated a study to
develop such screening tools and provide for an exhaustive list of sites having a potential
for grade separation throughout the whole railway network
The screening tools for crossings’ consideration for grade-separation were developed by
the study Gitelman, Hakkert (2001). The tools consist of a safety model, a formula for
estimating the economic loss due to vehicle delays at a crossing, and a qualification
criterion. The tools are based on economic principles, comparing the economic loss due to
an at-grade crossing with the average cost of grade-separation.
In this report we will briefly discuss the development of the screening tools and present a
cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of grade-separation of two representative road-rail crossings.


2          Description of measure

A grade-separation of a road-rail crossing means building a bridge or a tunnel instead of
an existing at-grade crossing. A grade-separation eliminates existing railway-road
crossings and consequently, removes the problem of train-vehicle collisions at the site
considered. Besides, the grade-separation considerably diminishes the amount of road
traffic delays at the site that previously stemmed from the crossing’s closures due to trains’
movements.

                                                                                       Page 131
                              GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



A grade-separation is usually considered for road-rail crossings that are already protected
by automatic gates.


3            Target Group

The target accident group are train-vehicle collisions at level crossings.
The project aimed at developing screening tools for selecting crossings with a high
potential for grade-separation, i.e. those crossings where the costs of vehicle delays and
safety problems associated with the at-grade crossings are sufficiently high in order to
justify building a grade-separation. Such tools are needed for decision-makers, as they
both stimulate an objective policy and a systematic approach to the issue, and define a
priority for grade separation at crossings.
The tools are applied to perform a CBA of a grade-separation of two typical crossings.


4            Assessment method


4.1          Assessment tools developed

•     The economic losses associated with the current situation, i.e. at-grade crossing, stem
      from two main factors: vehicle delays and safety problems. These losses represent the
      economic benefits, which can be attained due to eliminating the at-grade crossing. The
      CBA should compare these potential benefits with the costs of building a grade-
      separation.
The assessment tools developed for estimating potential benefits from a grade-separation
include (Gitelman, Hakkert, 2001):
•     An accident prediction model, which, along with accident costs, supplies a basis for
      evaluating losses due to safety problems at level crossings.
•     A model for evaluating economic losses due to vehicle delays at any crossing, based
      on its parameters.
•     A quantitative criterion for grade separation, which combines the results of both
      models.
•     Field measurements at twenty representative sites (out of more than 200), as well as
      accident data and the crossings’ inventory for five years (1995-1999), provided a basis
      for building the tools.


4.1.1        Evaluating economic losses due to safety problems

Safety concerns at level crossings frequently provide the main reason for grade-separation
(Europe@ 1998; US GAO 1995). The evaluation of the safety factor needs two inputs: an
estimate of the expected number of accidents per crossing and the cost of an average
crossing accident. The expected number of accidents per crossing represents the annual

                                                                                          Page 132
                                GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



number of accidents that will be prevented due to grade-separation, whereas their costs
demonstrate the economic value of safety benefits expected. Both inputs were developed
based on the data on train-vehicle accidents, which occurred at all level Israeli crossings
over the five years, 1995-1999.
To estimate the number of accidents expected at a specific crossing based on the crossing
characteristics, a multiple regression model was developed. The database for the models’
development comprised, in total, 80 accidents and 994 “crossing-years”; both populations
were built as a unification of five-year statistics, with necessary updates of crossings’
characteristics for each year considered.
The model was developed by means of the S+ and SAS statistical packages. The Poisson
rather than the Negative Binomial distribution was found to fit the accident frequencies at
the crossings. As known, when a Negative Binomial distribution is found to be most
suitable, it is customary to apply the Empirical-Bayes method for predicting accident
numbers (WP3, 2004). In our case, the expected number of accidents at a local crossing
should be defined mainly by its type (i.e. estimated by means of the fitted regression
model) without a need for further correction of the value using the Empirical-Bayes
method. In other words, the expected number of accidents at a crossing is equal to the
expected number of accidents at an average site of this type.
The model recommended for application in Israeli conditions looks as follows:
λ = exp(-5.904 + 1.183*PROTECT + 0.426*NVOL + 0.876*NTRAIN -
0.6*NTRAIN*PROTECT)                                                                                  (1)
where
λ = the expected number of accidents at a local crossing, per year;
PROTECT= protection level, with 1 for “gate” or “lights”, 0 for “signs only”;
            NVOL = category of traffic volume, a number between 1-5 (see values in Table 50);
        NTRAIN = category of the number of trains, a number between 1-7 (see values in Table 50).


              Table 50: Categories of crossing characteristics, for evaluating crossing safety
                     Vehicle traffic volume                Daily number of trains
                 Category      Value, thousand       Category      Value, trains per day
                 number        vehicles per day      number
                    1                 ≤ 1.0             1               Irregular*
                    2                1.0-5.0            2                   ≤ 10
                    3               5.0-10.0            3                  10-30
                    4              10.0-20.0            4                  30-50
                    5                ≥ 20.0             5                  50-80
                                                        6                 80-110
                                                        7                  ≥ 110
               *does not appear in operative timetable
The cost of an average crossing accident was estimated using actual accident
consequences over the 5-year period. The list of accident consequences included the
effects of human injury; damage to vehicle, train and crossing equipment; delays of road
and train traffic; and the activities of authorities involved, i.e. police, trial, railway accident
investigation team, etc – see Table 51. The cost of an average train-vehicle crossing
accident was estimated to be about NIS 448,000 or € 118,000 (at 2000 prices). The
accident injury and fatality costs were calculated on the basis of the gross loss of output

                                                                                                    Page 133
                                  GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



method. Had the ‘willingness-to-pay’ method been used, the accident costs would
probably have doubled.
                         Table 51: Calculation of Cost of Average Crossing Accident
  Ordinal          Accident Consequence                 Frequency     Unit Cost,      Contribution to
 number                                                per Accident     NIS           Total Cost, NIS
 1.         Fatality                                       0.091       2,726,500               248,112
 2.         Injury                                        0.334          205,000                 68,470
 3.         Damage to vehicle                             0.979            47,487                46,490
 4.         Damage to train                               0.448            65,758                29,460
 5.         Damage to crossing equipment                  0.113            27,782                 3,139
 6.         Passenger train traffic delays                0.468             3,123                 1,462
 7.         Freight train traffic delays                  0.379               491                   186
 8.         Railway maintenance work delay                0.091               240                     22
 9.         Road traffic delays                              1              5,861                 5,861
 10.        Activities of authorities involved:              1             44,447                44,447
            police; trial; social insurance, etc and
            railway accident investigation team
            Total accident cost                                                            NIS 447,649
                                                                                           or € 118,020
Note: NIS = New Israeli Shekel, € 1= 3.793 NIS. At 2000 prices.


The composition of the accident cost with the expected accident number supplies the
annual cost evaluation of safety problems at a crossing.

4.1.2       Evaluating economic losses due to vehicle delays

•   A sample of 20 crossings was selected for detailed measurement. The crossings were
    selected from among the busier lines of the rail network.
•   At each crossing, the parameters measured were as follows: vehicular traffic volumes,
    closure times and queue release times, and vehicle speeds. For traffic volumes, hourly
    distribution was attained, along with the traffic subdivision into three vehicle classes:
    cars, trucks and buses. Prior to the evaluation, the hours were divided into three time
    intervals, according to the traffic volumes observed: peak, low (night) and intermediate
    volumes. The closure times (of the automatic gates) were estimated for three types of
    trains: passenger trains, freight trains and operational trains. Vehicle speeds were
    measured at a “free” distance from the crossing and immediately before the crossing.
    Besides, for each crossing the number of train transitions per each hour was calculated
    based on the railway line operative timetable.
•   The analysis revealed that the closure times depended on the train type, train speed
    and the vicinity of station, whereas for the times for queue release no clear
    dependence was seen between this parameter and the average traffic volume or
    closure time [GITELMAN, HAKKERT, 2001].




                                                                                                    Page 134
                                    GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



The annual cost of vehicular delays at a crossing was estimated from:
D = 260 ⋅ [ N ⋅ d1 + (V − N ) ⋅ d 2 ]                                                     (2)
where
D = annual cost of vehicular delays, NIS (for 260 working days a year),
V = vehicular daily traffic volume, vehicles,
N = number of vehicles stopped at the crossing per day,
d1 = average cost of a vehicle’s stopping at the crossing, NIS,
d2 = average cost of a vehicle’ slowing down at the crossing, NIS.
The economic losses sustained from traffic delays ensue from additional consumption of
fuel and other vehicle expenses and from the time lost to vehicle occupants because of
“velocity cycles” when passing the crossing. Estimating d1 and d2 in the above formula, the
losses due to different vehicle and train types at a specific crossing were weighted, in
accordance with the shares of these types in daily vehicle/ train traffic at this site.
The detailed calculation of vehicle delay costs at a specific crossing consists of various
and multiple data considerations. Hence, for a rapid screening of sites, an approximate
formula was developed which allows estimation based on the crossing’s parameters and
without prolonged calculations. The model fitting was performed by means of the SAS
multiple linear regression module where the parameters and estimates of the sample
crossings served as a database. The approximate formula recommended for application
was [GITELMAN, HAKKERT, 2001]:
Y = -0.656044 + 0.000108*V + 0.0023038*Trains + 0.094042*Slowdown                               (3)


where
Y = annual economic loss due to vehicle delays at a crossing, million NIS,
V = daily traffic volume (vehicles),
Trains = daily number of trains (trains),
Slowdown = average vehicle speed reduction due to a crossing (km/h).

4.2            Considering the cost of the measure

Summing up the costs of vehicle delays and of safety problems provides a value of annual
economic loss at the level crossing, i.e. the magnitude of economic benefits, which could
be attained due to a grade-separation. This value should be compared with the
construction costs. Consultation with local economic experts and authorities that
supervised some recent grade separations suggested that a figure of NIS 10 million (€ 2.6
million), at 2000 prices, would be a reasonable average for the construction of a grade
separation at an Israeli crossing.
Considering the net present value of the construction costs, with a 7 percent discount rate
and a 15-year project life19 supplies a value of benefits (or annual economic loss at a level
crossing) that would justify a grade-separation. This is a loss of 1.1 million NIS at least (€
0.290 million; at 2000 prices), to provide a benefit-cost ratio higher than 1.

19
     According to Israeli recommendations for economic evaluation of transport projects
                                                                                          Page 135
                               GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



Applying the boundary value of 1.1 million NIS to the estimates of sample crossings, 13
sites (out of 20) were chosen as meriting a grade-separation [GITELMAN, HAKKERT,
2001]. Considering the parameters of two groups of crossings, i.e. those warranting and
those not yet warranting a grade-separation, a criterion was developed for a preliminary
crossing's qualification from the viewpoint of its potential for grade-separation. The
criterion examines two crossing's parameters: daily vehicle traffic and number of trains per
day, and compares them with the boundary values for urban or rural crossings (depending
on the crossing's location). For example, for urban crossings, the consideration for a
grade-separation is irrelevant for sites with less than 20 trains per day or when the daily
vehicle traffic is less than 8,000 [GITELMAN, HAKKERT, 2001].


5            Assessment Quantification


5.1          General

In this section we consider a CBA of grade-separation of two typical crossings. To note, a
cost-benefit and not cost-effectiveness analysis was chosen, due to following reasons:
             1. multiple policy objectives to be considered (both safety and mobility),
             2. monetary valuations of all benefits and costs should be applied (inter
                alia, to justify the implementation of the measure).
The main data elements to be provided for the CBA performance are (WP3, 2004):
•     A definition of unit of implementation for the measure;
•     An estimate of the number of accidents expected to be prevented per unit implemented
      of the measure, through: identification of target accidents, estimate of the number of
      target accidents expected to occur per year, estimate of the safety effect of the
      measure on target accidents;
•     Accident costs;
•     Other monetary values depending on the effects considered;
•     An estimate of the costs of implementing the measure;
•     The economic frame for the evaluation (length of service life, interest rate).
In our case of grade separation of at-grade crossings, the above data elements will be as
follows:
•     The unit of implementation is one at-grade crossing;
•     Target accidents are all train-vehicle accidents at the at-grade crossings. The number
      of target accidents expected to occur per year can be estimated using a prediction
      model (formula 1 above). The safety effect of the measure is 100% reduction in target
      accidents, as a grade-separation implies the elimination of all train-vehicle collisions.
      Thus, in this case, the number of accidents expected to be prevented following
      implementation of the treatment is equal to the number of target accidents that are
      expected to occur at the site, prior to implementation of the treatment.

                                                                                          Page 136
                              GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



•     Accident costs – see Section 4.1.1;
•     Other monetary values include costs of travel time and vehicle operating costs; they
      can be estimated using formulae from Section 4.1.2;
•     The average cost of implementing the measure – see Section 4.2;
•     The economic frame for the evaluation: 15-year project life, with 7% discount rate. The
      accumulated discount factor is 9.108.
The CBA is performed for two at -grade crossings: No 19 and No 133.

5.2          CBA of a rural crossing

Crossing No. 19 is a rural road-rail crossing, which is situated on 45.106 km of Haifa-Tel-
Aviv railway line and on a regional road No. 651; the crossing is protected by automatic
gates.
The site has the following characteristics:
Daily vehicle traffic - 15,330 vehicles, with 93% of private cars, 5% of trucks and 2% of
buses;
Number of trains per day - 132, with 89% of passenger trains and 11% of freight trains.
Using Formula 1, the expected number of accidents per year will be 0.338 (that is the
number of accidents to be prevented due to the measure). The annual loss due to
accidents, or the economic value of safety benefits due to implementation of the measure,
is equal to 0.151 million NIS (€ 0.040 million), at 2000 prices.
The average free speeds measured on the road were 66-68 kph, the average crossing
speeds – 51-52 kph (for private cars, buses) and 44 kph (for trucks). Thus, the average
slowdown at the crossing is 15-16 kph (for private cars, buses) and 22 kph (for trucks).
The average cost of a slowdown at the crossing is estimated to be 0.49 NIS.
The average length of the crossing closure is 0.37 min due to a passenger train, and 1.46
min due to a freight train. The average cost of stopping due to the crossing's closure is
2.23 NIS.
Using Formula 2 for a detailed calculation, the annual costs of vehicle delays at the
crossing will be 2.916 million NIS (€ 0.769 million), at 2000 prices.
Another estimate of the annual costs of vehicle delays, based on the approximate Formula
3 will be 1.925 million NIS (€ 0.508 million), at 2000 prices.
Effects, safety, and mobility compose the benefits from the grade-separation of the
crossing. A comparison of the net present values of the benefits with the average cost of
building a grade-separation provides the cost-benefit ratios as follows:
1:2.79 when the costs of delays come from a detailed calculation;
1:1.89 when the costs of delays come from the approximate formula.




                                                                                       Page 137
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



5.3        CBA of an urban crossing

Crossing No. 133 is an urban railroad crossing, which is situated on 114.806 km of Remez
Junction-Kiriam Gat railway line and on Jabotinsky Street in Beer Yakov; the crossing is
protected by automatic gates.
The site has the following characteristics:
Daily vehicle traffic - 13,156 vehicles, with 91% of private cars, 7% of trucks and 2% of
buses;
Number of trains per day - 71, with 86% of passenger trains and 14% of freight trains.
Using Formula 1, the expected number of accidents per year will be 0.195 (that is the
number of accidents to be prevented due to the measure). The annual loss due to
accidents, or the economic value of safety benefits due to implementation of the measure,
is equal to 0.087 million NIS (€ 0.023 million), at 2000 prices.
The average free speeds measured on the road were 43-49 kph, the average crossing
speeds – 42-47 kph. Thus, the average slowdown at the crossing is 1-2 kph. The average
cost of a slowdown at the crossing is 0.13 NIS.
The average length of the crossing closure is 0.51 min due to a passenger train, and 0.77
min due to a freight train. The average cost of a vehicle’s stopping due to the crossing's
closure is 1.78 NIS.
Using Formula 2 for a detailed calculation, the annual costs of vehicle delays at the
crossing will be 1.023 million NIS (€ 0.270 million), at 2000 prices.
Another estimate of the annual costs of vehicle delays, based on the approximate Formula
3, will be 1.490 million NIS (€ 0.393 million), at 2000 prices.
A comparison of the net present values of the benefits (from both safety and mobility
improvements) with the average cost of building a grade-separation, provides the cost-
benefit ratios as follows:
1:1.01 when the costs of delays come from a detailed calculation;
1:1.44 when the costs of delays come from the approximate formula.


6          Assessment Results

The cost-benefit ratio for a grade-separation of crossing No. 19 ranges from 1:1.9 to 1:2.8;
the cost-benefit ratio for a grade-separation of crossing No. 133 – from 1:1.0 to 1:1.4. In
both cases, the treatment is warranted from the economic viewpoint.
The safety factor had only a minor contribution to the economic benefits expected: 4.9%-
7.3% for crossing No. 19, 5.5%-7.8% for crossing No. 133. However, one should
remember that safety problems of the at-grade crossings are usually the main reason for
consideration of grade-separation.
Applying the evaluation tools developed for the examination of all existing Israeli crossings,
in the year 2000, 30 sites out of 216 were found to warrant a grade-separation (Gitelman,
Hakkert, 2001).




                                                                                       Page 138
                             GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS




7          Decision-Making Process

The study was initiated by the Planning Department of the Ministry of Transport in co-
operation with the Israeli Railways. The study's steering committee included decision-
makers having senior positions in the Ministry of Transport and in the Railway Authority.
The project's results – a list of crossings warranting a grade-separation were adopted by
the Planning Department of the Ministry of Transport, which is responsible for financing
and planning of improvements of public road networks.
The CBA provided a firm basis for the evaluation’s performance and for selecting
crossings that have higher priorities for future investments.


8          Role of barriers

•   Considering the main groups of barriers to the use of EAT or to the implementation of
    evaluation results (WP2, 2004), one can conclude that none of them played a serious
    role in the project's performance. The transport authorities initiated the project and
    promoted the implementation of its results, therefore indicating that institutional or
    implementation barriers are actually irrelevant in this case.
•   The technical barriers, e.g. lack of knowledge of safety effect or of accident costs,
    existed at the beginning, but were solved later by means of relevant data collection and
    fitting statistical models for various evaluation needs. The assistance by railway
    executives was extremely important at the stage of collecting data on train-vehicle
    accidents and on railroad crossings' characteristics.


9          Discussion

A grade-separation of an at-grade crossing can be beneficial under certain conditions. The
daily number of trains and daily road traffic volume are the main crossing parameters in
this consideration as they influence both the accident frequencies and the extent of traffic
delays at the crossing.
In the study, the evaluation tools for preliminary CBA of a grade-separation were
developed and applied for selecting crossings warranting implementation of the measure.
Examples of a CBA of two typical crossings are provided. The crossings warrant a grade-
separation, while both safety and mobility benefits are accounted for.
The CBA presented in this study was satisfactory from many viewpoints, such as:
    1. the evaluation findings supported the measure's implementation;
    2. the evaluation performed was in line with the criteria of correct evaluation
       (WP3, 2004); in particular, special data were collected for different evaluation
       tasks and statistical models were fitted to the data;
    3. the accident costs were fitted to the accident type considered;
    4. the evaluation study was initiated by the authorities and the results were
       accepted by the decision-makers.


                                                                                          Page 139
                            GRADE-SEPERATION AT ROADRAIL CROSSINGS



In general, in the case presented, the majority of technical and institutional barriers for the
CBA's performance were overcome.
The evaluation results had a number of limitations, such as:
   1. The implementation costs include mostly initial investments. Maintenance
      costs were not explicitly considered either for at-grade or for grade-separated
      crossings.
   2. The average value of implementation costs was applied for all sites
      considered. Providing specific values will need detailed feasibility studies of
      specific locations.
   3. No confidence interval was provided for the safety effect value. As explained
      previously, the safety effect in this case is stable (i.e. eliminating all
      accidents), whereas the safety benefits from the measure depend on the
      number of accidents expected at the site per year. The latter was predicted
      by a model.
   4. The contribution of a safety factor to the benefits from the measure
      implementation was relatively low. This contribution might be doubled had
      the ‘willingness-to-pay’ method been used for estimating accident costs.
   5. Environmental impact was not quantified by the CBA performed.

References

Europe’s Approach to Rail Crossing Safety (1998): ITE Journal, Feb.,18.
GITELMAN V., HAKKERT A.S. (2001): Updating procedures for the consideration of
  grade-separation at road-rail crossings in Israel. Research Report No 285/2001,
  Transportation Research Institute, Haifa, Israel (in Hebrew).
Taggart, R.C., LAURIA, P. et al. (1987): Evaluating Grade-Separated Rail and Highway
  Crossing Alternatives. NCHRP Report 288, Transportation Research Board,
  Washington D.C.
TUSTIN, B.H., RICHARDS, H., MCGEE, H. and PATTERSON, R. (1986): Railroad-
  Highway Grade Crossing Handbook. Report No. FHWA TS-86-215, Springfield VA.
United States General Accounting Office (US GAO) (1995): Status of Efforts to Improve
  Railroad Crossing Safety. Report GAO-RCED-95-191, Washington, D.C.
WP3 (2004): Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.
WP2 (2004): Barriers to the use of efficiency assessment tools in road safety policy.
 ROSEBUD.




                                                                                        Page 140
CASE G: MEASURE against collisions with trees




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE G REPORT


  MEASURES AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES
             RN134 (LANDES)
                 FRANCE




                                                BY PHILIPPE LEJEUNE,

                                                 CETE SO, FRANCE
                                   MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1     CASE OVERVIEW.............................................................................................. 143
2     PROBLEM TO SOLVE ....................................................................................... 145
3     DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE...................................................................146
4     TARGET ACCIDENT GROUP............................................................................ 146
5     ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 147
5.1   Choice of CBA..................................................................................................... 147
5.2   Assessment tool.................................................................................................. 147
5.3   Road safety of the collisions against trees .......................................................... 149
5.4   Type of assessed impacts................................................................................... 149
5.5   Costs of the measure .......................................................................................... 150
5.6   Costs of accidents............................................................................................... 150
6     ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 151
7     ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 152
8     DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................152
9     IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS ........................................................................ 153
10    CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 154




                                                                                                                  Page 142
                             MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES




Case Overview


Measure
The measure aims to avoid the collisions with the trees along 26.5 km of the national road
RN 134 over the "Département des Landes" in the Southwest of France. The measure
consists of the implementation of 7800 meters of guardrails, 13 frontage accesses and 8
lay-by.
Problem
Some stretches of the road RN 134 crossing through the forest have a high level of risk in
terms of crashes and severity due to the row of trees along the road side.
The problem was to propose and negotiate measures to reduce the number and the
severity of the crashes by ensuring the protection of the row of trees by the means of
guardrails when it was possible, or otherwise by means of tree felling.
Target Group
All the road users driving on two stretches of the national road RN 134, which had a high
level of risk of collision with trees.
Targets
The safety measures applied along the tree-lined stretches of road had two main
objectives: 1) Avoid the collisions of the vehicles against the trees, and 2) Reduce the
accident severity of the remaining crashes. This second objective implies the use of
normalized guardrails insuring the vehicles against violent impact, throwing the vehicles to
the opposite carriageway.
Initiator
The initiator of this local safety road improvement is the local transport administration
(DDE-CDES), but other actors at the French national, regional and local levels are also
involved in decision-making and funding.
Decision-makers
Mid-level civil servants of the local transport administration (DDE-CDES) make the choices
among the panel and define the time schedule of the "accepted" local road safety
measures. These measures are mentioned in a ministerial decision signed by high-level
civil servants of the Road Directorate of the Ministry of Transport at the national, regional,
and local levels.




                                                                                       Page 143
                             MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



Costs
The total cost for implementing the measure was around 1 million €, including
management, studies, implementation and site supervision. All these costs have been paid
by the Ministry of Transport through the financial management of the regional
administration.
Benefits
The main benefit from implementing the measure consists of an important reduction of the
number of accidents against trees, fatalities and crash severity.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
The Cost/Benefit ratio is 8.69.




                                                                                 Page 144
                               MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES




1         Problem

The RN 134, which crosses the forest of “Landes” along 64.5 km, has long, tree-lined
stretches of road on which before the measure, 38.5% of the accidents occurred against
trees. A detailed traffic safety study showed that 58% of the accidents occurred over two
stretches of road, which is 26.5 km length. Finally, the survey shows that 82% of the
accidents against trees on the RN 134 occurred alongside the 26.5 km of these two
stretches of road. Furthermore, during the period before the treatment (1993-1997) the
safety indicators (accidents, casualties and injuries) of the crashes against trees were
increasing (see Figure 15).
                    Figure 15: Indicators and trends of accidents against trees


                   Indicators and trends of accidents against trees
                     (stretches of road RN134 before treatments)
           10

             8

             6

             4

             2

             0
                   1993             1994          1995            1996              1997
                               Accidents       Killed       Injured Seriously

On the other hand during the same period (1993-1997) the safety indicators (accidents,
casualties and injuries) of crashes against trees were decreasing alongside the roads of
Landes (see Figure 16 below).
                          Figure 16: Safety of crashes against trees in Landes

                                             LANDES
                                 Safety of crashes against trees
           120

           100

            80

            60

            40

            20

            0
                   1993             1994           1995            1996                 1997
                              Accidents            Killed           Injured Seriously

Therefore the problem was to take measures to reduce the number and the severity of the
crashes alongside these 26.5 km, which had the highest and increasing level of risk. For
this purpose, the more suitable measures were the protection of tree rows by means of
                                                                                               Page 145
                              MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



guardrails, when possible, or otherwise tree felling should be examined. This second
measure raised other difficulties due to ecological pressure groups that are against tree
felling. Therefore, it has been decided to spend time and money to reach an agreement
between the local authorities, decision-makers and ecological pressure groups to solve the
problem jointly, i.e. traffic safety taking into account the ecological aspect.


2          Description of the measure

Taking into account this road safety problem specifics, i.e. traffic safety and ecology, the
study carried out by the local administration of the Ministry of Transport (DDE-CDES)
located precisely the stretches of road to be treated. Along all 26.5 km of these road
stretches, the choice between guardrails and cutting trees down had to be done case by
case according to the five following technical criteria:
    1. The distance between the trees and the carriageway,
    2. The number of trees (isolated trees to cut down),
    3. Lay-by where hard shoulders are missing,
    4. General state of health of trees,
    5. The frontage accesses to be remained.
In each case the decision was taken according to these criteria, keeping in mind the
ecological aspects; therefore, the following measures have been performed:
•   7800 meters of guardrails have been implemented where the preserved trees put the
    road users’ lives at risk,
•   8 lay-by (emergency stop facilities) have been implemented at regular intervals where
    the hard shoulders were missing due to the narrow land and guardrails implementation,
•   13 frontage accesses remained.
The different steps to perform this measure were:
•   Management of the road safety measure and report related to the ecological topic,
•   Implementation plans: topographical surveying, choices between guardrails and tree
    felling, frontage access treatments project report etc.,
•   Installation of the safety measure guardrail implementation, tree felling, road
    equipments and frontage access treatment,
•   Site supervision.


3          Target accident group

The road safety stakes in terms of accidents, casualties and injuries of the crashes against
trees are summarised on the following figures. The target accident group involved those in
crashes against trees and the related severity on the 26.5 km stretches of the RN 134.




                                                                                      Page 146
                                  MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



                            Figure 17: Treated sections of crashes against trees


                                Treated sections Safety evolution
                                     of crashes against trees
               10

                 8




                                                         works
                 6

                 4

                 2

                 0
                      1993 1994   1995 1996      1997    1998 1999          2000 2001       2002 2003

                              Accidents     Killed      Injured Seriously      Injured Slightly


The Figure 17 shows the impact of the measure on the safety indicators measured before
and after the treatment of the row of trees along the roadside.


4            Assessment method


4.1          Choice of CBA

According to the theoretical principle of CBA as mentioned in the WP3 report, "CBA
evaluates the economic benefits and costs of the objective….It aims to find if the proposed
objective is economically efficient at all and how efficient it is". Taking into account the
before-after data availability related to this traffic safety measure (accidents, traffic
volumes, accident trends), CBA has been chosen for the assessment.


4.2          Assessment tool

The CBA ratio defined as:
                            Present value of all benefits
Benefit-cost ratio =
                       Present value of implementation costs

All the following data have been collected during the periods before and after:
      1. Accidents
      2. Casualties
      3. Injuries (severe and slight) according to current French definitions
      4. Traffic volumes
These data have been collected on the treated stretches of road and on reference areas
before and after the measure implementation. The present value of all benefits has been

                                                                                                        Page 147
                                    MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



calculated from the safety impacts listed above (accidents causalities, and injuries), taking
into account the trends of each of these variables in order to assess the numbers of
accidents, casualties and injuries prevented.
By this way it has been possible to apply the fundamental principle of the methodology
proposed by Ezra HAUER20 "…to assess the effect of a treatment on the safety of some
entity, one has to compare what would have been the safety of the entity in the after period
had treatment not be applied, to what the safety of the treated entity in the after period
was".
This fundamental principle leads to assess "what would have been the safety (accidents,
casualties and injuries) of the crashes against trees in the after period if the measure
(guardrails or tree felling) had not been applied".
In accordance with this principle, the impact of the measures have been calculated by
comparing the counted "before safety values" to the assessed Ho safety values which are
the "after period safety values" assessed under the Ho Hypothesis (i.e. if the measures
had not been applied).
The method 2 consists in calculating the theoretical "after accident numbers" as follows:
                  Theoretical After Accident Numbers = Po x (N after + N before)

Where:
Po is the probability of accidents under Ho i.e. if the measures had not been applied
N after and N before is the number of accidents counted on the treated section after and
before the implementation of the measure.
Due to the random properties of the number of accidents, Po is calculated as follows:
                                        Evol × Daf × Taf
                          Po =
                                 (Evol × Daf × Taf ) + Dbf × Tbf

where:
•     Evol: is the trend of the analysed traffic safety indicator calculated on a reference area
      (here the “Département des Landes”)
•     Daf and Dbf are the duration of the periods "after" and "before" the works concerning
      the implementation of the measure (assessment periods)
•     Taf and Tbf are traffic counted on the treated stretches of road "after" and "before" the
      works concerning the implementation of the measure (assessment periods)




20
     Ezra HAUER "Observational Before-After Studies in Road Safety" Pergamon 1997
2
    "Statistiques pour la Sécurité Routière" SETRA février 1999
                                                                                         Page 148
                                  MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



4.3       Road safety of the collisions against trees

The road safety indicators of the collisions against trees can be summarised as follows:
                                          Table 52: Safety results
                                    Treated strechtes
                                                                     Landes
                                         of road
                                  Before         After     Before     After
                                   1993          1999       1993      1999
                                                                                 trends
                                    to             to        to        to
                                   1997          2003       1997      2003
                     Accidents      50            10       4 370      3 311       0,76

                       Killed       20             2        530       402         0,76
          All
       crashes        seriously
                                    37             6       2 148      1 368       0,64
                       injured
                       slightly
                                    34            17       3 996      3 475       0,87
                       injured

                     Accidents      27             1        436       294         0,67

       crashes         Killed       11             0        129        85         0,66
       against
                      seriously
        trees                       18             2        253       152         0,60
                       injured
                       slightly
                                    9              0        261       194         0,74
                       injured




4.4       Type of assessed impacts

As shown above in § 3, the measure had a significant impact on the traffic safety related to
the crashes against trees. This impact was assessed in accordance with the "Before-After"
assessment tool presented. Therefore according the above formulas, the prevented
impacts have been calculated as follows:

                 (Prevented Accidents) = (Before Accidents)   - Ho (After Accidents)
                 (Prevented casualties) = (Before casualties) - Ho (After casualties)
                 (Prevented injuries) = (Before injuries) - Ho (After injuries)

The cost-benefit ratio has been calculated by using the accidents and casualties’ monetary
values currently applied for the French CBA assessments.
These road safety results related to the collision with trees have been applied according to
the assessment tool described above and lead to the figures shown in the following tables.




                                                                                          Page 149
                                        MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



                                          Table 53: Measure – safety impacts

                                                           Treated strechtes of road

                                                           Theoretical                 benefits
                                            Accident
                                                           Number of       accident     of the
                                          probability P0
                                                            accidents     prevented    measure
                                            under Ho
                                                            under Ho                     K€

                           Accidents          0,387          10,83          16,2             88,9



                             Killed           0,381           4,19           6,8          6 806,1
              crashes
              against
               trees        seriously
                                              0,360           7,19          10,8          1 620,8
                             injured


                             slightly
                                              0,410           3,69           5,3            116,8
                             injured

                         Total                                                             8632,6




4.5            Costs of the measure

The costs for implementing the measure against collisions with trees were divided up in
the following way:
•     Management of the road safety measure and report related to the ecological topic,
•     Implementation plans: topographical surveying, choices between guardrails and tree
      felling, frontage access treatments project report etc.,
•     Installation of the safety measure guardrail implementation, tree felling, road
      equipments and frontage access treatment,
•     Site supervision.
The total implementation costs were 993K €, which was paid by the Ministry of Transport
through the financial management of the regional administration.

4.6            Costs of accidents

In France the cost of road safety has been assessed by Mr. Le NET (ENPC Paris) in a
study 3carried out in 1991-1992 in which the different components of the price of human
life have been calculated. This calculation applied the method called "Compensated
Human Capital" using the following "marketed" and" non-marketed" costs.
•     Direct marketed costs,


3
    "Prix de la vie humaine, application à l'évaluation du coût économique de l'insécurité routière" M. Le NET
      (ENPC) 1992


                                                                                                        Page 150
                                MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



•   Medical and social costs,
•   Property damage costs (vehicles public equipments and environmental damages, fuel
    consumption, towing, etc.,
•   Overheads as costs of police, justice, insurance services, etc.,
•   Indirect marketed costs,
•   Costs of the loss of future productive capacity of fatalities and injuries, or jailed people,
•   Costs of the loss of future potential production,
•   Non-marketed costs; these costs are based on insurance company jurisprudence:
           o Cost of a killed person (moral wrong, prétuim mortis)
           o Cost of an injured person (prétium doloris)
In 1999, this method led to the following costs:
           1. Killed: 3950 KF (for which there are 88% of indirect marketed costs)
           2. Seriously injured:     407 KF
           3. Slightly injured:      86 KF
           4. Property damages: 22 KF

These values have been updated in 2000 taking into account other country accident cost
methodologies and including the correlation between the human life cost and GDP (Gross
Domestic Product) per person. These updated costs (see the following §5) have been
used for the present assessment.


5          Assessment Quantification

The quantitative analysis is a "case study" for which the data gathering and processing has
been performed as follows:
•   This is a before/after study concerning the safety of the crashes with trees for which the
    data collected concerns all the accidents, casualties, injuries and the traffic volumes on
    the treated stretches of road and reference area, i.e. the road of the "Département des
    Landes". These figures have been cheeked and corrected, if necessary, at the local
    level according to police reports. The reference areas exclude the treated stretches of
    road.
•   Data sources are the official local accident statistic and traffic volumes that count ADT
    (Average Daily Traffic). The safety data concerns all the accidents involving at least
    one injured person, as defined below. Crashes against trees were identified.
•   Disaggregated data has been used; concerning the safety data, all details included in
    the accident database were available.




                                                                                           Page 151
                                 MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



•   The time periods of the analysis are 1993 to 1997 for the “before period” and 1999 to
    2003 for the “after period”. The period of construction (1998) has been cancelled from
    the data used.
•   Concerning safety data, killed and injured users have been defined according to
    current French definitions, i.e. six days for fatalities; hospitalised more than 6 days for
    seriously injured, and less than 6 days for the slightly injured. In each accident, the
    casualties, severe and slight injuries, and property damages were taking into account
    for the monetary valuations of the relevant measure impacts.
•   The source of monetary costs of accidents, casualties and injuries are those currently
    used in France4. For this assessment the costs for 2000 (safety and implementation)
    have been chosen as the reference year. This choice is due to the fact that the
    correlation between the safety costs and the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has been
    used for the first time to make them comparable at the international level. These costs
    are:
           5. Killed                  1 000 K€
           6. Seriously injured         150 K€
           7. Slightly injured           22 K€
           8. Property damages           5.5 K€
The quantified safety results are summarised in the following table.


6          Assessment Results

Taking into account the safety parameters presented above, the "after" safety values have
been calculated, and the impact of the measure has been assessed from the figures
summarised in the Table 1 below.
The total value of benefits is 8633 K€.
The total value of implementation costs is 993 K€
Therefore according the above figures, the assessment tool (see § 4.2) and the French
monetary valuation used, the cost-benefit ratio gives the following result:
     Present value of all benefits
                                      =        8633K€ / 993K€ . = 8.69
Present value of implementation costs



7          Decision-Making Process

The initiative of this local safety road improvement involved different actors at the French
national, regional and local levels in terms of decision-making and funding.


4
  Sécurité Routière en France" Bilan 2003 ONISR (Observatoire National Interministériel de Sécurité
Routière) Documentation Française 2004


                                                                                           Page 152
                             MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



The local safety measure described in this case report is part of a national French road
safety program PRAS (Programme Régional d'Aménagements de Sécurité - Regional
Road Safety program).
This program is elaborated as follows:
•   Local road safety analyses are performed by the local transport administrations (DDE),
    which provide reports (Etude des Enjeux). These reports propose a set of breeding
    grounds of local road safety measures corresponding with the local road safety context.
•   All these reports are put together at the regional transport administration level (DRE),
    which performs a regional comprehensive road safety study. This comprehensive study
    is sent to the National Road Administration (Road Directorate), which in charge of the
    choices according to several criteria (political, financial, technical, etc).
•   The "accepted" local safety measures are mentioned in a ministerial decision signed by
    the three decision levels of the Transport Administration (national, regional and local
    DR, DRE, DDE), where applicable.
•   Funding is managed at the regional level (DRE).
The local transport administration (DDE-CDES) makes the final choices among the
"accepted" local road safety measures mentioned in the ministerial decision.
The same local administration is in charge of the implementation work programs, time
schedules, and so on, of these local road safety measures.
These tasks have been undertaken, including dialogues with the local authorities and
pressure groups, e.g. ecologists who are keeping a close watch on the measures leading
to tree felling. For this purpose, an extra report has been written and provided to the local
Commission of Sites (Commission des sites). This report presented a detailed study
concerning the tree species of the ‘Landes’ forest and proposed compensating measures,
which planned to replant trees in appropriate places. The Commission of Sites gave its
approval. Otherwise, the implementation of this road safety measure would be impossible.
Relevant decisions have been taken by the local transport administration and approved by
the local authorities and pressure groups.


8          Implementation barriers

No significant technical barriers or difficulties have been met by the local decision-maker
(DDE-CDES) in charge of the implementation of the measure. Only some problems related
to the frontage access and the underground telecommunication cable networks were
raised and were solved.
The significant barriers before starting the measure were related to long and complicated
administrative and financial procedures. These procedures involved several steps from the
national (Road Directorate DR) to the regional (DRE) and local DDE/CDES) levels. Also,
the local decision-maker in charge of the implementation of the measure has been waiting
for the credit line before starting any work on the program.



                                                                                      Page 153
                               MEASURE AGAINST COLLISIONS WITH TREES



  Concerning the assessment process, no barrier occurred. Local and national decision-
  makers and data providers provided all the necessary information and figures to perform
  the CBA.


  9          Conclusion

  The implementation of this road safety measure dealing with collision against the trees and
  the related “ex-post” cost-benefit analysis can be summarized as follows:
  •   Although the problem to solve was included in a global and national traffic safety
      program it has been clearly identified and delimited. For this purpose local surveys
      have been integrated into the national road safety framework policy, decision
      processes, technical approaches and financing. The final decisions concerning the
      implementation of the measure are made by the local decision-maker from the
      administration (DDE-CDES).
  •   In spite of the difficult technical choices and decisions to be made, in particular those
      related to political and environmental aspects linked to this measure, an agreement has
      been reached by means of dialogues involving the different local authorities,
      administrations, road engineers and pressure groups, e.g. ecologists.
  •   Finally, the measure has been quite well accepted and the assessment shows good
      efficiency in terms of accidents and severity with a 8.69 cost-benefit ratio.
  •   Therefore it seems that such an “ex-post” cost-benefit analysis could be an efficient in-
      put for further cost-benefit analyses (CEAs) and should be considered as only one of
      the decision-making process criteria to be used by the decision-makers to choose
      among available measures related to collisions against trees and side obstacles.
  The question is what will be the weight of such a CBA in the final decision-making process
  toward the other criteria to be taken into account by the decision-makers. This point should
  be discussed during the workshop and the conference.


  References

(1) Ezra HAUER "Observational Before-After Studies in Road Safety", Pergamon, 1997
(2) Statistiques pour la Sécurité Routière" SETRA février 1999
(3) " M. Le NET (ENPC) "Prix de la vie humaine, application à l'évaluation du coût
    économique de l'insécurité routière" Ministère des Transports, 1992
(4) Sécurité Routière en France" Bilan 2003 ONISR (Observatoire National Interministériel
    de Sécurité Routière) Documentation Française, 2004




                                                                                         Page 154
CASE H: introducing signal control at a rural junction




                                 Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
                                    Transportation Research Institute




                                              ROSEBUD
                                        WP4 - CASE H REPORT


                              INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL
                                  AT A RURAL JUNCTION




                   BY VICTORIA GITELMAN AND SHALOM HAKKERT,

          TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE, TECHNION,
                            ISRAEL
                              INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1     PROBLEM ..........................................................................................................158
2     DESCRIPTION OF MEASURE...........................................................................159
2.1   General ............................................................................................................... 159
2.2   Current installation .............................................................................................. 159
3     TARGET ACCIDENT GROUP............................................................................ 159
4     ASSESSMENT TOOLS ...................................................................................... 160
4.1   Method for estimating safety effect ..................................................................... 160
4.2   Safety effect of introducing traffic signal control .................................................. 162
4.3   Accident costs ..................................................................................................... 163
5     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS............................................................................... 164
5.1   General ............................................................................................................... 164
5.2   Values of costs and benefits ............................................................................... 164
5.3   Cost-Benefit Ratio ............................................................................................... 165
6     DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................165
7     DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 166




                                                                                                                       Page 156
                          INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Introducing traffic signal control at a rural junction
Problem
Traffic delays and accident occurrences due to conflict vehicle movements at a junction
with no signal
Target Group
All injury accidents at the treated junction
Targets
Reducing traffic delays and the number of injury accidents at the junction
Initiator
Road authority – for the measure’s application; Ministry of Transport – for the evaluation of
safety effect
Decision-makers
Road authorities, Ministry of Transport
Costs
Traffic lights’ design and installation, and the junction's realignment costs; paid by the
Road Authority and the Ministry of Transport
Benefits
Estimated benefits stem from the expected savings in injury accidents at the treated
junction. Benefits from reduced traffic delays are expected but not estimated. The driving
public will benefit.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
1:1.25, where the CBR accounts for safety effect only




                                                                                      Page 157
                          INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




1          Problem

In Israel, some 10% of both injury accidents and fatalities occur at rural junctions (CBS,
2003). When the accidents are observed at unsignalised intersections, the majority of
accidents are usually right-angle, rear-end and pedestrian accidents. For unsignalised
intersections, introducing traffic lights is frequently suggested as a safety treatment to
reduce all accident types.
International experience demonstrates (Elvik and Vaa, 2004) that the effect on accidents
of traffic signal control at intersections was mostly positive, providing on average a 15%
accident reduction at T-junctions and a 30% accident reduction at crossroads.
At the same time, one should remember that the function of traffic lights is to provide time
separation between conflicting traffic flows. Thus, the main purpose of introducing traffic
lights at a junction is in improving traffic flows through the junction, i.e. in reducing delays,
better use of the road’s capacity, providing successive traffic flows on arterial roads, etc.
Eliminating conflicts between different traffic flows at the junction diminishes the probability
of collisions and, therefore, may provide an additional benefit from traffic signal control –
accident reduction.
However, as it was proven by a number of studies when traffic lights are introduced at
junctions with low traffic volumes, neither reductions in traffic delays nor safety benefits are
usually observed. In some cases, deterioration in both conditions (i.e. an increase in traffic
delays and accidents) was even reported. Therefore, the current Israeli guidelines on the
design of traffic signal control recommend considering the introduction of traffic lights only
for junctions with reasonably high traffic volumes (Ministry of Transport, 1981).
The warrants for introducing traffic lights at a junction consider mostly the traffic volumes
on the main and secondary roads, but enable also to account for additional conditions
such as high accident numbers due to priority problems, lacking visibility, high approaching
speed, or other geometric problems at the junction. The Israeli guidelines dictate a
threshold of at least 10,000 private car units (or equivalent vehicle units) which enter the
junction during the eight most heavily travelled hours, from both main and secondary
roads, whereas the number of vehicles entering from the secondary road should be over
1,500. If the traffic volumes at a junction satisfy this demand, the introduction of traffic
signal control can be considered. Presence of additional conditions (high accident
frequencies, geometric problems, etc) may facilitate the above demand by up to 30%
(Ministry of Transport, 1981).
Prior to the installation of traffic lights the guidelines recommend considering other
improvements such as priority signs, better visibility distances, road marking
improvements, rumble bars to warn on approaching a junction, physical separation
between different flows, pedestrian islands, etc. Such improvements are known as low-
cost safety measures and are usually applied to sites with low to medium traffic volumes,
but evident safety problems.
Traffic lights’ installation is considered for sites with relatively high traffic volumes, which
are close to the warrant’s demand. Possible safety benefits may be estimated in
association with this infrastructure improvement, however, they will usually be treated as
an additional benefit and never present the main reason for the application of the measure.




                                                                                          Page 158
                           INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




2          Description of measure


2.1        General

A road junction presents a natural point of potential conflict between different traffic
streams. As traffic volumes increase, the probability of conflict increases too, and traffic
delays worsen. Traffic signal control at intersection separates different traffic streams from
each other and therefore improves the flow of traffic at the intersection and reduces
accident occurrences.
Traffic signal control is introduced using lights, which may be either time-controlled
(phases change after a given time irrespective of the amount of traffic) or vehicle-actuated
(the length of the phases is adapted to the amount of vehicles up to a given maximum
phase length).
The safety measure evaluated in the current study is the introduction of traffic signal
control at a rural junction, which was previously controlled by priority signs, i.e. was an
unsignalised intersection. The treatment is complex, including both the installation of traffic
lights and the junction’s realignment. The latter typically includes arranging turning lanes,
adding traffic islands, and improving signing and road marking at the site and in its vicinity.

2.2        Current installation

In the current study, we consider the installation of traffic signal control at a typical rural
road junction, which is situated on a single-carriageway road. The junction is four-legged
(a crossroad) with relatively high traffic volumes on the main road. The daily traffic
volumes are: 9,000 vehicles entering the junction from the both directions of the main road
and 2,000 vehicles – from the both directions of the secondary road.
In total, nine injury accidents were observed at the junction over the three years prior to
the traffic lights’ installation, whereby eight of them were associated with priority problems.
The analysis of "before" traffic flows demonstrates that based on the traffic volumes only,
the site would not satisfy the warrant for signal control’s installation. However, an
additional consideration of accident records at the site enables to treat it as a boundary
case warranting the measure.
The purpose of the installation was, first of all, to improve the traffic flows and, possibly, to
improve the site’s safety.
The case is considered for the year 2002.


3          Target Accident Group

Considering the introduction of traffic signal control, the safety effect usually refers to all
injury accidents (e.g. Elvik and Vaa, 2004). The positive effect is usually expected on right-
angle accidents, other collisions from conflicting crossing movements and pedestrian
accidents, whereas for rear-end collisions an increase is sometimes observed.
In a recent Israeli study that estimated, inter alia, a safety effect of traffic lights' installation
at rural junctions in Israel, the target accident group was also defined as all injury
accidents at the treated sites (Hakkert et al, 2002).

                                                                                             Page 159
                         INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION



In the current study, the economic evaluation of safety improvement of a typical rural
junction, the target accident group of all injury accidents is considered as well. At the
junction considered three injury accidents on average were observed per year.
To note, a slightly different consideration of accidents is accepted by the guidelines
(Ministry of Transport, 1981), which, for the warrants’ examination, recommend accounting
only for accidents associated with vehicle and pedestrian priority problems at the site.


4          Assessment tools


4.1        Method for estimating safety effect

The safety effect from introducing traffic lights (signal control + realignment) at rural
junctions in Israel was estimated in a recent study, which was initiated by the Ministry of
Transport and conducted by the T&M Company in association with Technion (Hakkert et
al, 2002). The study aimed at developing a uniform methodology for evaluating potential
safety effects of projects on road infrastructure improvements and estimating safety effects
of some 30 types of safety treatments, which were introduced on Israeli roads throughout
the 90s.
For the estimation of safety effects of road infrastructure improvements, a method
combining an after/before comparison with a control group, and with an empirical
correction due to selection bias, was proposed. The outline of the method resembles that
described in Elvik (1997), whereas in the Israeli study, an extension accounting for
changes in traffic volumes was developed. Besides, the reference group statistics, which
are necessary for correction of the selection bias, were estimated by the method of sample
moments and not on the basis of a regression model.
The reference group included sites which are similar to the treatment sites in most
engineering characteristics but were left untreated (unchanged) during the “before” periods
of all the sites in the treatment group. The demands for the control (comparison) group
were as follows: it should be large (to strengthen the significance of the findings), and
demonstrate some similarity with the treatment group from the engineering viewpoint.
For the treatment type considered, evaluation of the safety effect included three steps:
1) A correction of “before” accident numbers, with the help of reference group statistics, for
each site in the treatment group (WP3, 2004 – see Appendix to Chapter 3).
2) An evaluation of the treatment effect at each site by means of the odds-ratio with the
comparison group, where for the “before” period the corrected accident numbers (from the
first step) are applied. Besides, a correction due to changes in traffic volumes is
performed. The formula is:




                                                                                       Page 160
                                         INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




                                         Xa
Estimated effect (θ ) =                       δ
                                           Ca
                                        Xm
                                           Cb
where
                  1
δ=               βc                βt
      Vcb            Vt a   
     
      Vc    
                     
                       Vt     
                               
      a              b      
where
Xa – the number of accidents observed at the treatment site in the “after” period,
Xm – the corrected number of accidents at the treatment site in the “before” period,
Vta – traffic volume at the treatment site in the “after” period,
Vtb – traffic volume at the treatment site in the “before” period,
Ca – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “after” period,
Cb – the number of accidents in comparison group sites in the “before” period,
Vca - traffic volume in comparison group sites in the “after” period,
Vcb - traffic volume in comparison group sites in the “before” period,
βt – the parameter of the safety performance function (a power of relation between traffic
volume and the accident number), for treatment sites,
βc – the parameter of safety performance function, for comparison-group sites.
3) Weighting the effects found for separate treatment sites. This is done by means of a
standard method known for weighting odds-ratios, where a statistical weight of separate
result is defined by the sizes of data sets, which provided this result:

                                   ∑ w ln(θ )                  i       i
Weighted mean effect (WME ) = exp(            )        i

                                     ∑w                    i
                                                                   i


             1                   1
wi =                   =
       VAR (log(θ i ))    1    1   1   1
                           i
                             + i + i + i
                         X a X b Ca Cb
where
θi - estimate of effect for site i,
wi - statistical weight of estimate for site i,
Xia – the number of accidents observed at treatment site i, in the “after” period,
Xib – the number of accidents at treatment site i, in the “before” period,
Cia – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “after” period,
Cib – the number of accidents in comparison group (for site i), in the “before” period.
The 95% confidence interval for the weighed effect is estimated as follows:


                                                                                          Page 161
                               INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




                zα            z α 
                              1−  
WME exp          2
                      , WME exp   2
                                       


        
                ∑ wi 
                                ∑ wi  
                                      
               i              i    


The applicable value of the safety effect, i.e. the best estimate of accident reduction
associated with the treatment (in percent), is calculated as (1-WME)*100.
In the cases of large samples of treatment sites (that diminishes a threat of selection bias
and also limits the practical possibility of building a comparable reference group), only
steps 2-3 were applied for the evaluation.

4.2            Safety effect of introducing traffic signal control

In the study HAKKERT et al. (2002), the data on the road infrastructure improvements
were collected by means of written applications and meetings with the representatives of
road and municipal authorities in different country areas. A special database on the issue
was established. The data were sought mostly for projects performed in the mid 90s, to
have a two-year “before” and two-year “after” period for observation.
To represent a specific project in the database, three information elements were defined
as crucial: location of the treatment, type of treatment and the period of treatment. For the
project to be involved in the evaluation, all three pieces of information had to be thoroughly
verified. To provide a minimum but comprehensive presentation of a specific project in the
database, a special reporting form was devised which enabled to classify the site and the
treatment in accordance with the road layout, area specifics, etc. The data were obtained
from the authorities and accomplished by information from detailed maps, field surveys
and the publications of the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS).
Within each treatment type for the analysis, a strict definition of the periods “before” and
“after” the treatment was provided for each site; a relevant definition of both periods for the
comparison-group sites was also attached. The next stage in data preparation was filtering
the CBS accident files for the sites and periods required. For each treatment type, files
with series of accident numbers were produced for every treatment and comparison group
of sites and then processed using the method described in Section 4.1.
For the treatment type "introduction of traffic signal control at a rural junction", data were
collected on ten projects, which were performed in the north of the country, by the Haifa
county of the Public Works Department21. The traffic lights were installed at the junctions
over the years 1994-1998.
The time period for consideration was 1990-1999, both for the treatment and comparison
group sites. For the treatment group, all injury accidents observed at the junctions were
considered, whereas for each treated site two-year "before" period and two-year “after”
period were separately defined. All injury accidents observed at rural road junctions
throughout the country (fitting "before" and "after" periods for each site of treatment)
served as a comparison group.



21
     Public Works Department (PWD) is the National Road Authority that is responsible for the development
      and maintenance of the majority of rural roads in Israel.
                                                                                                    Page 162
                                 INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION



Table 54 details the number of sites (projects) involved in the evaluation, the number of
accidents observed at the treatment sites in “before” and “after” periods, the mean value of
the safety effect estimated, and the confidence interval for this value.
Accident reduction is significant when the whole WME confidence interval is below one. As
can be seen from Table 54, a close to significant accident reduction was observed
following the treatment: the right boundary of 95% confidence level is slightly over 1. The
accident reduction effect of traffic signal control is significant with p=0.11.

Table 54: Safety effect of introducing traffic signals estimated for Israeli conditions
 Treatment type                          Estimated      WME                 Number of            Number of
                                         effect         confidence          treatment sites      accidents at the
                                         (WME)          interval            in the sample        treatment sites
 Introducing signal control at               0.70       (0.453, 1.081)             10                   86
 rural junctions
Source: Hakkert et al, 2002
The average safety effect of introducing traffic signals at rural junctions in Israel was a
30% reduction in injury accidents. This result is comparable with the international value
reported by Elvik and Vaa (2004). Accounting for both the significance level and the
comparability of finding with the international experience, the above result was classified
as “admissible for application” and was recommended for use in evaluations of road
infrastructure improvements for Israeli conditions (Hakkert et al, 2002).

4.3            Accident costs

In the current Israeli practice, the average accident cost can be estimated as a sum of
injury costs and damage costs of an average accident in the target accident group. The
injury costs are a sum of injury-values multiplied by the average number of injuries, with
different severity levels, which were observed in the target accident group. The road
accident injury values are usually taken as $ 500,000 per fatality, $ 50,000 per serious
injury, $ 5,000 per minor injury; the damage value is stated as 15% of the injury costs.
      Table 55 illustrates the calculation of accident costs for an average injury accident,
observed at rural Israeli junctions in 2002. The injury-costs of an average accident are NIS
155,057; with the addition of damage-costs, the value of average injury accident is NIS
178,315 (at 2002 prices).
The above values of injury should be treated as conservative because the fatality-value is
lower then that estimated accounting for the ‘willingness-to-pay’ approach (MATAT, 2004).
              Table 55: Estimating costs for an average injury accident at rural junctions in Israel

      Value                                                      Fatality       Serious injury     Slight injury
      Average number of injuries per accident*                   0.0275         0.1227             2.571
      Injury-values, $                                           500,000        50,000             5,000
      Total injury-costs of average accident**                   $ 32,740 or NIS 155,057
      Damage costs                                               NIS 23,258
      Total costs of an average accident (at 2002 prices)        NIS 178,315
                  *in 2002         **$ 1 = 4.736 NIS (average, in 2002)



                                                                                                            Page 163
                               INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




5              Cost-Benefit Analysis


5.1            General

In this section, a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of the safety effect from introducing traffic
signal control at a rural junction is performed. The CBA compares the measure's safety
benefits with the measure's costs, where both values are brought to the same economic
framework.
As mentioned in Section 1, the main benefits from introducing signal control at a junction
come from the improvements of traffic flows, i.e. reduced traffic delays, better use of roads'
capacity, etc. Possible safety improvements (an accident reduction following the
treatment) present an additional benefit and not the main reason for the application of the
measure.
In the current practice, a general CBA of introducing signal control at a junction is not
obligatory when the warrant for the application of measure is satisfied. In other words, if
the traffic volumes at the junction are reasonably high, the traffic lights' installation usually
provides apparent economic benefits from the viewpoint of traffic flows. However, a
demonstration of these time savings and their costs is not simple as it requires for multiple
calculations depending on the traffic signal design parameters, characteristics of traffic
flows, approaching speeds, etc. Therefore, in the current evaluation, only benefits
associated with safety improvements due to the measure will be estimated and compared
with the measure's costs. The evaluation results should be treated as conservative and
demonstrating only a part of general benefits associated with the measure.
The costs of the measure consist of the initial investment, which is required for the design
and introducing signal control at the junction considered, and annual maintenance
expenses for providing a proper functioning of the system.
Both the costs and benefits are considered for 15 years, with a 7% discount rate
(according to the values recommended by the Ministry of Transport – Nohal Prat, 1996);
the accumulated discount factor will be 9.108.

5.2            Values of costs and benefits

Introducing traffic signal control at a junction includes both traffic lights' installation and a
minor realignment of the junction. The value of the initial investment on the measure
should account for the expenses on the traffic signal's design and approval, the junction's
redesign and approval, the performance of road paving, building turning lanes, traffic
islands and curbs, road signing and marking, and the installation of traffic lights. Typical
costs of the measure were estimated by Hakkert et al. (2002) and they amounted to NIS
750,000 (at 2000 prices). At 2002 prices22, the value of initial investment will be NIS
801,525.
The annual maintenance expenses present some 5% of the initial investment. Therefore,
the total value of costs for the introduction of traffic signal control, over a 15-year period,
will be:
801,525 (1 + 0.05* 9.108) = 1,166,539 NIS (at 2002 prices).

22
     Change of price index over 2000-2002 is 1.0687.
                                                                                          Page 164
                             INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION



The one-year value of benefits from the expected accident reduction is estimated as a
product of the annual number of "before" accidents, the accident reduction factor (the
safety effect) and the accident cost. This value is:
3 accidents * 0.3 * 178,315 NIS/ accident= 160,483 NIS (at 2002 prices).
The total value of safety benefits from the introduction of traffic signal control, over a 15-
year period, will be NIS 1,461,679 (at 2002 prices).

5.3        Cost-Benefit Ratio

Table 56 illustrates the calculation of the cost-benefit ratio (CBR) of the introduction of
traffic signal control. The CBR estimated for the measure is 1:1.25.
This means that based on safety benefits, only the application of the measure for the rural
junction considered appears to be slightly cost-effective. Had the traffic flow benefits been
added to the calculations, the CBR would be much higher.
      Table 56: Calculation of the cost-benefit ratio

        Costs                                           Benefits                Costs of accidents
                                                                                saved in one year,
                                                                                NIS
        Initial investment, NIS         801,525         Total benefits in one        160,483
                                                        year, NIS
        Maintenance costs, NIS          40,076
        (one-year)
        Total costs, over 15-year      1,166,539        Total benefits in 15         1,461,679
        period, NIS (2002)                              years, NIS (2002)
        Total costs, Euro (2002)*       260,388         Total benefits, Euro         326,268
                                                        (2002)*
                                                        Cost-benefit ratio            1 : 1.25
      *In 2002: 1 Euro = 4.48 NIS.


6          Decision-Making Process

The cost-benefit analysis of the introduction of traffic signal control at a junction is not
common in Israel. Usually, neither safety nor traffic flow benefits are estimated in
economic terms. The only estimate that is usually performed is an examination of the site
from the viewpoint of warrants for the installation of traffic lights.
Both road and local authorities frequently request this measure when any safety problem
is identified at the junction. The Ministry of Transport applies efforts to regulate these
demands approving the introduction of signal control only for junctions where the measure
is really warranted.
The estimation of the safety effect from the introduction of signal control is not obligatory
according to current guidelines. However, for boundary cases (i.e. when traffic volumes at
the junction are slightly lower than the threshold values) such an estimation might provide
additional arguments in favour of approving the measure.




                                                                                                     Page 165
                          INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




7          Discussion

In this study, a CBA of a typical example of introducing signal control at a rural junction
was considered. The CBA included the safety effect only. A consideration of time savings
due to new signal control would strengthen the benefits of the measure. However, such a
consideration is complicated and site-specific and, thus, cannot easily be performed within
the framework of a mini-CBA. Other possible effects of signalising an intersection are the
effects on energy consumption and pollution effects. These were not considered in the
present case study.
Based on the evaluation of the safety effect only, the measure was found to be beneficial.
This is because a certain amount of injury accidents was observed at the junction in the
“before” period. However, it is worth mentioning that the economic value of safety benefits
is only slightly higher than the costs. The above result alone would not provide a high rank
of the site for the measure's application.
Obviously, fewer injury accidents in the "before" period would lower the estimated value of
benefits, making the results less relevant for the decision-making.
The safety effect of introducing signal control, observed under Israeli conditions, was high
and close to significant. It was in line with the findings reported by studies in other
countries.
The CBA presented in this study can be characterized as follows:
•   the CBA accounts for safety effect only; a consideration of time savings would
    strengthen the benefits of the measure;
•   the evaluation findings support the measure's implementation;
•   to estimate the safety effects, a statistical model was fitted to the accident data from a
    group of similar sites; the evaluation was in line with the criteria of correct safety
    evaluation (WP3, 2004);
•   the accident costs were fitted to the accident type considered, however, they should be
    treated as conservative as the injury costs do not account for the ‘willingness-to-pay’
    component;
•   the evaluation of the safety effect was initiated by the Ministry of Transport. However,
    the decision-makers usually do not require a CBA of the measure.




                                                                                         Page 166
                         INTRODUCING SIGNAL CONTROL AT A RURAL JUNCTION




References

CBS (2003). Road accidents with casualties 2002. Part A: General Summaries. Central
  Bureau of Statistics, Jerusalem.
Elvik, R. (1997). Effects on Accidents of Automatic Speed Enforcement in Norway.
   Transportation Research Record 1595, TRB, Washington, D. C., pp.14-19.
Elvik, R. and Vaa, T. (2004) The Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Elsevier.
Hakkert, A.S., Gitelman, V., et al (2002) Development of Method, Guidelines and Tools for
  Evaluating Safety Effects of Road Infrastructure Improvements. Final report, T&M
  Company, Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
MATAT (2004). Road Accidents in Israel: the scope, the characteristics and the estimate
  of losses to the National Economy. MATAT - Transportation Planning Center Ltd,
  Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
Ministry of Transport (1981). Guidelines on design of traffic control signals. The National
  Transport supervisor, Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
Nohal Prat (1996). A guideline for economic evaluation of transport projects. 2.0 edition.
  Ministry of Transport (in Hebrew).
WP3 (2004). Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.




                                                                                       Page 167
CASE I1: intensification of police enforcement (speed and alcohol)




                      National Technical University of Athens
               Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering




                                              ROSEBUD
                                         WP4 - CASE I REPORT


      INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT
                (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




           BY GEORGE YANNIS AND ELEONORA PAPADIMITRIOU

                                                        NTUA / DTPE, GREECE
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ....................................................................................... 171
2   DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................... 171
3   TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 171
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 171
5   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 172
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 181
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................181
8   IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS ........................................................................ 181
9   CONCLUSION / DISCUSSION........................................................................... 183




                                                                                                             Page 169
                     INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Intensification of Speed and Alcohol Enforcement in Greece
Problem
Road accidents and related casualties presented an increasing trend during the past
decade in Greece, mainly due to insufficient maintenance of the road network,
inappropriate behaviour of the road users and lack of efficient and systematic
enforcement. Since 1998, an important effort was devoted to the improvement of this
situation in Greece, focusing on an intensification of enforcement aimed at improving
driver behaviour.
Target Group
Drivers, mainly on the interurban road network
Targets
a) Increase in the number of police controls for speeding and drinking-and-driving
b) Decrease in the number of road accidents and related casualties
Initiator
National Police
Decision-makers
National Police
Costs
Police Labour Costs, Police Vehicle Costs, Police Equipment Costs
Benefits
Fatal and injury accidents prevented
Cost-Benefit Ratio
1:6.6 to 1:9.7




                                                                                     Page 170
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




1            Problem

Road accidents and related casualties increased during the past decade in Greece, mainly
due to insufficient maintenance of the road network, inappropriate behaviour of the road
users and lack of efficient and systematic enforcement [NTUA/DTPE, 2003]. Since 1998,
an important effort was devoted to the improvement of this situation in Greece, focusing on
an intensification of enforcement aimed at improving driver behaviour.


2            Description

In 1998, the Greek Traffic Police started the intensification of road safety enforcement,
having set as the target the gradual increase of road controls for the two most important
infringements: speeding and drinking & driving. Since then, all controls and related
infringements recorded are systematically monitored and the related enforcement and
casualty results at the local and national level are regularly published, as shown in the
following table with basic road safety related trends in Greece. Seat belt and helmet use
were two additional offences, which the police started to enforce more systematically in
2002.
Table 57: Basic road safety and enforcement trends in Greece (1998-2002)

                                   1998      1999      2000       2001       2002       5-year change
Injury road accidents               24,819    24,231    23,127     19,710      16,852             -32%
Fatalities                           2,182     2,116     2,088      1,895       1,654             -24%
Vehicle fleet (x1000)                4,323     4,690     5,061      5,390       5,741             33%
Speed infringements                 92,122    97,947   175,075    316,451     418,421            354%
Drinking & driving infringements    13,996    17,665    30,507     49,464      48,947            250%
Drinking & driving controls        202,161 246,611     365,388    710,998   1,034,502            412%




3            Target Group

The target group of the measure included the entire population of Greek drivers. Although
the intensification of enforcement was more significant on the interurban road network, it is
considered that the entire number of accidents was affected. In particular, the enforcement
was nationwide and concerned all types of traffic violations. Moreover, previous research
allows for the quantification of the particular effect of speed and alcohol enforcement in
particular regions of Greece, as described in the following sections.


4            Assessment method

The present research concerns a cost-benefit evaluation of police enforcement for
speeding and drinking & driving in Greece for the period 1998-2002. The evaluation was
based on detailed police controls and infringements data, available by the police for the
examined period. Additional information was collected by means of interviews with police
officers in order to estimate the implementation costs of the measures. As far as safety
benefits are concerned, the results of three recent studies were used; one study
concerned the calculation of accident economic costs in Greece, one study on the

                                                                                               Page 171
                       INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



‘willingness-to-pay’ for accident risk reduction in Greece, and one study concerned the
quantification of the safety effect of enforcement and other safety related parameters in
Greece.
It should be noted that enforcement costs include police labour, vehicle and equipment
costs, whereas enforcement benefits exclusively refer to safety effects.


5           Assessment Quantification


5.1         Enforcement Costs

Enforcement costs include police labour costs, police vehicle costs and police speed and
alcohol enforcement equipment costs (speed cameras, alcoholmeters etc.). As the
intensification of enforcement in the examined period was not foreseen as part of a
specific project with a specific budget and resource allocation, there was very little
information available on police-related costs. The additional necessary information for CBA
calculations was obtained by means of exhaustive interviews with Head Officers of the
police. In particular, on the basis of the available detailed information on yearly numbers of
speed and alcohol infringements, the interviews tried to yield the related labour and capital
parameters through the adoption of typical conversion measures.

5.1.1       Police Labour Costs
Table 58: Police Labour Costs for Speed Enforcement in Greece (1998-2002)*

                                      1999              2000                 2001           2002
 Number of infringements                  97,947           175,075             316,451       418,421
                    typical days          73,460           131,306             237,338       313,816
                    special days          24,487            43,769              79,113       104,605
 Number of shifts
                    typical days             4,897             8,754            15,823        20,921
                    special days             1,224             2,188                3,956      5,230
 Shifts Labour
                        Persons                 3                 3                    3            3
                  Person-hours                  8                 8                    8            8
                  Hourly rate (€)              7.5               7.5                  7.5          7.5
                 Shifts Costs (€)      1,101,904         1,969,594           3,560,074      4,707,236
 Number of prosecutions                      2,938             5,252                9,494     12,553
 Prosecution Police Labour
                        Persons                 1                 1                    1            1
                  Person-hours                 14                14                   14           14
                  Hourly rate (€)              7.5               7.5                  7.5          7.5
          Prosecution Costs (€)          308,533           551,486             996,821      1,318,026
 Total Labour Costs (€)                1,410,437         2,521,080           4,556,894      6,025,262
*prices of 2002



                                                                                               Page 172
                       INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



The total yearly labour cost of speed enforcement is summarized in the table above. The
calculations for speed enforcement are based on the following assumptions, as reported
by Head Police Officers interviewed, based on experience:
   •   75% of speed infringements are recorded on typical days
   •   25% of speed infringements are recorded on special days (weekends,
       holidays, special events)
   •   An average of 15 speed infringements per shift are recorded on typical days
   •   An average of 20 speed infringements per shift are recorded on special days
   •   3% of speed infringements recorded result to driver's prosecution, both on
       typical and special days
As far as alcohol enforcement labour is concerned, the calculations are presented in the
following table.

Table 59: Police Labour Costs for Alcohol Enforcement in Greece (1998-2002)*

                                       1999              2000              2001            2002
 Number of infringements                  17,665             30,507              49,464      48,947
                    typical days          13,249             22,880              37,098      36,710
                    special days              4,416             7,627            12,366      12,237
 Number of shifts
                    typical days          13,249             22,880              37,098      36,710
                    special days              2,208             3,813             6,183       6,118
 Shifts Labour
                        Persons                  3                 3                  3            3
                  Person-hours                   8                 8                  8            8
                  Hourly rate (€)               7.5               7.5                7.5          7.5
                 Shifts Costs (€)      2,782,238          4,804,853            7,790,580   7,709,153
 Number of prosecutions                       1,767             3,051             4,946       4,895
 Prosecutions Labour
                        Persons                  1                 1                  1            1
                  Person-hours                  14                14                 14           14
                  Hourly rate (€)               7.5               7.5                7.5          7.5
         Prosecutions Costs (€)          185,483           320,324              519,372     513,944
 Total Labour Costs (€)                2,967,720          5,125,176            8,309,952   8,223,096
*prices of 2002


The respective assumptions for alcohol enforcement are the following:
   •   75% of alcohol infringements are recorded on typical days
   •   25% of alcohol infringements are recorded on special days
   •   An average of 1 alcohol infringements per shift is recorded on typical days
   •   An average of 2 alcohol infringements per shift are recorded on special days
   •   10% of alcohol infringements recorded result to driver's prosecution, both on
       typical and special days

                                                                                              Page 173
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Based on the information above, the yearly numbers of police control shifts on speed and
alcohol enforcement and prosecutions for speeding and drinking & driving were calculated.
Additionally, a detailed labour breakdown for control shifts and prosecutions obtained
though interviews (number of persons and person-hours of a typical control
shift/prosecution, typical policeman hourly rate) was used to calculate the total yearly
labour costs for alcohol enforcement. It should be noted that the police person-hour rate
(€) refers to year 2002. In particular:
   •    3 policemen are involved in one control shift for 8 hours each
   •    1 policeman is involved in an prosecution for a total of 14 hours
   •    The hourly rate of a policeman is 7.5 €



5.1.2       Police Vehicle Costs

The calculation of vehicle costs is based on the number of police control shifts and
prosecutions, which was calculated as described above on the basis of the interviews.
Additional information on the use of police vehicles collected during the interviews was
also exploited. The results are summarized in the following tables.
Table 60: Police Vehicle Costs for Speed Enforcement in Greece (1998-2002)*

                                       1999              2000                 2001           2002
 Number of shifts                             6,122          10,942              19,778        26,151
 Number of prosecutions                       2,938             5,252                9,494     12,553
 Shifts Vehicle costs
            Number of vehicles                   1                 1                    1            1
              Average distance                  20                20                   20           20
           Unit Cost per Km (€)                 0.1               0.1                  0.1          0.1
               Vehicle Cost (€)            12,243            21,884              39,556        52,303
 Prosecutions Vehicle Costs
            Number of vehicles                   1                 1                    1            1
              Average distance                   5                 5                    5            5
           Unit Cost per Km (€)                 0.1               0.1                  0.1          0.1
               Vehicle Cost (€)               1,469             2,626                4,747      6,276
 Total Vehicle Costs (€)                   13,713            24,511              44,303        58,579
*prices of 2002
As far as speed enforcement is concerned, the following assumptions were included:
   • 1 police vehicle is used in each shift
   • 1 police vehicle is used for each driver's prosecution
   • The average total distance travelled for each shift is 20 km
   • The average total distance travelled for each prosecution is 5 km




                                                                                               Page 174
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Table 61: Police Vehicle Costs for Alcohol Enforcement in Greece (1998-2002)*

                                       1999                    2000                    2001            2002
 Number of shifts                          15,457                 26,694                  43,281         42,829
 Number of prosecutions                       2,938                   5,252                   9,494      12,553
 Shifts Vehicle costs
            Number of vehicles                    1                      1                         1           1
              Average distance                    5                      5                         5           5
           Unit Cost per Km (€)                 0.1                     0.1                     0.1           0.1
                Vehicle Cost (€)              7,728               13,347                  21,641         21,414
 Prosecutions Vehicle Costs
            Number of vehicles                    1                      1                         1           1
              Average distance                    5                      5                         5           5
           Unit Cost per Km (€)                 0.1                     0.1                     0.1           0.1
                Vehicle Cost (€)              1,469                   2,626                   4,747       6,276
 Total Vehicle Costs (€)                      9,198               15,973                  26,387         27,691
*prices of 2002
As far as alcohol enforcement is concerned, the following assumptions were included:
   •    1 police vehicle is used in each shift
   •    1 police vehicle is used for each driver's prosecution
   •    The average total distance travelled for each shift is 5 km
   •    The average total distance travelled for each prosecution is 5 km
Additionally, the average police vehicle cost per kilometre was considered equal to 0.10
€/km (referring to year 2002) according to a recent study on accident costs in Greece
[LIAKOPOULOS, 2002].

5.1.3       Police Equipment Costs

The number of available devices used for speed and alcohol enforcement for the year
2002 was obtained from the Technical Services of the Police. However, no information on
the respective numbers for the year 1998 was available. According to the information
collected during the interviews, a reasonable assumption would be to consider that the
enforcement equipment was doubled in the examined period.
                    Table 62: Police Equipment Costs for Speed and Alcohol
                              Enforcement in Greece (1998-2002)*

                                                                      1998             2002
                    Number of portable speed guns                         231             462
                                               Unit cost (€)                            600.00
                    Number of in-car radars                                   31              62
                                               Unit cost (€)                            500.00
                    Number of speed guns on tripod                            20              39
                                               Unit cost (€)                            300.00
                    Number of alcoholmeters                               467             934
                                               Unit cost (€)                             10.00
                    Total Equipment Costs (€)                                164,620
                                                                                                         Page 175
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



                         *prices of 2002


5.2          Enforcement Benefits

In the framework of this study, the benefits examined exclusively concern safety benefits,
as no significant social or environmental costs were expected from the intensification of
speed and alcohol enforcement. The available results of previous research allowed for the
direct calculation of the number of accidents prevented by the measures, as described in
detail in the following sections.

5.2.1        Number of accidents prevented

For the estimation of the number of accidents prevented from the intensification of speed
and alcohol enforcement, the results of a recent research study were used [AGAPAKIS,
MYGIAKI, 2003]. This research concerned a macroscopic investigation of the effect of
enforcement on road safety improvement in Greece aimed in particular at determining the
separate effect of different types of enforcement (speeding, drinking and driving, violating
signals, failing to yield etc.), as well as the effect of other safety related parameters
(vehicles fleet, vehicle ownership, population) on the significant overall improvement of
road safety in Greece during the last few years.
This study included two distinct parts; the first part concerned a cluster analysis aimed at
identifying groups with similar characteristics within the 52 departments of Greece. In
particular, road network, population density, vehicle ownership, traffic infringements and
accidents characteristics were used for the separation of Greece in four groups of
departments, as follows:
    Figure 18: Clustering of the departments of Greece in groups of similar accident and infringement rates




                                                                                      Group I

                                                                                      Group II

                                                                                      Group III

                                                                                      Group IV




•       Group I included the Athens and Thessaloniki large urban regions, which present
        high accident and infringement rates
•       Group II included 5 large departments with relatively high population density and
        accident and infringement frequencies
                                                                                                      Page 176
                      INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



•       Group III included 22 departments with relatively medium population density, high
        accident frequencies and medium infringement frequencies
•       Group IV included 22 smaller departments with relatively low population density,
        accident and infringement frequencies
The second part of the study concerned the development of Poisson regression models for
the quantification of the separate effect of various types of enforcement, as well as other
parameters on the total number of accidents in each group of departments. In each case,
the marginal effects of the various significant parameters were also calculated.
Additionally, the modelling process was developed for two different assumptions
concerning the effect of enforcement, resulting in two categories of models:
    •    Models with no time-halo in the effect of enforcement
    •    Models with a time-halo in the effect of enforcement
The above classification rises from the international experience, according to which there
may be a delay of several weeks before a significant effect of enforcement is observed
(Holland, Corner, 1996, Vaa, 1997). This "time halo effect" was examined in the framework
of the analysis of intensification of enforcement in Greece.
It is interesting to note that, among the various types of enforcement examined in this
study, the enforcement of speeding and drinking & driving was found to have a significant
effect on the total number of accidents only in Groups II and IV, whereas in the other
groups, other types of enforcement were found significant, such as traffic signals
violations, failing to yield etc. The quantified effects are presented in detail below.

5.2.2        Consideration with no time-halo in the effects of enforcement

The first group of models is based on the assumption that there is no time-halo (delay) in
the effect of enforcement on the total number of road accidents. In this scenario, the
number of police controls and infringements of a certain period is considered to directly
affect the number of accidents of this period.
As mentioned above, the effect of speed and alcohol enforcement was significant in
Groups of departments II and IV. In particular, it was found that an increase of 1000 speed
infringements prevents approximately one accident in Group II departments and two
accidents in Group IV departments. Additionally, it was found that an increase of 1000
alcohol controls prevents approximately two accidents in Group II departments and 1
accident in Group IV departments.
In the framework of the present research, the above results were combined with the
related enforcement trends data for 1998-2002, which is available in detail from the
National Police, in order to calculate the total number of accidents prevented from the
intensification of enforcement in the examined period. The results are presented in detail in
the following Table 63. According to the results of the consideration without delay in the
effects of enforcement, a total number of 772 accidents were prevented in the examined
period in Greece. This consideration will be adopted as the "conservative scenario" of the
present cost-benefit evaluation, corresponding to a minimum effect of enforcement.




                                                                                      Page 177
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




Table 63: Marginal effects of enforcement and number of accidents prevented (1999-2002), no time-halo-effect

   Department Group                   I                    II                  III                  IV
 Marginal effects
     Speed infringements                                         -1.239                                  -1.542
          Alcohol controls                                       -1.929                                  -1.373
 Speed infringements
                     1998                  23,867                 9,579               42,028             14,648
                     1999                  32,480                16,091               49,169             19,899
                     2000                  37,324                31,533               74,323             30,112
                     2001                  68,397                64,966              128,924             54,164
                     2002                 105,025                82,531              161,297             69,568
 Alcohol controls
                     1998                 100,955                13,584               62,655             24,967
                     1999                 104,540                19,485               87,415             35,171
                     2000                 128,287                54,498              121,775             60,828
                     2001                 211,273               151,943              235,716         112,066
                     2002                 290,052               213,138              351,888         179,552
 Accidents prevented
                     1999                      0                    19                    0                  22
                     2000                      0                    87                    0                  51
                     2001                      0                   229                    0                107
                     2002                      0                   140                    0                116
 TOTAL                                                               772


5.2.3        Consideration of a two-month time-halo in the effect of enforcement

The second group of models was based on the assumption that there is a two-month time-
halo (delay) in the effect of enforcement on the total number of road accidents. More
specifically, in these models, the number of controls and infringements of one month were
combined with the accidents of the next third month.
As mentioned above, the effect of speed and alcohol enforcement was significant in
Groups of departments II and IV. In particular, it was found that an increase of 1000 speed
infringements prevents approximately one accident in Group II departments and two
accidents in Group IV departments. Additionally, it was found that an increase of 1000
alcohol controls prevents approximately two accidents in Group II departments and one
accident in Group IV departments.
Accordingly, the results were combined with the related enforcement trends data for 1998-
2002 in order to calculate the total number of accidents prevented from the intensification
of enforcement in the examined period. The results are presented in detail in the following
Table 64.




                                                                                                         Page 178
                       INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Table 64: Marginal effects of enforcement and number of accidents prevented (1999-2002) - Two-months
          time-halo-effect

   Department Group                I                  II                 III                IV
 Marginal effects
    Speed infringements                                    -2.224                                -2.053
         Alcohol controls                                  -2.265                                -2.684
 Accidents prevented
                    1999                   0                  28                   0                 38
                    2000                   0                 114                   0                 90
                    2001                   0                 295                   0               187
                    2002                   0                 178                   0               213
 TOTAL                                                        1,142

The results of the consideration with two-month time-halo in the effects of enforcement
indicate a total number of 1,142 accidents prevented in the examined period in Greece.
This consideration will be adopted as the "best scenario" of the present cost-benefit
evaluation, corresponding to a maximum effect of enforcement.

5.2.4       Accident costs

The estimation of average accident costs was carried out on the basis of a recent study on
accident costs in Greece (LIAKOPOULOS, 2002). This study concerned the estimation of
the costs of various components of accidents (material damage costs, generalized costs,
human costs) for fatal accidents, injury accidents and material damage accidents,
including:
   •    Material damage costs
   •    Police costs
   •    Fire brigade costs
   •    Insurance companies costs
   •    Court costs
   •    Lost production output
   •    Pain and grief
   •    Rehabilitation costs
   •    Hospital treatment costs
   •    First aid and transportation costs
The various costs were calculated by means of an exhaustive data collection process
addressed to various organizations (e.g. National Statistical Service of Greece, National
Police, Fire Service of Greece, Emergency Medical Service of Greece, hospitals, courts,
insurance companies). Additional parameters were adopted on the basis of estimations
from experts in each field, as well as the existing international literature.
It should be noted, however, that the above study did not adequately account for the
human cost component, as the pain and grief parameters as reported in the courts are not
sufficiently representative of the human cost. For that purpose, a separate investigation for
human cost in Greece was carried out in the framework of present research. In particular,
human cost was estimated according to the following formula:
                                                                                                 Page 179
                          INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



                                       VoSL = (NAEIS) / (LSE)
Where:
VoSL: Value of Statistical Life
NAEIS: National Annual Expenditure on Improving Safety
LSE: Expected Lives Saved from this Expenditure Annually

In particular, the calculations included parameters such as the percentage of family annual
income that each person is willing to pay in his/her entire life in order to reduce the
probability of accident involvement of himself/herself or of any family person by 50%, the
average members per family in Greece, the proportion of families with an economically
active member, the average family annual income in Greece, the national population, the
life expectancy in Greece and the current and new accident risk.
In regards the percentage of family annual income that each person is willing to pay in
his/her entire life in order to reduce the probability of accident involvement by 50%, the
results of a recent "willingness-to-pay" survey were used [AGGELOUSI,
KANNELOPOULOU, 2002]. In this survey, respondents were asked the percentage of
annual income they were willing to pay to reduce the probability of fatal accident, injury
accident and material damage accident involvement by 50%.
It should be noted that in the willingness-to-pay survey, respondents were also asked to
rate various types of accidents and injuries in order to identify their perception on injury
severity. On the basis of the results in the present research, the value corresponding to
injury accidents is considered to adequately represent serious injury accidents, whereas
the value for material damage accidents is considered to adequately represent both slight
injury and material damage accidents.
On the basis of the above, the human cost of accidents in Greece was estimated as:
VoSL = 612,140.72 €/person for fatal accidents
VoSL = 467,703.02 €/person for serious injury accidents
VoSL = 206,339.57 €/person for minor injury and material damage accidents
It should also be underlined that the calculations concern prices of 1999. In order to
calculate the average accident cost in Greece, the costs of fatal and injury accidents were
weighted in relation to the average distribution of accident casualties per casualty severity
in Greece.
In the following Table 65, the parameters concerning accident costs in Greece are
summarized on the basis of the previous research used and the additional calculations
carried out:
Table 65: Calculation of average accident cost in Greece (1999)

 Cost of Accidents with                        Fatalities         Seriously Injured     Slightly Injured
                 Material Damage cost              28,769.42                18,174.91          13,904.19
                      Generalised cost           442,466.54                 23,906.66           6,960.30
                             Human cost          612,140.72               467,703.02         206,339.57
 Total cost                                     1,083,376.68              509,784.59         227,204.06
 Proportion of casualties                              5.81%                  11.60%             82.59%
 Average accident cost                                              309,723.25




                                                                                                   Page 180
                         INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




6             Assessment Results

On the basis of the detailed approach described in the previous sections, the cost-benefit
ratio was calculated for the "conservative" scenario and the "best" scenario. An
accumulated discount factor was applied to the benefits calculation on the basis of an
interest rate of 4% (National Statistical Service of Greece, 2003).
Table 66: Calculation of the cost/benefit ratio for the "conservative" scenario (1999-2002)

 Present value of benefits                   1999               2000                    2001                2002
      Number of accidents prevented                  42                138                      337                256
           Average accident cost (€)        309,723.25         309,723.25              309,723.25         309,723.25
         Accumulated discount factor               1.000              1.040                    1.082              1.125
                            Total (€)    12,871,643.25      44,338,168.72       112,837,881.79          89,265,963.13
 Present value of costs
      Cost of Speed Enforcement (€)       1,424,149.38        2,545,590.50            4,601,197.54       6,243,791.34
     Cost of Alcohol Enforcement (€)      2,976,917.64        5,141,148.94            8,336,339.27       8,255,456.63
 Benefit/Cost Ratio                                                         6.6:1

As shown in the above Table 66, the "conservative" scenario yielded a very high benefit-
cost ratio equal to (6.6:1). In particular, the total value of benefits for this scenario were
calculated equal to 274,696,321.34 €, whereas the enforcement implementation costs
totalled 39,524,591.23 €, all values referring to year 2002.


Table 67: Calculation of the cost/benefit ratio for the "best" scenario (1999-2002)

 Present value of benefits                  1999               2000                   2001                 2002
    Number of accidents prevented                   66                203                     482                  390
          Average accident cost (€)       309,723.25         309,723.25              309,723.25           309,723.25
       Accumulated discount factor             1.000              1.040                      1.082                1.125
                              Total     20,446,780.45      65,542,783.83      161,458,163.95           136,023,786.23
 Present value of costs
    Cost of Speed Enforcement (€)        1,424,149.38       2,545,590.50            4,601,197.54         6,243,791.34
    Cost of Alcohol Enforcement (€)      2,976,917.64       5,141,148.94            8,336,339.27         8,255,456.63
 Benefit/Cost Ratio                                                         9.7:1


Accordingly, as shown in the above Table 67, the "best" scenario yielded an even higher
benefit-cost ratio equal to (9.7:1). In particular, the total 1999-2002 value of benefits for
this scenario were found equal to 406,219,308.40 €, whereas the 1999-2002 enforcement
implementation cost totalled 39,524,591.23 €, all values referring to year 2002. In both
scenarios, the nationwide intensification of speed and alcohol enforcement in Greece was
found to be highly cost-effective.


7             Decision-Making Process

The results of this research were presented to Head Officers of the police at the Ministry of
Public Order. Although these decision-makers were not familiar with efficiency assessment
                                                                                                               Page 181
                     INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



in terms of cost-benefit analyses, they responded positively towards this work from the first
stages, contributed with data and other available information, and were very helpful in
dealing with lack of data when necessary.
Furthermore, decision-makers were very interested in the results. The high benefit-cost
ratios were received as a confirmation of the important role of the police in road safety and
a validation of the systematic efforts of the police to contribute in the reduction of road
accidents and casualties. Consequently, they intend to communicate these results to their
superiors, to the press, as well as the Head Police Officers of the various regional police
departments.
They were also asked on their possible response if the results were negative or less
encouraging. They replied that they would try to identify the more cost-effective cases
among the results and focus their efforts accordingly.
Decision-makers also expressed a high interest for more analyses and results concerning
other types of police enforcement and other road safety related activities of the police.
They also underlined that these results would have been even more useful if they were
available at earlier stages of the intensification of enforcement.


8          Implementation barriers

•   As far as the implementation of the measures is concerned, the basic barrier
    concerned the inefficiency of the process for the payment of the infringement ticket, as
    several different authorities are involved in the process (police, municipalities, tax
    computer centre, etc.). Other related barriers concerned the lack of appropriate
    number of policemen and the reactions from the drivers and the policemen against the
    systematic controls (using several different pretexts). These parameters were the main
    difficulties encountered during the early implementation period.
•   As far as the present evaluation is concerned, the main difficulty concerned the lack of
    detailed and accurate data on the specific resources allocated in the intensification of
    enforcement. As in most countries (ESCAPE, 2003), no standards to measure police
    intensity existed in Greece and no system of performance indicators for enforcement
    activity was developed. Additionally, neither police headquarters nor road safety
    authorities use such performance indicators. Consequently, the systematic recording of
    the number of police controls and related infringements achieved during the 1998-2002
    period in Greece contributed important progress in the monitoring of the enforcement
    activity as well as the road safety level in Greece.
•   Additionally, no systematic and official cost data are available in Greece. In particular,
    police costs are not systematically recorded in relation to specific actions, as labour
    and capital allocation is optimised according to the specific needs of each
    circumstance. As far as accident costs are concerned, no social values of reference
    are officially published, and the estimated values are based on survey results.
•   In the present evaluation, the lack of appropriate data for cost-benefit evaluation
    purposes was overcome by means of exhaustive interviews with experienced Head
    Officers of the police who had also been actively involved in both the decision-making
                                                                                         Page 182
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



    process and the monitoring of police effort. Additionally, existing research in Greece
    was further used to yield the necessary parameters for the computation of cost-benefit
    ratios.


9          Conclusion / Discussion

There is certainly a correlation between systematic road safety enforcement and the
number of road accidents. This road safety enforcement intensification is one of the two
basic reasons (the other one is congestion) that may explain the important decrease
observed in the number of road accidents, persons killed and injured during the last five
years in Greece.
Previous research on enforcement assessment has indicated that only a significant
increase in enforcement level may affect the number of accidents [BJØRNSKAU, ELVIK,
2003]. Additionally, very little validation of enforcement effect at the national level has been
available in international literature. In particular, most evaluation attempts concern a
temporary increase in local resources or concentrated enforcement efforts in a selected
area [ESCAPE, 2003]. However, as far as Greece is concerned, the measures were
implemented at the national level, and a systematic intensification of enforcement covering
all types of violations was achieved.
The present research has revealed a limited exploitation of assessment methods in the
decision-making process in Greece. This phenomenon is not specifically related to the
processes and administrations related to the particular research on enforcement, as CBA
and CEA evaluations are not commonly used in general in Greece.
As far as the particular case is concerned, the lack of systematic and appropriate cost data
complicated the assessment process. The co-operation of the decision-makers who
provided useful data based on their experience was very important in dealing with this
problem. However, it is obvious that a lot of additional effort is required in order to achieve
a systematic recording of police labour and capital costs, in a similar way that the related
controls and infringements were monitored since the intensification of police enforcement
in Greece.
However, the important benefit obtained from the intensification of speed and alcohol
enforcement in terms of number of accidents and casualties prevented could motivate
decision-makers towards further improvement of the implementation and monitoring of the
measures. Additionally, it is obvious that decision-makers respond very positively to results
of CBA and CEA evaluations when these are available, as their efforts and policies are
confirmed. Nevertheless, such efficiency assessment is rarely initiated, especially at the
national level.




                                                                                         Page 183
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




REFERENCES

AGAPAKIS, J., MYGIAKI, E., (2003): "Macroscopic investigation of the effect of
  enforcement on the improvement of road safety on Greece", Diploma Thesis, NTUA,
  School of Civil Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering,
  Athens.
BJØRNSKAU, T., ELVIK, R., (1992): "Can road traffic law enforcement permanently
  reduce the number of accidents?", Accident Analysis & Prevention, Volume 24, Issue 5,
  Pages 507-520.
ESCAPE CONSORTIUM (2003): "Traffic enforcement in Europe: Effects, measures,
  needs and future", The “Escape” Project Final report, Contract Nº: RO-98-RS.3047, 4th
  RTD Framework Programme.
HOLLAND, C.A., CONNER, M.T., (1996): "Exceeding the speed limit: An evaluation of the
  effectiveness of a police intervention", Accident Analysis & Prevention, Volume 28,
  Issue 5, Pages 587-597.
KANELLOPOULOU, A., AGGELOUSSI, K., (2002): "Estimation of the human cost of road
  accidents and drivers' sensitivity towards accident risk - A willingness-to-pay technique
  and a stated-preference technique", Diploma Thesis, NTUA, School of Civil
  Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
LIAKOPOULOS, D. (2002): "Development of a model for the estimation of the economic
   benefits from accident reduction in Greece", Diploma Thesis, NTUA, School of Civil
   Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
NATIONAL STATISTICAL SERVICE OF GREECE, (2003): "Greece in figures", Official
  Publication of the National Statistical Service of Greece, Athens (www.statistics.gr).
National Technical University of Athens, Dept. of Transportation Planning and Engineering,
  (2003): "A strategic plan for the improvement of road safety in Greece 1998-2002",
  Ministry of Economy and Finance.
TSAMBOULAS, D., (2004): "Evaluation of transport infrastructure projects", NTUA, School
  of Civil Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, Athens.
VAA, T., (1997): "Increased police enforcement: Effects on speed", Accident Analysis &
  Prevention, Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 373-385.
YANNIS, G., KANELLOPOULOU, A., AGGELOUSSI, K., TSAMBOULAS, D., (2003):
  "Modelling driver choices towards accident risk reduction", Article In Press, Safety
  Science.




                                                                                     Page 184
CASE I2: Concentrated General enforcement on interurban roads in israel




                               Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
                                  Transportation Research Institute




                                            ROSEBUD
                                       WP4 - CASE I REPORT


  CONCENTRATED GENERAL ENFORCEMENT ON
       INTERURBAN ROADS IN ISRAEL




                 BY VICTORIA GITELMAN AND SHALOM HAKKERT,

          TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE, TECHNION,
                            ISRAEL
                       INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




TABLE OF CONTENTS



1     PROBLEM ..........................................................................................................188
2     DESCRIPTION OF MEASURE...........................................................................189
2.1   The enforcement project ..................................................................................... 189
2.2   The follow-up study ............................................................................................. 190
3     TARGET ACCIDENT GROUP............................................................................ 191
4     ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 191
4.1   Monitoring of police activity ................................................................................. 191
4.2   Accident analysis ................................................................................................ 193
5     COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS............................................................................... 195
5.1   General ............................................................................................................... 195
5.2   Costs................................................................................................................... 196
5.3   Benefits ............................................................................................................... 197
5.4   Computation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio................................................................ 199
6     DECISION-MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................199
7     ROLE OF BARRIERS ........................................................................................ 200
8     DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 200




                                                                                                                        Page 186
                     INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



CASE OVERVIEW

Measure
A police project of concentrated general enforcement on interurban roads
Problem
Reducing the high numbers of severe accidents on main rural roads
Target Group
Accidents of all types, with fatalities or serious injuries
Targets
Improving drivers' behaviour and diminishing severe accidents on main rural roads
Initiator
National Road Safety Authority and the Police Traffic Department
Decision-makers
National Road Safety Authority and the Police Command
Costs
Additional personnel costs, additional vehicle fleet expenses and the costs of a publicity
campaign that accompanied the police project; paid by the National Road Safety Authority
and the Ministry of Interior Security
Benefits
The benefits stemmed from prevention of severe accidents, which were attained during the
project's performance. The driving public and the national economy will benefit.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
Ranges from 1:3.5 for a "conservative estimate" of the accidents prevented to 1:5 for the
"best estimate".




                                                                                    Page 187
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




1          Problem

Traffic law enforcement is believed to be a factor that contributes significantly to normative
road user behaviour and road safety. Traffic rules are usually enforced by traffic police
forces whose activity and success are generally limited by the resources that can be
applied and by established priorities. Numerous long and short-term enforcement projects
frequently accompanied by research studies have been performed throughout the world
over the last forty years, aimed at increasing the effects of police activity on driver
behaviour and road safety and, concurrently, to improve the enforcement methods in use.
Examples of literature surveys that summarize the findings of this research are Fitzpatrick
(1992); Bjornskau and Elvik (1992); Zaal (1994); Oei (1998); and OECD (1999). A number
of large-scale European studies on the subject funded by the European Commission have
also been conducted over the past ten years, including GADGET, ESCAPE and VERA.
Over the last two decades, traffic rules' enforcement became a significant share of activity
of the Israeli police. The National Traffic Police (NTP) in Israel was established in 1991 as
an operational branch of the national police, when all existing interurban traffic units came
under its direct command. At the beginning of 1997 the NTP’s responsibility covered over
3100 kilometres of interurban roads, where the traffic police forces counted more than 400
patrol officers, about 150 patrol vehicles and about 70 units of mobile enforcement tools
(speed guns and photo radar cameras).
The NTP has always been looking for more effective forms for deployment of its forces.
The approach usually applied in Israel for deployment of patrol cars on road sections can
be termed “correlative”, whereby the number of accidents that occurred on a certain road
and the traffic volumes determine the road’s priority for police enforcement. (A detailed
description of the method is given in Hakkert et al, 1991). This approach is common for the
annual and other typical plans of activity of the traffic police. Besides, as the NTP bears
the responsibility for the whole network of interurban roads, during the 90s two nationwide
enforcement experiments took place. The first of these enforcement projects was
performed following the NTP foundation in 1991, and lasted for 21 months (Zaidel et al,
1994).
At the beginning of 1997, the NTP, with the support of the National Road Safety Authority,
undertook a redeployment of its forces and started the second nationwide enforcement
project. This was called the 700-project as its basic idea was to concentrate the major part
of the NTP forces on about 700 kilometres (some 20%) of interurban roads which in 1996
contained the majority of all interurban accidents and about half of all severe rural accident
locations. The project began in April 1997 and lasted for one year. The new deployment
was aimed at increasing the enforcement activity on the roads under focus, to properly
combine the traffic and safety issues in everyday police operations, and to lead the traffic
police to a more effective use of its resources.
In contrast to most reported projects in this field, which usually tend to be localized and/or
focus on specific target behaviours and populations, the 700-project was planned on a
wide geographical scale with the intention to improve the general functioning of the NTP
forces and to determine the resource allocation and field activity modes, providing maximal
influence on drivers’ behaviour and road safety. From reviews on the subject (e.g.
Bjornskau and Elvik, 1992) it follows that changes in drivers’ behaviour and a decrease in
accident frequency can be expected when the enforcement intensity has been increased
by at least a factor of three. Due to its size, the 700-project could not satisfy this demand.
However, accounting for a general deterrence effect of such wide-scale enforcement, one
might expect changes in drivers' behaviour and in the end, in the accidents.

                                                                                       Page 188
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Besides, the potential to influence driver behaviour and accident occurrences might
increase when conventional enforcement is fortified by non-trivial enforcement tactics such
as a random scheduled deployment or the use of the field experience of the police officers
when the activity types are selected.


2         Description of measure


2.1       The enforcement project

The "700-project" was the second large-scale experiment of the National Traffic Police.
The project began in April 1997 and lasted for one year. The project involved ten out of
thirteen regional police subdivisions that comprised more than 90% of the NTP staff.
Within the project, the NTP declared a redeployment of its forces, concentrating the major
part of its resources on about 700 km of interurban roads. These were the most heavily
travelled roads throughout the country which, in 1996, contained some 60% of all
interurban accidents and about half of the severe accident locations (severe accidents are
those with serious casualties or fatalities). The declared purpose of the project was to
achieve a reduction in severe accidents on the roads in focus.
The “700 project” roads included fifteen road sections (Table 67) with a traffic volume of
17-80 thousand vehicles per day. Four of the roads, i.e. roads No 65, 70, “4-center” and
“40-south” were declared as the highest priority roads, intended for maximum enforcement
"coverage". The police planned three-shift patrols everyday on the highest priority roads,
two working day shifts on other project's roads, and 2-3 shifts per week for the rest (of the
rural network). The enforcement was announced to emphasize severe violations
(speeding, not keeping to the right, non-compliance with traffic signs and other moving
violations), however in practice it was not limited to severe violations only.
Being inspired by the Australian experience of enforcement programs combined with
publicity campaigns (Cameron et al, 1996), the Israeli Road Safety Authority initiated a
publicity campaign, which was launched simultaneously with the beginning of the 700-
project. This was the first experiment in NTP history where publicity accompanied the
police operation in a controlled manner. The campaign consisted of TV and radio
advertisements, press announcements, outdoor advertising and special yellow sign posts
indicating intensive enforcement that were erected on the shoulders of the project roads.
Two purposes were determined for the campaign: a) to inform the public about the police
enforcement project, its territory and major violations enforced; and b) to strengthen the
public feeling that the risk of apprehension had grown for those who violated traffic rules
on the project roads.
The publicity campaign in the media lasted four months, from April to July 1997. The static
outdoor advertising and signposts were left in the field till the end of the police project.




                                                                                      Page 189
                          INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




                                     Table 68: 700-project road sections

      Region     Road No       Section: from km   Length, km    AADT, 1000 vehicles   Road Type*
                               to km
      North          65              0-60             60                   30.2           D
                     70             10-52.9          42.9                  25.1           D
                     2              55-100            45                   39.7           D
                     4              157-200           43                   18.8           S
                     85              1-31             30                   21.4         D+S**
                     79              0-27             27                   17.3           S
                     77             49-75.7          26.7                  18.0           S
                     75              20-49            29                   19.4           D
      Centre         2               28-55            27                   79.5           D
                     4              85-157            72                   62.3         D+F**
                     40             248-301           53                   35.3           D
                     44              10-35            25                   29.1           D
                     1               4-56             52                   47.7           F
      South           4              51-85            34                   27.2           D
                     40             189-248           59                   30.9           D
*F – Freeway; D - Dual-carriageway; S - Single-carriageway
**Includes sections of both types


2.2           The follow-up study

An assessment study was conducted for the purpose of the follow-up of the actual project
performance and of the project’s influence on drivers’ behaviour and on road safety. This
was performed by Technion – the Transportation Research Institute in co-operation with
the Technion Statistics Laboratory. The assessment project began in March 1997 and
accompanied the police activity for the whole year [HAKKERT et al, 1998].
The underlying rationale of the evaluation study was based on the assumption of a chain
of relations between police activities and road safety [e.g. OECD, 1999; HAKKERT et al.,
2001]. It is hypothesized that the new deployment of police forces will lead to increased
enforcement on the project roads; the latter implies a growth in the actual risk of being
detected for traffic rules’ violations which, together with the accompanying publicity, raises
the subjective probability of apprehension perceived by the drivers. The subjective
probability of apprehension, together with the expected punishment for violators that is
meted out by the judicial process, constitutes the deterrence effect. Ultimately, the
deterrence and the detection in combination with proper education and training may cause
positive changes in driving norms and actual traffic behaviour in a manner that would
manifest itself in a reduction in accidents and their severity.
In order to identify changes in the components of the aforementioned relationship, the
evaluation study was designed to monitor police activity on the project roads, estimate
changes in road users’ apprehension and behaviour, and assess changes in traffic
accidents that might be attributable to the project performance. Thus, the follow-up study
of the 700-project consisted of three main parts:
                                                                                                Page 190
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



1. monitoring of everyday police operations on the project roads (shift deployments,
   activity types, citation types and locations, etc.);
2. periodic evaluation of the project’s influence on driver behaviour (through field
   observations, driver questionnaires and speed measurements);
3. the evaluation of changes in accident numbers and severity within the project area.
As the present report focuses on the economic evaluation of the enforcement project, only
data on the police activity during the project and changes observed in accident numbers
will be further discussed. A description of changes in drivers' behaviour and attitudes
which were observed during the project's performance and served as intermediate
indicators of the project's effects can be found in Hakkert et al (2001).


3          Target Accident Group

The target accident group of the enforcement project included all severe accidents, i.e.
accidents of all types, with fatalities or serious injuries. All accident types were considered
as the enforcement was of a general nature, aimed at improving drivers' obedience to
most traffic rules. The results pertaining to severe accident counts are considered as the
most appropriate to the project's objective.
The accident changes were considered on the project's roads (see Table 1). The detailed
consideration of the police patrol data (during the project's performance) revealed that
shortly after the project's beginning, the actual project territory was reduced in comparison
with the original plan, and comprised in fact about 600 kilometres of roads. Table 1
provides the actual lengths of the project road sections, whereas the changes concerned
roads No. 70, 77, 75 and “4-north” (these are not the highest priority roads). The accident
analysis and the analysis of police activity on road sections addressed these actual
lengths of the project roads.


4          Assessment results


4.1        Monitoring of police activity

A special information system was established to monitor the enforcement activity during
the project. This included the data of policemen’s shift activity reports of all the NTP
subdivisions involved in the project – a monthly input of some 4,500 records. The
policeman’s activity report provides details on patrol car locations, activity types and
citation categories produced during the shift. Using these data, three groups of summary
indices were estimated: (a) inputs - the number of police officers, patrol vehicles and
devices per site in a definite time interval (day, week, month); (b) outputs - the level of
actual police presence and the citations given; and (c) the efficiency indices, e.g. the
performance-against-plan ratios and utilization of resources. The summary indices
illustrated the police activity in the form of daily and average monthly figures, with respect
to road sections, police regions and the entire project area.
The intensity of the police enforcement over the 700-project is characterized by the
following facts:



                                                                                        Page 191
                                           INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



•     the number of patrol units within the project area during a regular weekday shift was
      about 60; during a similar weekend shift – more than 30; during a night shift – 9.5 and
      12, accordingly;
•     the average monthly amount of the patrol units in all the shifts was some 4,000 in the
      whole interurban area, of which some 2,700 in the project-area (70%) – Figure 19;
•     on average, every road section of the 700-project was patrolled about 1,760 hours
      monthly with a “production rate” of 0.83 citation per shift hour, or 1.2 citations per actual
      enforcement hour;
•     the average monthly amount of citations in the project area was more than 24,000
      (some 82% of the total), with 1460 citations per project road, on average;
•     the productivity of a patrol unit in the project area was on average 9 citations per shift,
      and 7.7 in the whole territory under the NTP responsibility. (The figure does not include
      automatic citations, produced by F6 – photo radar camera, and Marom – an infra-red
      speed and gap-following camera).


    Figure 19:Monthly number of patrol units in the course of the project (estimated amount of vehicle-shifts in
                                                 three daily shifts)
                             5000

                             4500

                             4000

                             3500

                             3000
             Vehicle-shift




                             2500

                             2000
                                                                                                          All roads under the NTP
                             1500                                                                         responsibility
                                                                                                          the project area
                             1000

                             500
                                                                                                                            month
                                0
                                    4/97

                                            5/97

                                                   6/97

                                                          7/97

                                                                 8/97

                                                                        9/97

                                                                               10/97

                                                                                       11/97

                                                                                               12/97

                                                                                                       1/98

                                                                                                              2/98

                                                                                                                     3/98




As became evident from the evaluation of most input/output indices [HAKKERT et al,
1998], project intensity did not stay constant over the whole year. There was an initial
period of increasing activity; a fall in September; some priority changes in October and a
return to routine in November, however, with a lower intensity in comparison with the initial
project period. There were also other factors pointing to two periods in the project’s
performance: the intensive publicity accompanied the project only in the first four months;
and in September, the central NTP subdivisions were restructured administratively. Finally,
                                                                                                                                    Page 192
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



a detailed consideration of police deployment (the force split between the project road
sections) determined two periods: I - from April to August, II - starting from September
1997 till the project’s completion. This was the first finding taken into consideration in the
following accident analysis.
The second important point that influenced the accident analysis was the fact that not all
road sections were characterized by the same enforcement intensity during the project.
Based on three criteria:
1. the number of patrol units per road-km per month (with a threshold of 4);
2. the rate of NTP forces allocated to the road section (5% was accepted as a
   threshold);
3. the amount of net enforcement hours on the section as opposed to the average
   value (above average was taken as considerable).
Seven road sections, out of fifteen, were chosen as having higher police presence during
the project.

4.2        Accident analysis

To assess the NTP project’s influence on safety, the trends in road accidents during the
project year were analysed. An evaluation method, which combines both the odds-ratio
and a longitudinal (time-series) analysis, was developed. Using this method, the
longitudinal models were fitted to the monthly accident counts in the “before” and the
“after” periods, for both the treatment and the comparison-group roads, followed by a
comparison of the changes. Unlike the classical methods in which the odds-ratio considers
the average behaviour “before” and “after”, this method produces odds-ratios for each time
point (month) of the “after” period.
For the accident analysis, all the roads under the NTP supervision were divided into eight
groups, according to following three characteristics:
4. Belonging to the 700–project (yes/no);
5. Police activity level within the project area (high/low presence);
6. Geographical zone (north, centre, south).
The third characteristic was added as the geographical regions differ in their traffic
patterns and, consequently, in the police activity modes. (Not nine, but eight groups were
considered, as in the south there were only two road groups: “non-project roads” and
“project roads with higher police presence”.) The roads, which did not belong to the
project, served as comparison groups in the corresponding geographical area.
The data file for the analysis consisted of the accident records from January 1995 till
March 1998. The observed monthly counts of severe accidents, both for the project and
comparison group roads, are given in the Appendix.
Models for the “before” and “after” periods, were fitted for each road category. A
generalized linear model was fitted to the monthly accident counts using the GENMOD
procedure of SAS, assuming a Poisson distribution and allowing for over-dispersion. Each
model includes a trend and seasonal component. More details can be found in [HAKKERT
et al, 2001].
Based on the fitted model for the "before" period for each month of the project period, the
expected number of accidents, had there been no intervention, were predicted. Then, a
model based on the actual data for the "after" period was also fitted. The monthly odds is
                                                                                       Page 193
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



the ratio of the predicted number of accidents according to the model based on the "after"
period and the forecast according to the model based on the "before" period. These
monthly odds were evaluated for all the roads (comparison and treatment groups).
The next stage of evaluation - the odds ratio - is required to account for possible changes
that were not necessarily caused by the intervention (project). Thus, for each month the
odds of the treatment group were divided by the corresponding odds of the comparison
group to obtain a monthly odds-ratio. This odds ratio was expected to be significantly less
than 1, had the project been effective. The "gain" (or loss in accident number due to the
treatment) was expressed as the difference between the product of the odds-ratio times
the actual count.
Table 69 provides the evaluation results. It was seen that since the project started, an
increase in accident numbers was observed in most road groups. However, the
comparison of the “during the project” accident counts with the “before” period (Table 69,
“after/before ratio”) revealed that none of the changes appeared to be significant. A further
comparison of the changes observed for the project roads with those occurred in the
proper comparison groups, demonstrated that (Table 69, “Odds-ratio”):
•   A statistically significant reduction of severe accidents, as opposed to the comparison
    group, was found on the highly enforced road sections in the centre of the country
    (mainly during the second project period);
•   No other statistically significant results were obtained. However, as can be seen in
    Table 69, in most cases the mean value of the odds ratio is much less than one and
    the average gain (the number of accidents prevented due to the project) is positive.
The summary changes in severe accidents over the project's period, in terms of the odds
ratio and the "gains" estimated, are highlighted in Table 69.
The supplementary analyses performed for all injury accidents and for the numbers of
severe casualties (serious injuries and fatalities together) provided similar results
[HAKKERT et al, 1998]. To note, separate consideration of fatalities did not bring a
significant contribution to the findings, as, due to scarce statistics, the confidence intervals
for the odds-ratio values were very wide. None of the project road groups demonstrated a
statistically significant change of all injury accidents [HAKKERT et al, 1998].
In general, it was concluded that a general deterioration in safety on the interurban roads
occurred during the project year. The phenomenon was less tangible on the project roads,
and this result ought to be, due to the concentrated police enforcement applied in this area
[HAKKERT et al, 1998].




                                                                                         Page 194
                          INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



      Table 69: Odds ratios and estimated "gains" for severe accidents on the project roads
        Evaluation  After/before       After/before       Odds ratio      Estimated           Observed
        period(1)   ratio (odds) for   ratio (odds) for                   “Gain” (2)          Accident
                    the project        comparison-                                            Count (3)
                    roads              group roads
        Road Group: North, Higher Police Presence
        I           1.75               1.29               1.35            -7.74               29
                    (0.93;3.27)        (0.90;1.86)        (0.66; 2.79)    (-19.09; 15.67)
        II          1.37               1.41               0.97            1.02                36
                    (0.75;2.50)        (0.99;2.00)        (0.49; 1.95)    (-18.18; 39.48)
        Whole       1.50               1.37               1.10            -5.92               65
        Year        (0.88;2.54)        (1.00;1.86)        (0.60; 2.02)    (-33.88; 45.61)
        Road Group: Centre, Higher Police Presence
        I           0.95               1.42               0.67            28.58               58
                    (0.70;1.29)        (0.94;2.15)        (0.40; 1.12)    (-6.07; 86.64)
        II          0.76               1.32               0.57            58.02               76
                    (0.57;1.02)        (0.89;1.96)        (0.35; 0.93)    (5.52; 143.62)
        Whole       0.82               1.36               0.61            88.06               134
        Year        (0.64;1.06)        (0.96;1.92)        (0.39; 0.93)    (9.85; 208.44)
        Road Group: South, Higher Police Presence
        I           0.85               1.06               0.80            4.18                16
                    (0.47;1.53)        (0.69;1.64)        (0.38; 1.66)    (-6.53; 26.50)
        II          0.95               1.23               0.77            6.48                22
                    (0.54;1.70)        (0.80;1.89)        (0.38; 1.59)    (-8.24; 36.67)
        Whole       0.91               1.17               0.78            10.74               38
        Year        (0.55;1.51)        (0.80;1.70)        (0.42; 1.46)    (-12.24; 53.72)
        Road Group: North, Lower Police Presence
        I           0.97               1.29               0.75            14.16               41
                    (0.63;1.48)        (0.90;1.86)        (0.43; 1.31)    (-9.91; 56.26)
        II          1.25               1.41               0.89            11.58               90
                    (0.86;1.81)        (0.99;2.00)        (0.53; 1.47)    (-29.21; 79.39)
        Whole       1.14               1.37               0.83            26.51               131
        Year        (0.82;1.59)        (1.00;1.86)        (0.53; 1.31)    (-31.67; 118.13)
        Road Group: Centre, Lower Police Presence
        I           0.79               1.42               0.56            10.56               13
                    (0.31;2.00)        (0.94;2.15)        (0.20; 1.54)    (-4.66; 52.51)
        II          0.65               1.32               0.49            19.58               19
                    (0.27;1.60)        (0.89;1.96)        (0.19; 1.31)    (-4.57; 83.76)
        Whole       0.70               1.36               0.52            30.38               32
        Year        (0.32;1.55)        (0.96;1.92)        (0.22; 1.22)    (-5.94; 116.43)
(1)
    The project periods: I (first) April-August 1997; II (second) September 1997-March 1998.
(2)
    “Gain” corresponds to loss in the accident number due to the project.
(3)
    The observed accident counts for the "before" and "after" periods, for the treatment and the comparison
group roads are given in the Appendix.


5              Cost-Benefit Analysis


5.1            General

In this section, a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) of the enforcement project is performed. The
CBA compares the measure's benefits with the measure's costs, where both values are
brought to the same economic framework. Due to the fact that a certain level of
enforcement activity was available on the roads prior to the project’s beginning and,
therefore, somehow contributed to the safety of the rural road network, the CBA will focus
on the changes associated with the project’s performance. In other words, the CBA will
                                                                                                      Page 195
                         INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



compare the additional costs that were invested in the enforcement project's performance
with the safety benefits observed.
As the time halo-effect of the enforcement project is usually limited, both the costs and the
benefits are considered for the project's period only (one year). No conversion to the
present economic values is necessary.

5.2            Costs

The additional costs, which were required for the police project's performance, are as
follows:
      1. personnel costs, including overhead;
      2. vehicle fleet expenses;
      3. publicity costs.
The additional personnel costs were associated with an increase in the police staff, which
was needed for the project's performance. A comparison of the numbers of monthly
vehicle-shifts during the project with similar data for the "before" period demonstrated that
the project's figures were 1.4-1.6 times higher [HAKKERT et al, 1998]; we shall apply an
average increase of 1.5 times.
Based on the average figure of 1760 hours of patrolling per road per month (see Section
4.1) for the 15 project's roads, the total person-hours during the project month will be
26,400. Applying the norm of 180 person-hours per month, 147 policemen appear to be
involved in the project's performance, of whom 49 compose the addition (providing a
higher than usual police presence on the project's roads).
The personnel costs of one policeman are estimated at 150,000 NIS per year23. A 100%
overhead should be added to this figure, accounting for the command, logistics, support
staff, equipment’s maintenance, citations' processing, etc. Thus, the additional personnel
costs for the project's performance were:
49 policemen * 150,000 * 2 = 14.7 million NIS (at 1997 prices)
The vehicle fleet was extended by 10 cars and 3 motorcycles for the project's
performance. The cost of a new car is $ 20,000 and a new motorcycle costs $10,000 (as
each vehicle stays in use for 5 years, on average, 20% of the initial investment belong to
the project’s costs). The annual maintenance expenses of the traffic police in 2003 were
93,000 NIS per a car and 15,000 NIS per a motorcycle. (All the estimates were provided
by the Traffic Department of the Police.) Thus, using the average rate $1 = 3.45 NIS (in
1997) and accounting for the change of price index over the years 1997-2002 (by 1.1986),
the additional expenses on the vehicle fleet can be estimated as:
10 cars * [0.2 * 20,000 $ * 3.45 + 77,590] = 913,900 NIS on cars, and
3 motorcycles * [0.2 * 10,000 $ * 3.45 + 12,515] = 58,245 NIS on motorcycles
(both figures are at 1997 prices).
The costs of publicity that accompanied the project were 5.0-7.0 million NIS24 (at 1997
prices).


23
     Provided by the Police Traffic Department
24
     Provided by the National Road Safety Authority
                                                                                      Page 196
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Besides, the additional costs of administration were considered to account for the
processing of extra citations that were produced during the project. As HAKKERT et al.
(1998) found, the productivity of the patrol units increased during the 700-project in
comparison with the previous years. The increase in the number of citations would mean
extra work for the prosecution of offenders by the police and, in some cases, by courts.
However, as known, the fines paid for traffic law violations produce revenues to the
treasury. As believed, both figures (of the additional costs and the benefits) are somewhat
similar and compensate each other’s effects. The exact figures are unknown and cannot
be easily tracked. Therefore, neither costs nor benefits stemming from the extra citations
were accounted for in our case.

5.3          Benefits

The project's benefits came from the accidents prevented due to concentrated police
enforcement. The value of benefits is estimated as the product of the number of accidents
saved and the average accident cost. In the current evaluation the severe injury accidents
are considered, as both corresponding to the project's purpose and providing more
significant results (see Section 4.2).
The number of accidents saved due to the project can be estimated in two ways:
      1. Summarizing the values of "gains" estimated by the fitted models (see Table
         69). The values are summed up through the project area, i.e. over the five
         groups of the project's roads (see Table 69). This case will be called "the
         best estimate".
      2. Applying the values of odds-ratio, i.e. the safety effects estimated (see Table
         69), the number of accidents prevented is assessed by multiplying the value
         of the safety effect by the number of accidents observed on project roads
         during the year "before". The total number of accidents prevented presents a
         sum of the values from the five groups of the project roads. In this case, a
         “conservative estimate” of benefits is provided (as less accounting for the
         general increasing trend, which was observed in the accidents on the whole
         network of interurban roads during the project year).
The details of both estimates are given in Table 70. The "best estimate" states that 150
severe accidents were prevented due to the project's performance. The “conservative
estimate” will be 108 severe accidents prevented.




                                                                                           Page 197
                        INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




Table 70: Estimating the number of severe accidents prevented due to the project's performance

 Project's road group       North,         Centre,       South,         North,          Centre,        Total
                            higher         higher        higher         lower police    lower police
                            police         police        police         presence        presence
                            presence       presence      presence
 Estimated "gain" ("best    -5.92          88.06         10.74          26.51           30.38          149.77
 estimate")
 Estimated safety effect*   +10%           -39%          -22%           -17%            -48%           N/a
 Observed "before"          62             157           48             140             38             445
 accident counts**
 Number of "saved"          -6.2           61.23         10.56          23.8            18.24          107.63
 accidents
 (“conservative
 estimate”)
*Percentage of accident reduction attributed to the measure
** Over the period April 1996-March 1997
In the current Israeli practice, the average accident cost is estimated as a sum of injury
costs and damage costs of an average accident in the target accidents’ group. The injury
costs are a sum of injury-values multiplied by the average number of injuries with different
severity levels, which were observed in the target accidents’ group. The road accident
injury values are usually taken as $ 500,000 per fatality, $ 50,000 per serious injury, and $
5,000 per slight injury [HAKKERT and GITELMAN, 1999]. The damage value is stated as
10% of the injury costs.
The above values of injury should be treated as conservative because a recent evaluation
of losses from road accidents in Israel recommended a higher estimate of the fatality-
value, of $ 930,000 [MATAT, 2004]. The latter accounts for both lost output and human
costs, i.e. accounts for the ‘willingness-to-pay’ approach.
      Table 71 illustrates the calculation of injury costs for an average severe accident
observed on rural roads over the year 1997. The injury costs of an average severe
accident are NIS 663,815; with the addition of damage-costs, the value of average severe
accident is NIS 730,196 (at 1997 prices).



            Table 71: Estimating injury costs for an average severe accident on rural roads in 1997

              Value                                Fatality         Serious injury     Slight injury
              Total number of injuries in severe   288              1285               1494
              accidents
              The number of severe accidents       1122             1122               1122
              Average number of injuries per       0.257            1.145              1.332
              accident
              Injury values, $                     500,000          50,000             5,000
              Total injury costs of average        $ 192,410 or NIS 663,815
              severe accident (at 1997 prices)*
               *$ 1 = 3.45 NIS


                                                                                                         Page 198
                           INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



5.4            Computation of the Cost-Benefit Ratio

 Table 72 illustrates the calculation of the cost-benefit ratio (CBR) of the enforcement
project. The total value of the project's costs was of 21-23 million NIS (at 1997 prices), or
about 6 million Euros (at 2002 prices). The total value of the project's benefits was of 79-
109 million NIS (at 1997 prices), or of 21-29 million Euros (at 2002 prices). Consequently,
the value of CBR was better than 1:3.5 for the "conservative estimate" of the accidents
prevented and about 1:5 for the "best estimate".
For the range of cost and benefit assumptions considered, the enforcement project
appears to be cost-effective.
    Table 72: Costs and benefits of the enforcement project considered

      Costs                                           Benefits              "Best          "Conservative
                                                                            estimate"      estimate"
      Personnel, with overhead,          14.7         Number of severe           150             108
      million NIS                                     accidents saved
      Vehicle fleet, million NIS    0.914 + 0.058     Average accident         730,196         730,196
                                                      cost, NIS
      Publicity, million NIS        From 5.0 to 7.0
      Total, million NIS (1997)     From 20.672 to    Total, million NIS       109.53           78.86
                                       22.672         (1997)
      Total, million Euro (2002)*    From 5.53 to     Total, million Euro        29.3            21.1
                                        6.07          (2002)*
                                                      Cost-benefit ratio    From 1 : 5.3   From 1 : 3.8
                                                                            to 1 : 4.8     to 1 : 3.5
          *Change of price index over 1997-2002 is 1.1986. In 2002: 1 Euro = 4.48 NIS.


6              Decision-Making Process

The follow-up study of the enforcement project was initiated by the National Road Safety
Authority. The study's steering committee included representatives from the Ministry of
Interior Security, National Road Safety Authority and the Police Traffic Department. The
evaluation results were reported to the Head and other high level decision-makers of the
Road Safety Authority and to the Traffic Police Command.
The follow-up consideration of the enforcement project concerned mostly the changes in
actual driver behaviour, drivers' attitudes and accident numbers. As the majority of
accident changes observed on the project's roads were statistically not significant, the
project's results were stated as "moderate" [HAKKERT et al, 2001]. Such a "conservative"
estimate was given to the project also accounting for a decrease in the project's intensity
during the second half of the project's year, changes in the force deployment over the
project's year, and lack of a strict policy in the enforcement modes applied by the different
police units. One of the main reasons for the limited success was seen in the gap between
the project target and everyday enforcement activity. The recommendations were given to
develop more focused enforcement operations, i.e. shorter in time, more concentrated in
area/enforcement subject, and more flexible in performance by the police units [HAKKERT
et al, 1998]. To note, in the coming years, 1998-1999, a series of short-term enforcement
experiments was performed by the Israeli Traffic Police.


                                                                                                        Page 199
                     INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



The cost-benefit analysis presented in this report actually rehabilitates the 700-project
demonstrating that in spite of the doubts as to the significance and consistency of the
results attained, the project was definitely beneficial from the economic viewpoint.
It is believed that a repeat discussion on the project's results with the decision-makers, and
especially with the Police Command, will stimulate the performance of other projects of
intensive police enforcement.


7          Role of barriers

None of the known barriers to the use of the efficiency assessment tools [WP2, 2004]
played a serious role in the CBA of the enforcement project considered. Both the Traffic
Department of the Police and the National Road Safety Authority assisted in collecting the
data to perform the economic evaluation. The police enforcement project was initiated by
the Israeli authorities based on the international experience that proved the effectiveness
of such a measure for improving drivers' behaviour and road safety. Therefore, neither
institutional nor implementation barriers to the EAT application seem to be relevant in this
case.
The technical barriers, e.g. lack of knowledge of safety effect, were overcome by means of
relevant data collection and fitting statistical models for various evaluation needs.


8          Discussion

The concentrated general police enforcement project took place for a whole year on the
most heavily travelled interurban roads in Israel. The project aimed at a reduction in
severe accidents on the roads in focus and, concurrently, at an improvement in the Traffic
Police working modes. The project did not attain its full purpose, as a significant reduction
of severe accidents was found only on one of the five project road groups. However, in
four of the five project road groups the mean value of the odds ratio was much less than
one, indicating a positive average safety effect.
The economic evaluation based on the average values of safety effects demonstrated that
the enforcement project was beneficial. An important finding of this study is that had the
cost-benefit analysis been performed immediately after the police project completion, the
conclusions of the evaluation study would have been more optimistic than those given in
the report by Hakkert et al. (1998).
The CBA compared the additional costs, which were required for the police project
performance with the safety benefits (severe accident savings) attained. The CBA
presented in this study can be characterized as follows:
    •   the evaluation findings support the measure's implementation;
    •   to estimate the safety effects statistical models were fitted to the accident
        data and the evaluation was in line with the criteria of correct safety
        evaluation [WP3, 2004];
    •   the accident costs were fitted to the accident type considered, however, they
        should be treated as conservative as the injury costs did not account for the
        ‘willingness-to-pay’ component;
    •   the measure does not have a long-term effect, therefore both costs and
        benefits were considered for the year of implementation only;
                                                                                        Page 200
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



   •   the evaluation study was initiated by the authorities and the results were
       accepted by the decision-makers;
   •   the barriers for the CBA's performance did not play an essential role in the
       case presented.
The limitations of the CBA performed are as follows:
   •   the calculation of benefits was based on mean values of safety effects,
       whereas part of them were not stated as statistically significant;
   •         the economic analysis considered the benefits stemming from the
       project's safety effect only. Neither environmental impact nor mobility effect
       was quantified, as the influence of the enforcement project appears to be
       insignificant in this sense.




                                                                                        Page 201
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)




References

BJORNSKAU, T. and ELVIK, R. (1992): Can road traffic law enforcement permanently
  reduce the number of accidents? Accident Analysis & Prevention 24, 507-520.
CAMERON, M., NEWSTEAD, S. and GANTZER, S. (1996) Effects of enforcement and
  supporting publicity programs in Victoria, Australia. Proceeding of International
  Conference on Traffic Safety on Two Continents, Prague, Czech Republic; VTI
  konferens 4A, part 4, pp. 244-253.
FITZPATRICK, K (1992): A Review of Automated Enforcement. Compendium of
  Technical Papers, Institute of Transportation Engineers, pp.184-188.
HAKKERT, A. S., YELINEK, A. and EFRAT, E. (1991): Police surveillance methods and
  police resource allocation models. In Enforcement and Rewarding: Strategies and
  Effects, eds M. J. Koornstra and J. Christensen, pp. 98-101. SWOV, Leidschendam, the
  Netherlands.
HAKKERT, A.S., GITELMAN V., COHEN, A., DOVEH, E., UMANSKY, T., SHINAR, D.
  (1998): A Follow-up Study of a New Deployment of the National Traffic Police in 1997 -
  Focused Police Enforcement. Research Report No. 98-268, Transportation Research
  Institute, Technion, Israel (in Hebrew).
HAKKERT A. S. and GITELMAN V. (1999): Development of a National Road Safety
  Program in Israel: Baseline, Components and Lessons. Proceedings of Int. Conf. Traffic
  Safety on Two Continents, Malmo, Sweden; VTI konferens 13A, part 3, pp. 75-92.
HAKKERT, A.S., GITELMAN V., COHEN, A., DOVEH, E., UMANSKY, T. (2001): The
  evaluation of effects on driver behaviour and accidents of concentrated general
  enforcement on interurban roads in Israel. Accident Analysis and Prevention 33, pp. 43-
  63.
MATAT (2004): Road Accidents in Israel: the scope, the characteristics and the estimate
  of losses to the National Economy. MATAT - Transportation Planning Centre ltd,
  Ministry of Transport.
OECD (1999): Enforcement. Chapter 5 in Safety Strategies for Rural Roads. Road
  Transport and Intermodal Research, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
  Development, IRRD No 491006, Paris.
OEI, H.L. (1998): The Effect of Enforcement on Speed Behaviour; A Literature Study.
  Proceedings of International Conference ‘Road Safety in Europe’, Bergisch Gladbach,
  Germany; VTI konferens 10A, part 10, pp.107-118.
ZAAL, D. (1994):Traffic Law Enforcement: A Review of the Literature. Report No.53,
  Accident Research Centre, Monash University, Australia.
ZAIDEL, D. M., HOCHERMAN, I. and HAKKERT, A. S. (1994): Evaluation of a National
  Traffic Police Force, Transportation Research Record 1401, Transportation Research
  Board, Washington, D. C., pp.37-42.
WP3 (2004): Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.
WP2 (2004): Barriers to the use of efficiency assessment tools in road safety policy.
 ROSEBUD.




                                                                                        Page 202
                    INTENSIFICATION OF POLICE ENFORCEMENT (SPEED AND ALCOHOL)



Appendix: The observed counts of severe accidents for the road groups considered
                 Non-project road groups                       Project road groups
Year   Month    North     Centre     South     North,     Centre,     North,     Centre,     South,
                                               lower       lower      higher     higher      higher
                                               police     police      police     police      police
                                             presence   presence presence presence         presence
95     1       33        19         11       17         4           6          11          5
       2       18        9          15       12         5           11         9           3
       3       22        9          13       15         5           9          12          4
       4       25        7          14       13         3           8          11          4
       5       23        12         22       12         5           8          10          3
       6       32        9          15       20         3           8          13          7
       7       26        11         22       16         3           12         13          9
       8       31        8          12       16         2           1          11          5
       9       25        13         10       13         0           3          8           3
       10      25        12         19       9          5           5          8           4
       11      25        11         17       7          2           5          13          4
       12      30        14         13       16         3           3          15          5
96     1       28        10         14       10         4           8          13          7
       2       29        9          16       9          4           9          7           2
       3       20        12         9        15         1           4          11          7
       4       18        4          17       15         2           7          9           3
       5       22        17         15       11         0           4          14          5
       6       27        8          21       11         4           6          10          9
       7       27        12         14       8          5           4          13          4
       8       29        7          21       7          6           4          16          3
       9       11        11         7        15         5           5          13          5
       10      22        12         10       13         4           6          16          4
       11      23        6          13       10         7           7          12          3
       12      21        9          4        14         0           6          16          4
97     1       18        8          11       12         2           6          9           2
       2       15        5          19       14         3           4          17          1
       3       19        6          10       10         0           3          12          5
       4       22        9          12       11         1           3          9           2
       5       21        14         14       11         2           2          18          4
       6       30        8          19       6          6           9          10          3
       7       34        13         18       10         4           9          12          5
       8       26        7          17       14         1           9          18          4
       9       27        6          19       10         3           4          13          3
       10      11        5          15       7          0           3          9           4
       11      24        7          13       18         1           1          10          3
       12      36        10         10       13         5           9          14          4
98     1       29        9          16       14         3           7          11          4
       2       17        18         16       12         1           7          11          2
       3       23        13         7        16         6           5          8           2




                                                                                              Page 203
CASE J1: 2 + 1 roads in Finland




                                        ROSEBUD
                                  WP4 – CASE J REPORT



                                   2 + 1 ROADS IN FINLAND




                                      BY MARKO NOKKALA,

                           VTT BUILDING AND TRANSPORT, FINLAND
                                             2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1.   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ....................................................................................... 207
2.   DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE................................................................... 207
3.   TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 208
4.   ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 209
5.   METHOD OF ANALYSIS.................................................................................... 209
6.   ASSESSMENT QUANTIFICATION .................................................................... 210
7.   ROLE OF BARRIERS ........................................................................................ 211
8.   DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 211




                                                                                                               Page 205
                                     2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
The measure is to construct 2+1 roads with pavement in the middle of a narrow highway.
Problem
Head-on collisions have been frequent in traffic in Finland and Sweden, with the number of
fatalities resulting from the accidents increasing as a proportion of total road accidents.
Target Group
All the road users driving on Finnish roads and highways where new 2+1 construction
takes place.
Targets
The safety measures applied in the middle of the road have two main objectives: To avoid
the head-on collisions of the vehicles off their lane and to reduce the accident severity of
the remaining crashes.
Initiator
In Finland, the national road authorities have been responsible of road construction to
produce the required alterations and investments for 2+1 roads. The discussion on the
safety impact of the measure has been centred on by a few key experts, otherwise the
measure is not widely promoted.
Decision-makers
Decision-makers are usually located in the headquarters of the national road authorities,
but if 2+1 roads are part of major national level investments, then the participation of
national level (i.e. Ministry) decision-makers is required.
Costs
For Finland, the total costs of the 2+1 road construction have so far been 417 million
Euros, which has resulted in over 500 kilometres of 2+1 road constructions, mostly as
short overtaking sections rather than a full road length.
Benefits
The main benefit from implementing the measure consists of an important reduction of the
number of head-on collisions at a cost lower than that of highway construction. These
benefit mainly national level decision-makers, insurance companies and those road users
who still experience a traffic accident, but with less damage than in the absence of the 2+1
road.
Cost-Benefit Ratio
The Cost-Benefit Ratio is 1.25.




                                                                                     Page 206
                                      2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND




1          Problem

Both Finland and Sweden have committed to a version of zero-tolerance for traffic
accidents with fatalities. Whilst it has been realised that the random variable in causing the
accidents cannot be controlled, several studies have addressed the efficiency of various
measures in preventing accidents (see, for instance, Peltola and Wuolijoki (2003) and
Kärki et al. (2001) for reviews of such typologies). However, these studies do not list the
construction of 2+1 roads into road safety measures list, which has only been a recent
addition (see Annex for latest available cost-effectiveness information on road safety
measures in Finland).
Head-on collisions have been one of the major causes of fatal accidents on roads in
Nordic countries. In 1998 the Swedish National Road Administration, Vägverket, started a
development project on 13-meter wide roads. The rationale for the program was that the
construction of a wider road would be a cost-effective way of increasing road safety on
highways, compared to alternative measures resulting in the same net effect in prevention
of crashes and fatalities.
Finland has been slow to use the 2+1 road as a solution to prevent the accidents. The
National Road Administration in Finland has studied the Swedish case with close interest,
but the frequency of adopting the measure has not been transferred to Finnish context. In
Sweden, however, there have been frequent campaigns to show the cost-efficiency of this
measure [NTF 2003]. It has been estimated that one kilometre of 2+1 road costs one-
twentieth of the cost of one kilometre of motorway, which has been translated into an
argument that building a motorway is not in fact an efficient way to increase road safety
compared to the 2+1 road solution.
Head-on collisions have been a severe problem as a percentage of total fatalities in
Finland; between 1996-2000 an average of 80-85 percent of fatal accidents on two-lane
highways were due to head-on crashes. For Sweden, figures for 1993-2000 show that 140
people were killed in head-on collisions, while the number of severely injured was 450 for
the same period.
For this case study a comparative study of Finnish and Swedish experiences were chosen
to study the decisions made in choosing the 2+1 road as means to prevent accidents.
Particularly in Finland, the decision-making on road construction does not take into
consideration a pure road safety aspect; the decisions are always based on the socio-
economic profitability of the project, where traffic safety is only one of the dimensions. This
is explained in greater detail in the section dealing with the assessment method.


2          Description of the measure

2+1 road construction is a measure where an existing road is updated to have a middle
lane changing direction every 1-2.5 kilometres. Of course, alternatively the construction
method can be applied to new road sections as well, but since the upgrading is a low-cost
measure compared to, for instance, construction of a new motorway, the standard
application is to existing road sections.
In principle, the 2+1 road construction takes place on 13-meter-wide roads, and it is
considered as means of upgrading other solutions, mainly wide shoulders or wide lanes.
Figure 20 illustrates the principle difference between these three approaches. Between the
three different approaches, the distinctive advantage of the 2+1 solution is that it prevents
head-on collisions, whereas wide shoulders and wide lanes allow for greater driving
                                                                                        Page 207
                                             2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



margins and can prevent crashes out of the roads with more margins. As noted, the most
effective crash reduction will result from the reduction in head-on collisions.
    Figure 20: Construction possibilities for 13-meter wide road: Wide shoulders, wide lanes and 2+1 design




Source: Larsson et al.
The road construction must also pay great deal of attention to switching the overtaking
lane from one side to another. The principles of this are shown in Figure 21. There are
signals both on the road and on the side to indicate the width of the overtaking lane to the
other side.
                                 Figure 21: Designing the lane transition zone




            Source: Larsson et al.


We will limit the analysis in this case study to the case where the 2+1 road is constructed
with fixed median cable, which is also the most common way of constructing the 2+1
roads. The more recent promotion of 2+2 road is obviously even more effective way of
increasing road safety in Nordic roads, but there is limited data from both countries in
terms of the impacts of these roads.


3             Target group

The construction of new roads using the 2+1 design is likely to benefit all road users, with
the reduction of head-on collisions. For those road users who cause the possibility of an
                                                                                                     Page 208
                                     2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



accident, for instance by sleeping behind the wheel, the immediate benefit is the reduction
to zero in the probability to have a serious head-on collision. The measure is considered
effective in fully preventing the head-on collision. For the drivers who are in danger of
facing a possible head-on collision, the benefit is derived from the fact that the probability
again is diminished by the existence of a middle road cable.


4          Assessment method

Sweden has been ahead of Finland in designing and implementing the 2+1 road
construction. There is a relatively well-documented, existing database on the constructed
sections of the 2+1 roads produced by VTI, the Swedish National Institute for Transport
Research. In Finland, the choice of methods for upgrading roads, particularly from the
safety point of view, has been unsatisfactory, focusing on speed improvements over low-
cost safety measures.
Finnish aggregate data on accidents shows that the cost-effectiveness of the 2+1 road is
of average in terms of cost for accident prevention [NOKKALA and PELTOLA 2004]. So
far, 575 kilometres of road with the 2+1 structure has been built at the cost of 417.6 million
euros. The associated reduction in fatal accidents is estimated to be around 29 accidents
annually, and in accidents resulting in death an average of 5.5 accidents are prevented
annually. In discussions with the representatives of National Road Administration, a case
study for the CBA was selected to represent a typical project focusing on the 2+1 road
construction.
For Finland, the TARVA program can be used for assessing the accidents on road
networks. TARVA contains detailed information on the road network based on road
addresses and information on investment projects (broken down by components) and
accidents data assigned to road address. This model can be used to analyse the reduction
in accidents for each given section of the road network.


5          Method of analysis

Finland uses a specific procedure for evaluating the transport projects: socio-economic
profitability analysis. This is a method that combines both quantitative and qualitative
techniques, but is very much based on CBA. The following components of the calculation
need to be produced, and the Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications has
published a set of official values to be used:
    •   Accident costs
    •   Time savings
    •   Vehicle costs
    •   Emissions
    •   Noise
    •   Maintenance costs
    •   Investments
The standard methodology can be applied to the case of 2+1 road, but a word of caution is
needed. The method tends to heavily stress the role of time saving component, often
overlooking other dimensions of analyses. Relying on cost-effectiveness methods could be
more appropriate, but it is against the evaluation principles. Therefore, we apply the

                                                                                       Page 209
                                          2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



standard methodology keeping in mind the constraints. Table 73 below shows the unit
values used in analyses.
        Table 73: Unit values for various components on the socio-economic profitability analysis

        COMPONENT                              UNIT PRICE
           VEHICLE COST LIGHT/HEAVY                 24.7/84.8
            VEHICLES PER KILOMETRE
                   (+VAT), CENTS
        Time savings light/heavy vehicles per       10.6/26.7
        km, cents
        Severe accident €                            386,832
        Accident, death €                          2,430,316
        Accident, average €                           84,094
        Emission costs per ton, average
        *SO2                                          8,322
        *NOX                                           734
        *PM2,5                                       103,537
        *CO                                             16
        Noise (annualised cost per inhabitant)         959
        €
        Source: Finnish Ministry for Transport and Telecommunications
Figures in Table 73 are officially used in all Finnish transport project appraisals and their
unit values are confirmed by the Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications.


6          Assessment quantification

The calculations have been complicated by the fact that the construction of road sections
in Finland is taking place on the terms of developing the road as a whole, as opposed to
constructing a separate measure, such as the pavement alone. In fact, in many cases the
centre of the road pavement is part of an upgrading of existing road, where traffic volumes
have increased to degrade the existing road. On the other hand, as explained in the
previous section, the use of the socio-economic profitability calculus allows one to take
into consideration the full impact of the investment, including the changes in speed.
For the calculation we have applied the socio-economic profitability analyses, with a 5
percent discount rate and maintenance period of 20 years. The technical durability of the
2+1 road is most likely less than 20 years, as new methods to construct motorways with
lower costs create pressures to upgrade the roads eventually.
The Finnish case is from Highway Nr. 4 (VT 4), from the section between Lahti and
Heinola. This particular section of the road is considered one of the rare congested
highways outside the Helsinki metropolitan area. The road was constructed into 2+1
format in 1993 and the section is 26 kilometres long (Hiltunen 2004). However, the road is
constructed without the median cable, as the solution is from 1993 when the construction
was not fashionable. In the Finnish context the road has a large traffic flow, 12,000
vehicles per day (Tuovinen et al. 2004). Data on traffic volumes and driving times was
available from both the pre-investment period and the period during which the road has
been operational.
Accident risk on the Lahti-Heinola road was estimated for the period 1998-2002 as 1.4
deaths per 100 million driven kilometres and 5.5 million severe accidents per 100 million

                                                                                                    Page 210
                                      2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



driven kilometres. These figures were extrapolated to the period of 1993-1998 and
contrasted with data from 1988-1993 to estimate the change in accidents.
The safety impact of the measure is considered to be 100% elimination of head-on
collisions and the fatalities resulting from these accidents if a median cable is inserted. The
median cable is able to fully prevent the accidents with vehicles from other lanes, but can
only partially reduce other damages from accidents where vehicles collide with the cable.
In monetary terms, however, the size of an average accident is reduced significantly.
However, in Finland there exists only one section of the road that has 2+1 construction
with a median cable. We were forced to use an example without the median cable, which
results in lower accident prevention rate.
The total cost of the project was estimated at 11.5 million Euros, which consisted of both
upgrading the road and the necessary expansion of the road width.
Using the data available, the socio-economic profitability analysis was carried out. The
resulting benefit-cost ratio was 1.25. The project was considered acceptable by pure
financial terms, even if the benefit-cost ratio was modest. The calculations have not been
subject to significant sensitivity analysis, but it can be noted that the main factor that may
change the calculus significantly is the change in driving speed, but this in fact is well
documented and should not be subject to too much variability.


7          Role of barriers

Barriers to constructing this type of road exist, and in decision-making this appears at all
hierarchy levels. Planners avoid the 2+1 solution in the first place because they know that
it will face resistance at high levels of decision-making. This is why there has been only
one example of the measure so far. New, smaller examples of simply constructing
overtaking lanes have adopted the principle of always having the median cable, which is a
clear indicator of the observed effect of the cable in preventing collision accidents.
Unlike in Sweden, Finnish decision-making seems to take the alternative, but more costly,
route of upgrading roads to broader motorways instead of 2+1 roads. This is perhaps in
the long-term interest of the government, but it overlooks the important cost factor.
Data availability for conducting the case study was good and authorities were helpful in
compiling required data. This suggests that the real problem of adopting the method lies
outside the authorities and is within the decision-making system.


8          Discussion

The findings show that the results are promising in terms of the expected reduction in
head-on-collisions. The value for the Finnish case in the CBA is unexpectedly low, perhaps
an indication of the relatively little impact of the safety in the socio-economic profitability
analysis. In the case of major investment programs, effects other than safety tend to
dominate the analyses and the isolation of the safety impact alone become meaningless,
as the project would not have been implemented by constructing the safety measure
alone. This is because the construction of 2+1 road requires updating the existing road
and possibly carrying out a number of supporting measures to be able to install the median
cable.
The section between Lahti and Heinola is already in an upgrading process. The 2+1 road
will be replaced by a motorway later in 2005. Therefore, obtaining long-term series data on

                                                                                        Page 211
                                       2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



the safety effect of the 2+1 road will not be possible. This also makes it difficult to interpret
the CBA results, where the estimated maintenance time was 20 years, but it now appears
to remain around 12 years.


REFERENCES

HILTUNEN, L. (2004): Uusien tietyyppien liikenneturvallisuus. Seminar paper at Helsinki
  Technical University.
KÄRKI, O., H. PELTOLA JA A. WUOLIJOKI (2001): Tienpidon toimien
  turvallisuusvaikutukset. Tie- ja liikenneolojen hallintajärjestelmän (TILSU) sisältämien
  toimien arviointi. Tiehallinnon sisäisiä julkaisuja 47/2001. Helsinki.
LARSSON, M., T. BERGH JA A. CARLSSON (2003): Swedish Vision Zero Experience.
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS (2003): Guidelines for
  project appraisal. In Finnish, with English abstract.
NOKKALA, M. JA H. PELTOLA (2004): Tienpidon uus- ja laajennusinvestointien
  kustannustehokkuus liikenneturvallisuuden näkökulmasta (LIIKUTUS). Publication in
  LINTU-program, the Finnish program for traffic safety.
SUMMALA, H. (2003): Kohtaamisonnettomuudet: Pääteiden suurin turvallisuusongelma.
  In Tiennäyttäjä 6/2003.
TARVA (2003). TARVA 4.4 Käyttöohje. Liite 2: Keskimääräiset onnettomuusasteet ja K-
  arvot.
Tuovinen, P., T. Luttinen, Å. Enberg (2004): Traffic Flow Characteristics on main road 4
  between Lahti and Heinola in Finland. In Finnish, with English abstract.




                                                                                          Page 212
                                                       2 +1 ROADS IN FINLAND



Annex - Measures to improve traffic safety in Finland
                                                     Toimenp    KVL        Hinta   Hvjonn.    Kuolem.    Hinta M€/vaikutus-   1.vuod
                                                       matka   aj/vrk       yht.    vähen.     vähen.      aikana säästetty    tuotto
     Nro   Toimenpide                                     km             1000 €     vuosit.    vuosit.      hvjo      kuoll    % inv.
     921   Kameravalvonta (50%)                          597    7461       1889      12,51      2,864       0,01        0,0    502,1
     684   Nopeusrajoitus 100 -> 80 km/h                  29    2159          13      0,31      0,083       0,00        0,0   1979,6
     685   Nopeusrajoitus 80 -> 60 km/h                   11    6066          10      0,44      0,058       0,00        0,0   2515,7
     676   Nopeusrajoitus 50 -> 40 km/h                    2    3885           2      0,10      0,016       0,00        0,0   3171,4
     678   Nopeusrajoitus 60 -> 50 km/h                    2    2335           1      0,02      0,003       0,00        0,0   1147,9
     502   Jäykät pylväät myötääviksi                     10   15914          70      0,23      0,055       0,02        0,1    256,9
     383   Liikennetieto-ohjaus, valmiit valot            50    5223        162       0,28      0,065       0,04        0,2    131,1
     924   Ajosuuntien erottaminen rakent.               297    9013      26653       9,71      2,965       0,14        0,4     33,0
     639   Kaiteiden kunnostus                             3    7441          59      0,01      0,006       0,21        0,5     27,2
     361   Uusi tievalaistus jäykin pylväin                4   12573        224       0,17      0,022       0,09        0,7     43,1
     362   Uusi tievalaistus myötäävin pylväin           615    5271      33259      13,98      2,933       0,16        0,8     30,3
     601   Koroke päätien suojatielle                      0    5479          15      0,01      0,001       0,08        0,8     31,8
     631   Kaiteiden rakentaminen                        121    6183       6137       2,04      0,359       0,15        0,9     21,8
     503   Kallioleikkausten leventäminen                 15    5951        782       0,11      0,044       0,35        0,9     15,4
     521   Muuttuva nopeusrajoitus                       620   16011      24291      10,16      1,563       0,16        1,0     25,6
     132   Kevytliikenteen ylikulku                        0    5479          57      0,02      0,003       0,15        1,0     20,7
     504   Esteiden poistaminen                           84   12139       5162       1,89      0,212       0,14        1,2     19,5
     638   Liittymämerkintöjen tehostaminen                0    2055           6      0,01      0,001       0,17        1,2     69,0
     905   Kapea 4-kaistatie                             557    8500     336214      63,46     13,252       0,26        1,3     13,6
     342   Linja-autopysäkki maaseudulla                   2    3303          62      0,02      0,002       0,17        1,6     15,4
     913   Yksityistiejärj.                             1185    5368      74331      16,66      2,199       0,22        1,7     12,8
     501   Luiskien loiventaminen                        214    4912      16677       1,28      0,481       0,65        1,7       8,0
     289   Väistötilan rakentaminen                       83    3812       9092       1,90      0,265       0,24        1,7     12,2
     912   Kevytliikenne rinnakkaisväyl.                 159    5780       6553       0,67      0,156       0,49        2,1       7,8
     658   Taajaman saneeraus                             11    4718       2329       0,66      0,054       0,18        2,2     13,4
     922   Mol -> MO                                      72   12477     163602       4,18      3,329       1,96        2,5       4,7
     602   Suojatien valo-ohjaus                           0    5479          43      0,02      0,001       0,18        2,9     16,2
     261   Lisäkaistan rakentaminen                       50   25043       5524       1,74      0,090       0,16        3,1     13,1
     634   Reunapaalut, 100 km/h                         109     903        368       0,16      0,024       0,45        3,1     26,6
     381   Uusi valo-ohjaus, 4-haaraliittymä               4   13387       3798       0,70      0,074       0,36        3,4       9,5
     902   Ohituskaistatie+kaide                         575    5230     417642      28,95      5,595       0,72        3,7       4,8
     288   Kiertoliittymän rakentaminen                    9    6531      15521       1,61      0,198       0,48        3,9       5,7
     914   Riista-aita, mol                              449    7680      14219       2,53      0,166       0,28        4,3       7,9
     301   Kiihdytyskaista eritasoliittymään              10   13980       4575       0,32      0,052       0,71        4,4       4,4
     282   Liittymän porrastaminen                        87    4774      94172       5,88      1,022       0,80        4,6       4,1
     281   Keskisaarekkeen rakentaminen                    2    5365        419       0,04      0,004       0,50        5,2       5,0
     911   Kevyen liikenteen väylän rak.                 544    5161      82065       3,54      0,777       1,16        5,3       3,2
     285   Nelihaaraliittymän kanavoinnin täydent.         2    5753        847       0,07      0,007       0,65        6,0       4,0
     173   Kapean tien leventäminen, maaseutu           1926    2278     284883      15,53      2,177       0,92        6,5       3,2
     290   Sivuteiden saarekkeen rakentaminen              4    3484        545       0,05      0,004       0,58        6,8       4,1
     283   Liittymän siirto parempaan paikkaan            15    5288       6937       0,39      0,049       0,88        7,1       3,2
     133   Henkilöauto & kevytliikenne alikulku           33    6404      69925       2,87      0,468       1,22        7,5       2,6
     482   Riista-aita muilla teillä                     261    5311       6008       1,05      0,036       0,29        8,3       6,7
     382   Uusi valo-ohjaus, 3-haaraliittymä               4    7671       3232       0,21      0,025       1,05        8,6       3,5
     172   Suuntauksen parantaminen, maaseutu            618    4325     299068      15,07      1,709       0,99        8,7       2,7
     284   Nelihaaraliittymän täyskanavointi              26    4988      26771       1,07      0,140       1,25        9,6       2,3
     131   Kevytliikenteen alikulku                       72    5588      73054       1,59      0,287       2,30      12,7        1,4
     302   Eritasoliittymän täydentäminen                 31   17653      46299       3,64      0,168       0,64      13,8        3,2
     102   Kevytliikenteen väylän parantaminen             2    3005        298       0,01      0,001       1,35      14,9        1,8
     632   Näkemäraivaus                                 104    3462        467       0,16      0,009       1,00      17,3      14,3
     915   Eritasoliittymän rakent.                       80    8387     983502      20,62      2,385       2,39      20,6        1,1
     286   Kolmihaaraliittymän kanavointi                 67    4820      73795       1,00      0,139       3,70      26,5        0,8
     287   Liittymän kevyt parantaminen                   20    5747       2945       0,35      0,030       2,77      32,7        5,8
     923   Yksittäisen ohituskaistan rakent.             138    4219      42294       0,15      0,000      14,58          -       0,1
     901   Ohituskaistatie                                 4    5479       2131       0,12     -0,011       0,86          -       0,8
     690   Nopeusrajoitus Kesä 80->100 km/h                5    5619           4     -0,10     -0,032           -         - -2359,4
     681   Nopeusrajoitus 70 -> 80 km/h                    4    7581           1     -0,34     -0,106           -         - -31224,0
     679   Nopeusrajoitus 60 -> 70 km/h                    4    7581           2     -0,34     -0,110           -         - -15999,0
     903   Leveäkaistatie                                 65    6324      42866       2,24     -0,153       0,96          -       1,0
     683   Nopeusrajoitus 80 -> 100 km/h                  69    6924        134      -3,60     -1,051           -         - -2364,9
           YHTEENSÄ                                    10240    6091    3297108    246,75      45,133       0,68        3,7       5,0

     Source: Nokkala and Peltola, 2004




                                                                                                                                    Page 213
CASE J2: 2 + 1 roads in Sweden




                                       ROSEBUD
                                 WP4 – CASE J REPORT



                                  2 + 1 ROADS IN SWEDEN




                                     BY MARKO NOKKALA,

                          VTT BUILDING AND TRANSPORT, FINLAND
                                           2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN




TABLE OF CONTENTS


1   PROBLEM TO SOLVE ....................................................................................... 217
2   DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE...................................................................217
3   TARGET GROUP ............................................................................................... 219
4   ASSESSMENT METHOD ................................................................................... 219
5   METHOD OF ANALYSIS.................................................................................... 219
6   ASSESSMENT RESULTS.................................................................................. 220
7   DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................220
8   ROLE OF BARRIERS ........................................................................................ 221
9   DISCUSSION...................................................................................................... 221




                                                                                                              Page 215
                                     2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
The measure is to construct 2+1 roads with pavement in the middle of a narrow highway.
Problem
Head-on collisions have been frequent in traffic in Sweden, with the number of fatalities
resulting from the accidents increasing as a proportion of total road accidents.
Target Group
All the road users driving Swedish roads and highways, also the drivers who drive the
opposite direction (due to the safety effect).
Targets
The safety measures applied in the middle of the road have two main objectives: to avoid
the head-on collisions of the vehicles off their lane and to reduce the accident severity of
the remaining crashes.
Initiator
In Sweden, the national road authorities have been responsible of road construction to
produce the required alterations and investments for 2+1 roads. There has been active
public discussion on the safety impact of the 2+1 construction, particularly when it has
been contrasted with construction of motorways, which are 20 times more expensive per
kilometre as opposed to 2+1 road construction.
Decision-makers
Decision-makers are usually located in the headquarters of the national road authorities,
but if 2+1 roads are part of major national level investments, then the participation of
national level (i.e. Ministry) decision-makers is required.
Costs
The average cost per kilometre of 2+1 road in Sweden is 125,000 Euros.
Benefits
The main benefit from implementing the measure consists of an important reduction of the
number of head-on collisions at a cost lower than that of highway construction. This
benefits mainly national level decision-makers, insurance companies and those road users
who still experience a traffic accident but with less damage than in the absence of the 2+1
road. On the average, every 40 kilometres of 2+1 road construction reduce the probability
of fatal accident by one death person.
Cost/Benefit-Ratio:
The Cost-Benefit Ratio is 2.26 in the Swedish case.




                                                                                     Page 216
                                     2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN




1          Problem

Both Finland and Sweden have committed to a version of zero-tolerance for traffic
accidents with fatalities. Whilst it has been realised that the random variable in causing the
accidents cannot be controlled for, several studies have addressed the efficiency of
various measures in preventing accidents (see, for instance, Peltola and Wuolijoki (2003)
and Kärki et al. (2001) for reviews of such typologies in Finland). However, these studies
do not list the construction of 2+1 roads into the road safety measures list, which has only
been a recent addition.
Head-on collisions have been one of the major causes of fatal accidents on roads in
Nordic countries. In 1998 the Swedish National Road Administration, Vägverket, started a
development project on 13-meter wide roads. The rationale for the program was that the
construction of a wider road would be a cost-effective way of increasing road safety on
highways, compared to alternative measures resulting in the same net effect in prevention
of crashes and fatalities.
Finland has been slow to use the 2+1 road as a solution to prevent the accidents. The
National Road Administration in Finland has studied the Swedish case with close interest,
but the frequency of adopting the measure has not been transferred to Finnish context. In
Sweden, however, there have been frequent campaigns to show the cost-efficiency of this
measure [NTF 2003]. It has been estimated that one kilometre of 2+1 road costs one-
twentieth of the cost of one kilometre of motorway, which has been translated into
argument that building a motorway is not in fact an efficient way to increase road safety,
compared to the 2+1 road solution.
Head-on collisions have been a severe problem as a percentage of total fatalities in
Finland, between 1996-2000 an average of 80-85 percent of fatal accidents on two-lane
highways were due to head-on crashes. For Sweden, figures for 1993-2000 show that 140
people were killed in head-on collisions, while the number of severely injured was 450 for
the same period.
For this case study a comparative study of Finnish and Swedish experience was chosen to
study the decisions made in choosing the 2+1 road as means to prevent accidents.
Particularly in Finland the decision-making on road construction does not take into
consideration a pure road safety aspect; the decisions are always based on socio-
economic profitability of the project where traffic safety is only one of the dimensions.


2          Description of the measure

In principle, the 2+1 road construction takes place on 13-meter wide roads, and it is
considered as means of upgrading other solutions, mainly wide shoulders or wide lanes.
Picture 2 illustrates the practical application of 2+1 road construction in Sweden.




                                                                                       Page 217
                                           2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN



                          Picture 2: An example of 2+1 road with a median cable




Source: Larsson et al, 2003
As shown in the Picture 2, the most common way to construct the 2+1 road is to set the
fixed steel median cable on the road, which then shifts to the other side when the
overtaking lane is switched to the other direction. The main problem with the solution is the
inability of the road to adjust to changes in traffic flows, for instance during the congestion
period as the solution is fixed and cannot be adjusted.
Figure 22 shows the other possibilities to utilise the 13-meter width of the road. Wide
shoulders mean that the standard lanes are left somewhat narrower, but shoulders have
been extended so that driving off the road becomes more difficult. In the case of wide
lanes, small errors in steering do not lead to driving off the road, but the shoulders are
narrower. In the case of the 2+1 road, shoulders are narrow and the lane width is similar to
that of wide shoulder lanes. The overtaking lane in the middle is slightly narrower than the
standard lanes. As can be seen, the 2+1 road most effectively reduces head-on collisions,
compared to the other two solutions. It is also the most effective solution to deal with
congestion, as it allows for overtaking more easily than the other two construction
possibilities.
  Figure 22: Construction possibilities for 13-meter wide road: Wide shoulders, wide lanes and 2+1 design




Source: Larsson et al, 2003
We will limit the analysis in this case study to the case where the 2+1 road is constructed
with a fixed median cable, which is also the most common way of constructing the 2+1
roads. The more recent promotion of 2+2 road is obviously even more effective way of


                                                                                                   Page 218
                                       2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN



increasing road safety in Nordic roads, but there is limited data from both countries in
terms of the impacts of these roads.


3          Target group

The construction of new roads using the 2+1 design is likely to benefit all road users with
the reduction of head-on collisions. For those road users who cause the possibility of
accident, for instance by sleeping behind the wheel, the immediate benefit is the reduction
in the probability to have a serious head-on collision. For drivers who are in danger of
facing a possible head-on collision, the benefit is derived from the fact that the probability
again is diminished by the existence of a middle road cable.


4          Assessment method

Sweden has been ahead of Finland in designing and implementing the 2+1 road
construction. There is a relatively well-documented, existing database on the constructed
sections of the 2+1 roads, produced by VTI, the Swedish National Institute for Transport
Research. In fact, VTI has been responsible for annual follow-up studies on the 2+1 roads
(or, in more general terms, the head-on collision free roads).
The unit cost for one kilometre of 2+1 road in Sweden was estimated at € 125,000, but
since actual costs of the investment were available, the real figures were used instead.

                           Table 74: Accident costs, official values [SEK]

 TYPE OF                MATERIAL COSTS             RISK VALUE                TOTAL
 ACCIDENT
 DEATH                  1,242,000                  16,269,000                17,511,000
 SEVERE INJURY          621,000                    2,503,000                 3,124,000
 SLIGHT INJURY          62,000                     113,000                   175,000
 PROPERTY               13,000                                               13,000
 DAMAGE


5          Method of analysis

The calculations have been complicated by the fact that the construction of road sections
in Sweden takes place on the terms of developing the road as a whole, as opposed to
constructing a separate measure, such as the pavement alone. In fact, in many cases the
centre of the road pavement is part of an upgrading of existing road, where traffic volumes
have increased to degrade the existing road. We do not want to separate the safety effect
in the analyses (for instance, in the form of cost-effectiveness analyses of various safety
measures, as this is not the procedure applied in the national project appraisal.
The Swedish case is from RV 44, Trollhättan-Håsten, totalling 10.6 km. The road was
opened as a typical 13-meter, 2-lane road in 1990. Daily traffic volume between 1991-99
was calculated to be 6450 vehicles. In 2000 the upgrading of the road began with
installation of the mid-road cable and the new road consisted of 6 sections of 2+1 road,

                                                                                          Page 219
                                     2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN



stretching from 910 meters to 1880 meters. Total cost of the operation was 44.6 million
Swedish Kronor (5 million €). On this road section the average cost per kilometre was
higher than the average estimate of 125,000 Euros (nearly 500,000 € per kilometre).
Accident statistics for the road show that during the 2+1 solution there were eight reported
accidents for the period of first 18 months of the operation of the new road, with two
person accidents (slight injuries). These accidents were used to correct the accidents data
that would consider the reduction of deadly accidents.
As in the Finnish case, similarly we need to calculate:
    •   Accident costs
    •   Time savings
    •   Vehicle costs
    •   Emissions
    •   Noise
    •   Maintenance costs
    •   Investments
For several of the variables averages were used based on the traffic volumes. This is
because the real data had not been collected for the purposes of the socio-economic
profitability, or if such data existed, it was not available for this case study. The next
section presents the results of the calculations.


6          Assessment Results

Assessment was carried out using the socio-economic profitability analysis, which is the
standard method of road investment project assessment in Sweden. Carrying out the
calculations for the project (with a standard duration of 20 years and a 4 percent discount
rate) gives us the CBA results in the form of socio-economic profitability with all the
mentioned elements of the analysis.
For the case of RV 44, Trollhättan-Håsten, the calculations yield a benefit-cost ratio of
2.26. The ratio is good, making the project profitable. The main sources of benefits were
derived from safety impact (reductions in estimated deaths) and time savings due to the
overtaking lane.


7          Decision-Making Process

In 1998 the Director General of the Swedish National Road Authority decided on a full-
scale programme to improve traffic safety on six existing 13-meter roads using low-cost
measures, where the main alternative identified was the 2+1 road with the separating
median cable. The estimate was to have a potential to reduce 50 percent of all severe link
accidents. It has been thereafter indicated that all old 13-meter roads should be replaced
with the 2+1 roads. In the Swedish system, the road administration (Vägverket) produces
and executes the investment plans. The final decision-making authority is in the hands of
the parliament, which confirms the annual budget for road construction.
The parliament, which is committed to the Swedish zero vision (on traffic deaths) has
clearly followed the principle in promoting the 2+1 road and other non-collision
construction methods for new roads. The political atmosphere is therefore clearly
favourable to implement safety-improving measures.

                                                                                     Page 220
                                      2 +1 ROADS IN SWEDEN




8          Role of barriers

Barriers in Sweden tend to be similar to those reported in the Finnish case, but more
appearing as a result of financial constraints than simply those of political nature. It
appears that several interest groups have been active in promoting the 2+1 road as one of
the major tools in reducing traffic accidents in Sweden. Perhaps in Sweden the relatively
low cost of this measure can be better understood as an alternative to motorways in the
areas where the traffic volumes do not suggest that a motorway is required to remove
capacity bottlenecks.
As in the Finnish case, data was relatively easily available and the quality was satisfactory.
Earlier studies of VTI had focused on more traffic flows than economic assessment, so
there was need to supplement the basic data with data on investment costs. These
additional data requirements did not complicate the analyses.


9          Discussion

In Sweden, the benefits of constructing the 2+1 road have been clearly documented well in
advance. The public opinion has been in favour of the solution, as it is considered an
effective means of preventing head-on collisions and is cost-effective compared to
motorway construction.
More than in Finland, in Sweden the 2+1 road construction is understood as a safety
measure, but this is not the principal criteria for constructing the road. Like in Finland, also
in Sweden the socio-economic profitability approach dominates cost-effectiveness
approach.
Perhaps the biggest challenge for shifting towards consideration of specific measures and
their appraisal is to acknowledge that decision-making can take place on the basis of, for
instance, the cost-effectiveness of the measure. The realization that not all the projects
can be comparable, if they are based on a single target (e.g., safety) compared to multiple
targets, which could include mobility, time savings and safety.


REFERENCES

CARLSSON, ARNE et al. (2003): Uppföljning av mötesfria vägar. Halvårsrapport 2002:1.
  VTI notat 9-2003.
CARLSSON, ARNE and ULF BRÜDE (2003): Utvärdering av mötesfri väg. Halvårsrapport
  2002:2. VTI notat 45-2003.
LARSSON, M., T. BERGH JA A. CARLSSON (2003): Swedish Vision Zero Experience.
NTF (2003): Motorvägar dödar fler än de räddar. NTF Tidning.




                                                                                         Page 221
CASE K: compulsory bicycle helmet wearing




                                          ROSEBUD
                                    WP4 - CASE K REPORT


         COMPULSORY BICYCLE HELMET WEARING




                                            BY MARTIN WINKELBAUER,

                 AUSTRIAN ROAD SAFETY BOARD, KFV, AUSTRIA
                                    COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS




TABLE OF CONTENTS

1       EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT FOR GERMANY ................................................. 225
1.1     Problem to solve ................................................................................................. 225
1.2     Description .......................................................................................................... 225
1.3     Target Group....................................................................................................... 225
1.4     Assessment method............................................................................................ 225
1.5     Choice of Efficiency Assessment method ........................................................... 225
1.6     Assessment tool and calculation method ............................................................ 226
1.6.1   Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time ............... 226
1.6.2   Considered cost of the measure ......................................................................... 226
1.7     Assessment Quantification.................................................................................. 227
1.7.1   Target group........................................................................................................ 227
1.7.2   Current helmet wearing rates .............................................................................. 227
1.7.3   Accident statistics................................................................................................ 227
1.7.4   Helmet prices ...................................................................................................... 228
1.7.5   Accident reduction potential ................................................................................ 228
1.7.6   Crash costs ......................................................................................................... 229
1.7.7   Unit of Implementation ........................................................................................ 229
1.7.8   Price basis, interest rates and duration of the measure ...................................... 229
1.8     Assessment Results............................................................................................ 229
1.8.1   Calculation procedure ......................................................................................... 229
1.8.2   Cost-benefit ratio by expected values ................................................................. 230
1.8.3   Marginal cost-effective helmet wearing rates ...................................................... 230
1.9     Decision Making Process .................................................................................... 231
2       EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT FOR AUSTRIA.................................................... 231
2.1     Problem to solve ................................................................................................. 231
2.2     Description .......................................................................................................... 232
2.3     Target Group....................................................................................................... 232
2.4     Assessment method............................................................................................ 232
2.4.1   Assessment tool and calculation method ............................................................ 232
2.4.2   Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time ............... 232
2.4.3   Considered cost of the measure ......................................................................... 233
2.5     Assessment Quantification.................................................................................. 233
2.5.1   Target group........................................................................................................ 233
2.5.2   Current helmet wearing rates .............................................................................. 234
2.5.3   Accident statistics................................................................................................ 234
2.5.4   Helmet prices ...................................................................................................... 235
2.5.5   Accident reduction potential ................................................................................ 235
2.6     Assessment Results............................................................................................ 236
3       DECISION MAKING PROCESS.........................................................................237
4       IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS ........................................................................ 237
5       CONCLUSION / DISCUSSION........................................................................... 238




                                                                                                                        Page 223
                               COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS




CASE OVERVIEW


Measure
Compulsory bicycle helmet wearing
Problem
Among all severe injuries sustained by bicycle riders, head injuries are the most common.
At the same time, average helmet wearing rates are very low. The protective potential of a
bicycle helmet is considered to be very high.
Target Group
All bicycle riders (precisely those currently not wearing a helmet)
Targets
Reduction of head injuries among bicycle riders
Initiator
Research institutes
Decision-makers
The decision has to be made by the national parliaments and has to be prepared following
the usual procedures for such legislation.
Costs
Helmet costs
Benefits
Reduction of head injuries and all related costs
Cost-Benefit Ratio

    efficiency of compulsory helmet                         cost/benefit ratio
                 wearing                   Germany                          Austria
                                                          road accidents only         all accidents
   helmet price            € 20              4.45                2.28                     4.10
                           € 40              2.23                1.14                     2.05




                                                                                                 Page 224
                               COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS




1            Efficiency Assessment for Germany


1.1          Problem

62% of the German population use a bicycle at least occasionally [Mobilität in Deutschland
2002 – Fahrradverkehr]. Annually, about 600 (in 2003: 639) Germans are killed as
bicyclists in road traffic, about 15,000 (in 2003: 15,591) are severely injured and 65,000
slightly injured. A little less than 50% of the bicyclists injured in road traffic suffer head
injuries. 65% of the head injuries occur in regions of the head that are covered by a helmet
and therefore are potentially protected by helmet wearing. In total, about 20% of the fatal
and severe injuries may be avoided by helmet wearing and the number of slight injuries
will rise by 1% if all bicyclists would wear helmets [OTTE, 2001].
Although the safety potential of wearing a cycle helmet is high and well documented,
helmet wearing rates are still very low. A considerable share of children wear helmets
(about 60%); the average helmet wearing rate in Germany is almost constant over the
recent years, currently about 6% [SIEGENER, 2004]. Bicycle helmet wearing campaigns
have been carried out successfully, but the total wearing rate could not be raised to a
desirable level.

1.2          Description

To make bicycle helmet wearing compulsory for all bicyclists. Used helmets shall be
approved by using one of the existing standards for cycle helmets (e.g. EN 1078).

1.3          Target Group

The target group is those bicyclists currently not wearing a helmet, which is a huge
majority of bicyclists in Germany.

1.4          Assessment method


1.5          Choice of Efficiency Assessment method

It was decided to perform a cost-benefit analysis for the following reasons:
•     It was an explicit demand of the partners in Germany (bast) to choose CBA.
•     The potential of injury reduction is well documented, but it did not support the decision-
      making process in a satisfying manner. The question of cost benefit in relation to the
      public economy level was raised during this process.
•     Most of the fatalities and severe injuries are considered to remain as slight injuries after
      introducing the measure, while the effect of helmet wearing on slight injuries is small.
      This leads to differing impacts of the measure on different levels of injury severity,
      which cannot be considered in a CEA.

                                                                                           Page 225
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



There was no question of comparing helmet wearing with other safety measures, in
   particular measures dedicated to bicyclists (for which a CEA would have been useful).
   As indicated, the effectiveness of helmet wearing is not in doubt at all, a cost-
   effectiveness ratio would not have given any severe input to the decision-making
   process.


1.6          Assessment tool and calculation method

A self-made calculation method was chosen using a spreadsheet program. The main
inputs were accident and population data and helmet wearing rates. Both were available in
age groups and for several years. Partly, the data was aggregated to age groups with
different thresholds. There were big differences between age groups. It seemed easy to
calculate the data without using formal assessment methods.

1.6.1        Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time

Safety
Concerning safety, three effects may be considered:
            1. Reduced likeliness of head injury
            2. Increased risk by risk compensation
            3. Reduced risk by reduced exposure
It was decided not to consider risk compensation and changes of exposure for the
following reasons:
•     Emotionally based effects like risk compensation and change of mobility behaviour are
      very much based on the culture in the target country. There was no evidence that these
      effects should occur in Germany.
•     It was presumed, that those who object to wearing a helmet would not change their
      mode of mobility, but continue cycling without a helmet. This is why a "break even
      helmet wearing rate" was calculated afterwards.
•     It was also presumed, that there may be a group of bicyclists who take higher risks if
      wearing a helmet. But a majority of these may be found among the bicyclists already
      wearing a helmet. Those cyclists who wear helmets due to legal obligation were not
      assumed to change their risk behaviour significantly.


Environment, mobility, travel time
As indicated above, a significant change of modal split was not expected to occur. If this is
the case, there will be no significant impact on environment, mobility and travel time.

1.6.2        Considered cost of the measure

The costs of the measure simply consist of the costs for supplying bicycle riders with
helmets. The cost of the legal process (making the law) will not be considered. Due to the
                                                                                        Page 226
                             COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



decision not to consider effects of a modal shift, no costs of environmental effects, mobility
or travel time will be considered.
The time use for the handling of the helmet was considered to have a very low impact on
total travel time and was therefore disregarded.

1.7        Assessment Quantification


1.7.1      Target group

The definition and calculation of the target group was primarily based on the total
population. "Mobilität in Deutschland 2002 -Fahrradverkehr" presents data on the
frequency of bicycle use; 38% of the Germans never use a bike and were discounted.
Cyclists already wearing a helmet had to be excluded from the calculation. There are no
impacts from this group either on accidents (the accident statistics and their development
already represented the impact of them wearing a helmet) or on costs (the money for their
helmets was already spent and a helmet law will have no impact on replacement costs of
these helmets).

1.7.2      Current helmet wearing rates
                             Table 75: Helmet wearing rates in Germany

  Helmet wearing rates                                   age groups
       Germany                -5    6 - 10   11 -    17 - 22 - 31 -         41 -   > 60    total
                                              16      21     30     40       60
    year of         1997     59%     37%     12%     3%     3%     3%       2%      1%     6%
  assessment        1999     85%     47%     11%     2%     3%     3%       2%      1%     5%
                    2001     58%     37%     8%      2%     3%     3%       3%      1%     5%
                    2002     32%     33%     9%      2%     3%     4%       3%      2%     5%
                    2003     60%     38%     10%     2%     2%     5%       5%      2%     6%

The study on helmet wearing rates by Siegener (2004) is based on a sample of 6800 to
8300 observations in each of the years. The sample of children is very small (32-80
observations) and therefore not very reliable. But the figures were compared to a study
from Austria with a larger sample and found plausible.

1.7.3      Accident statistics

The German accident data contains road accidents taken from the official accident
database including the years from 1991 to 2003 (disaggregated data from the German in-
depth-analysis-system GIDAS combined with aggregated). This database contains all
injuries where any of the parties involved sustained personal injury. It also contains the
numbers of all bicyclists, killed, severely injured or slightly injured in road accidents. It does
not contain the numbers of bicyclists killed or injured apart from road traffic. Further, this
database does not contain accidents that were not noticed by the police, i.e., all those
cases where a bicyclist falls off the bicycle for any reason in a single party accident and

                                                                                           Page 227
                            COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



goes away injured without calling the police are not contained. The population used was
taken from the official population statistics.
For Germany, there was good information on vehicle numbers available. This study by the
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin, does not contain bicycles
qualified as children's toys. This data later on was not used for calculation, but kept in this
report for information purposes.
Unfortunately, the age classification in the different data sources differs from each other.
Punctually, age classes had to be summarised together or divided based on the population
data. The whole table of German data can be found in annex K1.

1.7.4      Helmet prices

The prices of bicycle helmets differ very much. The cheapest offers are available for
children's helmets in super-markets, which are about € 7. The most expensive helmets are
about € 95. Elvik (2004) indicates helmet prices for children are about € 35 to € 50, an
adult helmet between € 50 and € 62. He estimates the lifetime of a children's helmet about
3 years, a young adult helmet about 6 years and an adult helmet about 10 years. In the
USA and Australia the average helmet price is about € 25 to € 30.
A short investigation in Austria (currently no data available either in Austria or in Germany)
had poor results, as most of the companies only gave little information on the prices of
helmets, and what would have been necessary to weight this data, not any information on
their sales or market share. The only really useful information came from a big sport
supplier, telling us that the average price of a cycle helmet is slightly below € 40.
What had to be taken into consideration was the number of helmets sold, if helmet wearing
is compulsory. For example, rescue jackets (warning jackets) were available in Austria for
about € 15. Immediately after introducing a law that rescue jackets will be compulsory,
even before this law was put into force, the prices fell to € 4. It is supposed that a similar
effect will take place if cycle helmet wearing should become compulsory. Further, we can
suppose that people buying a helmet voluntary for their own safety have different patterns
of decisions in their helmet purchase than those buying a helmet due to a legal obligation.
Determination of a suitable price for helmets is a key issue in this CBA since helmet costs
are the only cost factor. To consider the uncertainty of future helmet prices, it was decided
to calculate two alternatives: A conservative one with a helmet price of € 40 (i.e. helmets at
current price level) and a progressive one with € 20 as the average price for a helmet.

1.7.5      Accident reduction potential

There were various studies on the injury reduction potential of bicycle helmets. As it was
most commonly accepted in Germany, a study by OTTE (2001) was chosen as reference
for this assessment. OTTE investigated in-depth 3534 accidents with bicyclists involved in
Germany between 1985 and 1999. This very elaborate study considers injuries of different
regions of the body and different regions of the head. Actual injury severity of real life
crashes is compared to virtual injury severity, i.e. injuries which would have occurred if a
helmet had worn. OTTE concludes that the total number of fatally and seriously injured
bicycle riders would decline by 20% if all cyclists would wear helmets. The number of slight
injuries would increase by 1%, since the number of slight head injuries protected by a
helmet is lower than the number of fatal and severe injuries changed to slight ones.

                                                                                        Page 228
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



1.7.6        Crash costs

The accident costs (fatalities, severe and slight injuries) are taken from the ROSESUD
WP3 report for Germany, which is the official German accident cost estimation.

1.7.7        Unit of Implementation

Compulsory cycle helmet wearing is a measure that applies to all cyclists in the whole
country. The crash reduction potential is estimated for a whole country. The decision has
to be made for the whole country. Finally it is presumed that the results of an assessment
would be most useful if they estimate the total effect in reference to the group that is
affected by the measure, which is a whole country again. So it was decided to consider the
whole country as the unit of implementation.

1.7.8        Price basis, interest rates and duration of the measure

For all values presented in the previous ROSEBUD deliverables, it was decided for
comparability reasons to convert all monetary values to 2002 prices. It was then agreed to
choose the same procedure also for WP4 cases.
The interest rate was chosen based on ROSEBUD WP3 recommendations.
The life span of a cycle helmet was considered between 3 and 10 years. This
recommends assessing a period of at least 10 years. ROSEBUD WP3 recommends
assessing a period of 20 to 30 years, for non-infrastructure measures the period may be
shorter. Based on that, it was decided to assess a period of 13 years, being somewhere in
between 10 and 20 years.

1.8          Assessment Results


1.8.1        Calculation procedure

•     Based on the reported accident data (1991 to 2002), forecasts for 2003 to 2015 were
      calculated and reviewed for plausibility.
•     The same was done for helmet wearing rates based on the data from 1997 to 2003.
      Wearing rates for 1998 were missing (not investigated) and were interpolated.
•     The target accidents affected by a helmet wearing obligation was calculated as the
      product of the share of cyclists currently not wearing a helmet and the number of
      injuries in the different levels and age groups.
•     A further calculation was done as if the helmet law would have been introduced on
      January 1st 2003.
•     The crash severity reduction figures were applied to the target accidents in the different
      age groups and injury severity classes.


                                                                                         Page 229
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



•   Future costs and benefits were labelled to 2002 prices using a discount factor of 5%
    annually.
•   The costs were calculated assuming that 38% of the Germans never use a bike and
    the rest will be fully equipped with helmets.
•   Afterwards, two approaches were chosen.


1.8.2      Cost-benefit ratio by expected values

Considering the predictions for accidents, helmet wearing rates, population and accident
reduction potential, the costs and benefits were calculated for two values of the expected
helmet price. Within the period from 2003 to 2015 the cumulated costs and benefits based
on 2002 prices will be:
                          Table 76: Costs and benefits 2003 -2015, Germany

     Helmet price                benefits            total supply costs       cost/benefit-ratio
         (€)                       (€)                       (€)

          20,-               5,077,319,223             1,140,167,632                4.45

          40,-               5,077,319,223             2,280,335,263                2.23


1.8.3      Marginal cost-effective helmet wearing rates

For this presentation of the result it was supposed that 100% of the Germans at least
occasionally riding a bike buy a helmet. Again, supposing two different prices of the
average helmet, the minimum helmet wearing rate which would achieve a cost-benefit
ratio of one was calculated, i.e. enforcement measures would have to achieve at least a
"break-even helmet wearing rate" of 26.6% (47.9%) to make bicycle helmets effective
supposing a worst case scenario for the costs.
Table 77: marginal average helmet wearing rates 2003- 2015, Germany

     Helmet price                benefits            total supply costs          break-even
         (€)                       (€)                       (€)             helmet wearing rate

          20,-               1,140,464,390             1,140,167,632               26.6%

          40,-               2,282,903,190             2,280,335,263               47.9%

There is one problem in this type of calculation, as there is no information available on
enforcement costs either on costs of one unit of enforcement (e.g. one hour of road-side
enforcement) or on the number of those units necessary to achieve the demanded helmet
wearing rate. Further it is not known whether these enforcement measures would be self-
financing by fines. Even if enforcement measures would be cost neutral for the authorities,
they might not be for the target group.




                                                                                            Page 230
                               COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



1.9          Decision-Making Process

•     Currently there is no governmental initiative for making helmet wearing compulsory in
      Germany. But there is an explicit backup and encouragement for voluntary helmet
      wearing.
•     Basically the government strongly aims at improving road safety and reducing accident
      costs. Compulsory helmet wearing fits into this target but is currently not at a status of
      official discussion.
•     The bicycle-rider lobby wants to avoid any interference in bicycling, referring to aspects
      like "comfort", "freedom" and "responsibility". These groups argue that a large share of
      cyclists would stop cycling if a helmet would have to be worn.
•     A decision about an obligation to wear a helmet would have to be made by the national
      parliament, and the German Diet "Deutscher Bundestag".
•     It was supposed by a member of the ROSEBUD URG to select compulsory bicycle
      helmet wearing as one of the ROSEBUD WP4 cases.
•     But due to the fact that currently there was no occasion to raise a political or public
      discussion about compulsory helmet wearing, the results had only been presented to
      decision-makers from inside the experts' organisation. These experts agreed to the
      findings, but they did not think that EA results would bring useful input to the process of
      political and public decision making. The case was too far away from being discussed
      on a rational basis, that monetary arguments at national level, which are hardly
      understandable for the public, could support the implementation of this measure.
•     So far, it cannot be foreseen when a public and political discussion on bicycle helmet
      wearing will be continued.


2            Efficiency Assessment for Austria


2.1          Problem to solve

62% of the Austrian population uses a bicycle at least occasionally [BÄSSLER, 2001].
Annually, about 60 (in 2003: 56) Austrians are killed as bicyclists in road traffic, about
1,800 (in 2003: 1,838) are severely injured and 4,000 slightly injured. A little less than 50%
of the bicyclists injured in road traffic suffer head injuries.
The Austrian Federal Ministry of Transportation, Innovation and Technology has set up a
Road Safety Program from 2002 to 2010 which includes a 50% reduction target for
fatalities. Although this program does not specifically mention cycle helmet wearing as a
measure targeting bicycle accidents, cycle helmet could achieve a serious contribution
towards road safety targets. Besides, there might be an additional contribution in reducing
injury severity after leisure time and sport accidents.
Although the safety potential of cycle helmet is high and well documented, the helmet
wearing rates are currently very low. A considerable amount of children wear helmets
                                                                                          Page 231
                               COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



(about 60%), the average helmet wearing rate in Germany is almost constant over the
recent years, currently about 11% [FURIAN, GRUBER, 2002].
Bicycle helmet wearing campaigns have been carried out successfully, particularly
targeting school children, but the total wearing rates could not be raised to a desirable
level neither among children nor among adults.

2.2          Description

Making bicycle helmet wearing compulsory for all bicyclists. Used helmets shall be
approved by using one of the existing standards for cycle helmets (e.g. EN 1078).

2.3          Target Group

Those bicyclists currently not wearing a helmet, which is a huge majority of bicyclists in
Austria.

2.4          Assessment method

It was decided to perform a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) for the following reasons:
•     The studies for Germany and Austria were done at the same time, for reason of
      comparability it was useful to select the same method.
•     Most of the fatalities and severe injuries are considered to remain as slight injuries after
      introducing the measure, while the effect of helmet wearing on slight injuries is small.
      This leads to differing impact on different levels of injury severity, which cannot be
      considered in a CEA.
There was no question of comparing helmet wearing with other safety measures, in
   particular measures dedicated to bicyclists (for which a CEA would have been useful).
   As indicated, the effectiveness of helmet wearing is not in doubt at all; a cost-
   effectiveness ratio would not have given any severe input to the decision-making
   process.


2.4.1        Assessment tool and calculation method

A self-made calculation method was chosen using a spreadsheet program. The main
inputs were accident and population data and helmet wearing rates. Both were available in
age groups and for several years. Partly, the data was aggregated to age groups with
different thresholds. There were considerable differences between age groups. It seemed
easy to calculate the data without using formal assessment methods.

2.4.2        Types of assessed impacts: safety, environment, mobility, travel time

Safety
Concerning safety, three effects may be considered:

                                                                                           Page 232
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



•     Reduced likeliness of head injury
•     Increased risk by risk compensation
•     Reduced risk by reduced exposure
It was decided not to consider risk compensation and changes of exposure for the
following reasons:
•     Emotionally based effects like risk compensation and change of mobility behaviour are
      very much based on the culture in the target country. There was no evidence that these
      effects should occur in Austria.
•     It was presumed that those who object wearing a helmet would not change their mode
      of mobility, but continue cycling without a helmet.
•     It was also presumed that there may be a group of bicyclists who take higher risks if
      wearing a helmet. But a majority of these may be found among the bicyclists already
      wearing a helmet. Those cyclists who wear helmets due to legal obligation were not
      assumed to change their risk behaviour significantly.
Environment, mobility, travel time
As indicated above, a significant change of modal split was not expected to occur. If that is
the case, there will be no significant impact on environment, mobility and travel time.

2.4.3        Considered cost of the measure

The costs of the measure simply consisted of the costs for supplying bicycle riders with
helmets. The costs of the legal process (making the law) were not considered. Due to the
decision not to consider effects of a modal shift, no costs of environmental effects, mobility
or travel time had to be considered. The time use for the handling of the helmet was
considered to have a very low impact on total travel time and was therefore disregarded.

2.5          Assessment Quantification


2.5.1        Target group

The definition and calculation of the target group was primarily based on the total
population. Baessler (2001) showed numbers of inhabitants at least occasionally
performing various sports; 4.1 million Austrians aged over 15 engage in cycling.
Extrapolating this value to persons under 15 considering the share of the total population
gave almost exactly the same figures as in Germany.
Persons already wearing a helmet had to be excluded from the calculation. There will be
no impacts from this group either on accidents (the accident statistics and their
development already represented the impact of them wearing a helmet) or on costs (the
money for their helmets is already spent and a helmet law will have no impact on
replacement costs of these helmets).



                                                                                       Page 233
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



2.5.2        Current helmet wearing rates
                               Table 78: helmet wearing rates in Austria

       helmet wearing rates                            year of assessment
              Austria                1992          1994        1996      1998          2001
                total                2.7%         5.7%        8.6%      11.4%         10.7%
      by age           children      5.6%         19.3%      28.2%      42.9%         43.3%
                       juvenile      1.7%          5.2%       7.0%      12.5%          8.2%
                         adult       2.5%          4.4%        7.0%      8.1%          8.9%
    by mode of          sports      6.0%          16.0%      18.0%      22.0%         30.0%
    bicycle use     leisure time     1.0%          3.0%       4.0%       9.0%          7.0%
                        traffic      3.0%          3.0%       7.0%       7.0%          7.0%
     by type of        children      6.0%         25.0%      36.0%      59.0%         63.0%
      bicycle         adult bike     1.0%          2.0%        3.0%      4.0%          5.0%
                   mountain bike     3.0%          7.0%      11.0%      12.0%         12.0%
                     street race    13.0%         17.0%      20.0%      44.0%         62.0%
                         bike


These results of a study by Furian and Gruber (2001, 2002 and 2003) are based on about
20,000 observations in each of the years, which should provide very reliable information.
But the observations were made on bicyclists passing by without asking them for their age.
So the age distribution between children, juveniles and adults is only based on the
estimation of the observers. A study on helmet wearing rates in 2004 is currently being
carried out, but results were not available.
Generally speaking, the helmet wearing rates changed extremely over the years, which
makes forecasts quite difficult.

2.5.3        Accident statistics

Bicycle accidents are divided into two groups:
•    Road traffic accidents, i.e. accidents occurring on public roads taken from the official
     road traffic accident database.
•    The EHLASS database provides accident data based on about 12,000 interviews
     annually. These interviews are carried out in hospitals with interviewees who have
     sustained leisure time accidents. The accident statistics of the "Institut Sicher Leben"
     summarises sport and leisure time accidents. It may be presumed that these accidents
     are separate from traffic accidents, but no data on fatalities is included and the accident
     severity is reported in other patterns than the traffic accidents. This database contains
     data on injuries of different regions of the body, including head injuries.
The evaluation has to deal with shortcomings in both of these sources:
•    It is supposed that there are a considerable number of unreported cases not contained
     in the official traffic accident database, e.g. single party accidents of cyclists. Due to a

                                                                                           Page 234
                             COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



    legal obligation all road accidents where any of the persons involved sustains any injury
    have to be reported by the police. But particularly cycle accidents are not likely to be
    reported if no other party is involved. However, it is likely that most accidents remaining
    unreported this way are of minor severity and therefore will not alter the result of a CBA
    significantly.
•   Injuries not treated in hospitals, but by general practitioners in their private practices,
    are not covered in either database. The same for injuries that are not at all treated by
    doctors, however, these injuries may be frequent but are assumed severe enough to
    have a significant impact on public economy.
•   Fatal leisure time accidents are not reported.
•   Since the EHLASS data is investigated by interviews, it likely but not secure that no
    accidents are double-counted in both databases.
•   In the EHLASS database the accident severity is reported in other patterns than the
    traffic accidents.
Unfortunately the age classification thresholds in the different data sources differ from
each other. Punctually and age classes had to be summarised together or divided based
on the population data.
This data was used to calculate two different scenarios, one for road traffic on and one for
all accidents. A comparison of both databases shows that on an average road traffic
accidents are much more severe than sport and leisure time accidents. This difference
was considered in the calculation. Sport and leisure time accident data was only available
for 2001 to 2003; the numbers differ significantly. There are only three age groups.

2.5.4      Helmet prices

For the Austrian study the same approach was used as for Germany.

2.5.5      Accident reduction potential

There are various studies on the injury reduction potential of bicycle helmets. As it is most
commonly accepted in Germany, a study by OTTE (2001) was chosen as reference for
this calculation. OTTE investigated in-depth 3,534 accidents with bicyclists involved in
Germany between 1985 and 1999. This very elaborate study considers injuries of different
regions of the body as a whole and for different regions of the head. Actual injury severity
of real life crashes is compared to virtual injury severity (i.e. injuries which would have
occurred if a helmet would have been worn). It comes to the final conclusion that the total
number of fatally and seriously injured bicycle riders would decline by 20% if all cyclists
would wear helmets. The number of slight injuries would increase by 1% since the number
of slight head injuries protected by a helmet is lower than the number of fatal and severe
injuries changed to slight ones.




                                                                                          Page 235
                              COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



2.6          Assessment Results

•     Based on accident data of 1992 to 2003, forecasts for 2004 to 2015 were calculated.
•     The further calculation was done as if the helmet law would have been introduced on
      January 1st 2003.
•     The data on helmet wearing rates available does not allow one to extrapolate wearing
      rates for the future; there was a rapid increase in the 90s, whereas the wearing rates
      declined slightly recently. Therefore the helmet wearing rates of 2001 were taken as
      the basis to define the target group by excluding the share of cyclists currently wearing
      a helmet.
•     The target accidents affected by a helmet wearing obligation were calculated as the
      product of the share of those not wearing a helmet and the number of injuries in the
      different levels and age groups.
•     The crash severity reduction figures were applied to the target accidents in the different
      age groups and injury severity classes.
•     The costs were calculated assuming that 62% of the Austrians, i.e. all those at least
      occasionally using a bike, buy a helmet. The information about the life span of helmets
      was taken from Rune Elvik's Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Regular re-
      investment for helmets was considered from this source. For discounting those already
      wearing a helmet the same figures were used as described above for accidents.
•     Future costs and benefits were labelled at 2002 prices using a discount factor of 5%
      annually, and then finally added up.
•     To integrate sport and leisure time accidents, the two databases had to be compared.
      Sport and leisure time accident numbers are only available for the years 2001 to 2003,
      and besides, the numbers vary significantly through the years. It was supposed that the
      impact of helmet wearing on sport and leisure time accidents and road accidents is the
      same. An accident ratio was calculated based on 2001 to 2003 values for the three age
      groups. This ratio consists of two factors. One considers the ratio of the total numbers
      of accidents; the other considers the share of head injuries being different for road and
      other accidents.
                            Table 79: costs and benefits 2003 - 2015, Austria

                      helmet cost (€)      benefits (€)      total supply costs   cost/benefit ratio
                                                                     (€)
      only road             20             230,918,822         101,081,159              2.28
      accidents             40             230,918,822         202,162,319              1.14
    all accidents           20             414,093,300         101,081,159              4.10
                            40             414,093,300         202,162,319              2.05



                                                                                               Page 236
                            COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS




3          Decision-Making Process

If helmet wearing for cyclists would be made compulsory, this would have to be a decision
by the national parliament. Depending on what this obligation should cover, road traffic
legislation would not only be necessary. Deriving from this fact, it would also be necessary
to consult more than one ministry.
After making an arrangement between the concerned ministries, a draft of the law would
have to be sent out to be commented on by a lot of stakeholders. Usually this phase gives
rise to the public discussion. As we have learned from informal consultations with other
stakeholders during this operation, it may be expected that most of the interest groups
would oppose to an obligation.
The "Institut Sicher Leben" is a research institute dealing with sport and leisure time
safety. This study was presented to the head of the institute and three experienced
researchers working for the institute. The presentation of the study was started with
presenting the "short training course" on efficiency assessment although some of the
audience already had experience in this field. The "short training course" and the study
itself were understood by the audience. The results were accepted. Nevertheless, the
head of the institute decided not to bring the study forward to the relevant members of the
Austrian administration. Well informed about the current positions of the stakeholders, he
judged that it would do no good to the case itself if the discussion would be raised under
the current circumstances.
It was considered to present the efficiency assessment results to relevant decision-makers
without joining this with a recommendation to implement the measure, or even pointing out
that the institute does not recommend mandatory helmet wearing. But all these options
were rejected as it seemed impossible to leave the discussion, only to leave it at a strictly
theoretical level.
But, as a positive result of this presentation, it was decided to prepare another CBA only
considering children. The protection of children would not be the subject of a great deal of
controversy as cycle helmet for all cyclists would be, safety measures for children cannot
be easily objected, at least not as easy as measures targeting the whole population.

4          Implementation barriers

None of the fundamental barriers played a significant role within this study.
The institutional barriers were finally those avoiding this study to be used as it was meant
to be. It might have been a matter of wrong timing, but definitely was not the wrong timing
of using EA results to influence decision-making. Since there was no decision-making
process running, the results would have to be used to start a process. And finally, it was
supposed that these EA results were not a good starting point for a political discussion.
Within the calculation procedure several difficulties occurred, but the results of the
previous work packages of ROSEBUD were found to be very helpful to overcome these
problems. The valuation of fatalities and injuries used for this study significantly differs
from, e.g. the values used in Germany. New values for Austria will be available by the end
of 2005.
Three main problems were identified in the range of technical barriers:



                                                                                      Page 237
                             COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



•   Accident data: Road traffic and off-road accident data were difficult to compare and to
    aggregate. Unreported accidents were presumed to exist in a considerable number, but
    having no considerable impact on the total accident costs.
•   The basis for the estimate of helmet prices was rather weak.
Finally, there is no evidence of people stopping cycling when forced to wear a helmet.
   Although there are some results from another country tackling this problem, it seems to
   be highly depending on culture and attitudes of cyclists whether there is any change in
   mobility behaviour. If these effects should occur, there would be impacts of various
   kinds that would have to be considered in a CBA additionally (environmental effects
   and travelling time considering changed modal split as well as public health effects).


5          Conclusion / Discussion

When this study was carried out, there was strong interest by research institutes in EA of
compulsory helmet wearing, but there was no discussion going on either among scientists
and the administration or in the public. EA was found not to be an appropriate means of
raising this discussion. It was supposed that the argument of cost efficiency would not be
heard by the public, particularly not in a case where emotional arguments are the main
basis of these discussions.
It was found that it is not possible to discuss rational arguments (like the results of a EA
study) with the relevant stakeholders on a broad basis without starting a public discussion
on the topic at the same time.
The limitations of the CBA carried out were identified as follows:
•   The accident data used may be influenced by a large number of unreported cases.
•   Accident data from road traffic accidents and another database containing leisure time
    accidents were difficult to compare and aggregate to a common basis for calculation.
•   Helmet prices were difficult to estimate due to a lack of knowledge on current prices
    and strong uncertainty of the impact of the enormous increase of sales after introducing
    an obligation.
•   The valuations for fatalities and injuries for Austria are based on relatively old data.
•   Although there is no evidence for these effects to exist, a change of the modal split
    would significantly alter the results of this CBA. Time consumption, environmental
    impacts and public health effects would have to be considered in addition.
The following task in this CBA were particularly easy to achieve:
•   It was easy to gain access to accident data and other data sources, such as population
    data and empirical data on attitudes, mobility behaviour and helmet wearing rates.
•   There was suitable and elaborate information on the safety effects.
•   The calculation itself was supported by the framework described in WP3 report.


                                                                                          Page 238
                           COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS



An obligation for cyclists to wear a helmet was found beneficial in any case. A cost-benefit
ratio was found between 1.14 and 4.45 depending on what accident types are included,
the monetary values for fatalities and injuries and on the estimate for helmet prices.




REFERENCES

BÄSSLER, R. (2001): Quantifizierung des Unfallrisikos beim Sporttreiben. Austrian Life
  Style 2000. Fessel-GfK. Studie im Auftrag des Institutes "Sicher Leben". Austria.
HALBWACHS C. et. Al. (2000): Sport und Gesundheit. Bundesministerium für soziale
  Sicherheit und Generationen. Wien. Austria.
FURIAN G., Gruber M. (1999): Die Österreichische Radhelminitiative 1992 - 1998. Institut
  Sicher Leben. Wien. Austria.
KOLB W., BAUER R. (1999): Unfallfolgekosten in Österreich. Institut Sicher Leben. Wien.
  Austria.
STEINER M., BAUER R. (2002): Unfallstatistik 2001. Verletzte nach Heim-, Freizeit. und
  Sportunfällen in Österreich. Institut Sicher Leben. Wien. Austria.
Steiner M., Bauer R. (2003): Unfallstatistik 2002. Verletzte nach Heim-, Freizeit. und
  Sportunfällen in Österreich. Institut Sicher Leben. Wien. Austria.
BAUER R., KÖRMER, C., STEINER M. (2002). EHLASS Austria Jahresbericht 2001.
  Institut Sicher Leben. Wien. Austria.
BAUER R. et al (2003):EHLASS Austria Jahresbericht 2002. Institut Sicher Leben. Wien.
  Austria.
FURIAN G., Gruber M. (2002):Einstellungen zum Helmtragen, Verwendung von
  Radhelmen und Em,pfehlungen für die Zukunft. Institut Sicher Leben. Wien. Austria.
OTTE, D. (2001): Schutzwirkung von Radhelmen. Verkehrsunfallforschung Medizinische
  Hochschule Hannover. Im Auftrage der Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen. Bergisch
  Gladbach. Germany.
N.N. (2004):Mobilität in Deutschland 2002 - Fahrradverkehr. Bundesministerium für
  Verkehr-, Bau- und Wohnungswesen. Bonn. Germany.
SIEGENER W., RÖDELSTAB Th. (2004): Sicherung durch Gurte, Helme und andere
  Schutzsysteme. IVT Ingenieurbüro für Verkehrstechnik GmbH Karlsruhe. Bundesanstalt
  für Straßenwesen. Bergisch Gladbach. Germany.
ELVIK, R., BORGER-MYSEN, A. and VAA, T. (1997): Trafikksikkerhekshandbok (Traffic
  Safety Handbook). Institute of Transport Economics. Oslo. Norway.
ROSEBUD WP3 Report (2004): Improvements in efficiency assessment tools.
ROSEBUD WP2 Report (2004): Barriers to the use of efficiency assessment tools in road
  safety policy.




                                                                                         Page 239
                                                       COMPULSORY HELMET WEARING FOR CYCLISTS


                                                Accident, population and vehicle data, Germany,
                                         1991   1992   1993     1994     1995     1996     1997     1998        1999     2000    2001     2002    2003
injury accidents                   all         395462 385384   392754   388003   373082   380835   377257     395689   382949   375345   362054
                         with bicycle involved 78695 72487      74955    72949    66667    73341    68879      76133    73927   72110    71219
bicycle riders and           total        925    906    821      825      751      594      679      637         662      659     635      583    616
passengers, fatalities        0-5         12     12     10        6        12       6        7        7           2        4       4        4
                             6-10         37     28     33        33       24       27       20       18         25       10       12       10
                            10-15         59     58     74        66       54       45       39       48         53       41       37       28
                            15-21         62     68     43        59       57       40       36       33         35       40       39       36
                            21-65        437    430    377       371      326      277      316      293        289      298      278      270
                             >65         316    308    284       290      277      198      261      237        257      265      265      235
bicycle riders and           total      17698 18928 17468       18041    17552   15747    17112    15624      16740    15586    14741    14025
passengers, severe            0-5        315    383    310       287      273      239      253      177        190      144      130      126
injuries                     6-10        1393   1268   1198     1181     1241     1175     1088      873        942      717      532      490
                            10-15        2510   2704   2609     2657     2564     2290     2565     2134       2340     2014     1828     1606
                            15-21        2199   2401   2183     2263     2178     1823     1955     1773       1836     1601     1509     1481
                            21-65        8705   9586   8782     9061     8738     7748     8747     8188       8718     8325     8086     7618
                             >65         2550   2552   2358     2561     2529     2440     2484     2462       2692     2775     2646     2698
bicycle riders and           total      52307 58552 53764       55507    54049    49647    54876    52053      58294    57152    56338    56138
passengers, slight            0-5        973    1075   958       910      922      742      805      634        744      652      591      615
injuries                     6-10        3553   3582   3494     3427     3715     3431     3755     3068       3367     2838     2309     2258
                            10-15        8443   9378   9141     9207     8867     8323     9072     8414       9994     9152     8435     8420
                            15-21        7893   8814   7800     8061     7786     7044     7615     7505       7798     7464     7381     7296
                            21-65       27493 31394 28321      29689    28393    26003    28918    28015      31114    31315    31683    31420
                             >65         3719   3982   3770     3907     4051     3814     4351     4165       4953     5438     5681     5922
German population            total      79984 80594 81179       81422    81661    81896    82052    82029      82087    82188    82339    82440
(x1000)                       0-5        5357   5366   5319     5197     5051     4919     4832     4781       4743     4724     4706     4695
                             6-10        4211   4290   4377     4456     4517     4560     4569     4540       4506     4462     4396     4358
                            10-15        3445   3510   3582     3645     3695     3731     3738     3714       3687     3650     3596     3566
                            15-21        5363   5190   5103     5096     5177     5299     5411     5474       5521     5561     5590     5604
                            21-65       49640 50139 50526      50581    50586    50596    50587    50506      50421    50381    50177    50152
                             >65        11969 12100 12272      12448    12634    12791    12916    13014      13207    13510    13874    14066
Bicycles existing         (million)      64,2   67,3    70       72,3     73,5     73,9      74       74        74,1     74,5     74,6



                                                                                                   Page 240
                                SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT




SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY
ASSESSMENT

by Shalom Hakkert
Efficiency assessment studies should be evaluated using standardized techniques. As
highlighted at several points of this report, efficiency assessment is a sophisticated method
and need some basic information to understand the methodology. This understanding is
supposed as a basis for the recipients to believe in the results of such studies.
The "short training course on efficiency
assessment" provides a concise description of
the main steps and data components, which are
needed to perform a Cost-Benefit Analysis
(CBA)/ Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of a
road safety measure25. The description includes:
basic formulae, safety effects, implementation
units, target accidents, accident costs and
implementation costs. The evaluation of WP4
case-studies was performed in line with these
evaluation techniques.
Certainly, the background and interest of the
recipients of efficiency assessment studies is very diverse. The "short training course"
aims at making a compromise for all level of decision making and the full range of interests
and background.




The introduction gives an overview on the motives to carry out EA studies, to use the
results and the methods.




25
     This is a concise compilation of Chapters 2, 3 of the WP3’s report. More details can be found in the report.
                                                                                                         Page 241
                         SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



a. Basic formulae
The cost-effectiveness of a road safety measure
is defined as the number of accidents prevented
per unit cost of implementing the measure:
Cost-effectiveness = Number of accidents
prevented by a given measure/ Unit costs of
implementation of measure
For this calculation, the following information
items are needed:
   •   A definition of suitable units            of
       implementation for the measure,
   •   An estimate of the effectiveness of the safety measure in terms of the number of
       accidents it can be expected to prevent per unit implemented of the measure,
   •   An estimate of the costs of implementing one unit of the measure.
The accidents that are affected by a safety
measure are referred to as target accidents. In
order to estimate the number of accidents it can
be expected to prevent (or prevented) per unit
implemented of a safety measure, it is
necessary to:
   •   Identify target accidents,
   •   Estimate the number of target accidents
       expected to occur per year for a typical
       unit of implementation,
   •   Estimate the safety effect of the measure
       on target accidents.

The numerator of the cost-effectiveness ratio is
estimated as follows:
Number of accidents prevented (or expected to
be prevented) by a measure = The number of
accidents expected to occur per year X The
safety effect of the measure




                                                                                Page 242
                          SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



The benefit cost ratio is defined as:
Benefit-cost ratio = Present value of all benefits/
Present value of implementation costs
When a CBA is applied, then, besides the above
CEA’s components, the monetary values of the
measure’s benefits are also required. The
monetary values imply, first of all, accident costs
and, depending on the range of other effects
considered, may also include costs of travel
time, vehicle operating costs, costs of air
pollution, costs of traffic noise, etc.
In order to make the costs and benefits
comparable, a conversion of the values to a
certain time reference is required. Such an
action needs a definition of the economic frame,
i.e. the duration of effect (length of service life of
the project) and the interest rate, which are
those commonly used for the performance of
economic evaluations in the country.
In a basic case, where the benefits come from
the accidents saved only (and no influences on
travel expenses and the environment are
expected), the numerator of the benefit-cost
ratio will be estimated as:
Present value of benefits = Number of accidents
prevented by the measure X Average accident
cost X The accumulated discount factor,
where the accumulated discount factor depends
on the interest rate and the length of life of the
measure.


b. Safety effects
The most common form of a safety effect is the
percentage of accident reduction following the
treatment. The main source of evidence on
safety effects is from observational before-after
studies. Other (theoretical) methods for
quantifying safety effects are also possible.
One should remember that the safety effect of a
measure is stated as available if the estimates
of both the average value and the confidence
interval of the effect are known. One should also
ascertain that both the type of measure and the
type of sites (units) for which the estimates are
available, correspond to those for which the
CBA/CEA is performed.

                                                                           Page 243
                              SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



For WP4’s evaluations, it was desirable to apply the local values of safety effects, i.e.
those attained by the evaluation studies performed in the country. When the local values
do not exist, the summaries of international experience can be used26.




If the value of a safety effect is supposed to be provided by a current study (for which the
CBA is performed), the estimation of safety effect should satisfy the criteria of correct
safety evaluation. This implies that the evaluation should account for the selection bias
and for the uncontrolled environment (e.g. changes in traffic volumes, general accident
trends).


c. Implementation units
In the case of infrastructure measures, the
appropriate unit will often be one junction or one
kilometre of road. In the case of area-wide or
more general measures, a suitable unit may be
a typical area or a certain category of roads. In
the case of vehicle safety measures, one vehicle
will often be a suitable unit of implementation,
or, in the case of legislation introducing a certain
safety measure on vehicles, the percentage of
vehicles equipped with this safety feature or
complying with the requirement. For police
enforcement, it may be a kilometre of road with
a certain level of enforcement activity (e.g. the number of man-hours per kilometre of road
per year); in the case of public information campaigns - the group of road users, which is
supposed to be influenced by the campaign.


d. Target accidents
The accidents affected by a safety measure present a target accident group. Depending
on the type of safety measure it can also be a target injury group, target driver population,
etc.
Target accidents depend on the nature of the safety measure considered. There are no
strict rules for this case. For general measures like black-spot treatment, traffic calming,
speed limits, etc. the target accident group usually includes all injury accidents.

26
     Such as: Elvik R. and Vaa T (2004) The handbook of road safety measures. Elsevier.
                                                                                          Page 244
                              SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



One should remember that if we apply a specific and not general accident group, proper
corrections should be performed for the accident costs, as well.


e. Accident costs
As known, a detailed survey of practice in
estimating road accident costs in the EU and
other countries was made by an international
group of experts as part of the COST-research
programme 27. Five major cost items of accident
costs were identified as follows:




(1) Medical costs
(2) Costs of lost productive capacity (lost output)
(3) Valuation of lost quality of life (loss of welfare due to accidents)
(4) Costs of property damage
(5) Administrative costs




27
     Alfaro, J-L.; Chapuis, M.; Fabre, F. (Eds): COST 313. Socioeconomic cost of road accidents. Report EUR
      15464 EN. Brussels, Commission of the European Communities, 1994.
                                                                                                    Page 245
                            SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



The relative shares of these five elements differ
between fatalities and the various degrees of
injuries, and also differ among countries.
We assume that each country has its official
valuations of accident injuries and damage.
Otherwise, the comparative figures from the
recent studies can be of help 28. All the values
are applicable for the WP4’s evaluations but, in
every case, there should be a clear indication
which components of the above accident costs
are included.
For the sake of comparability of the evaluation
results, the monetary values will be converted to € at 2002-prices.




The literature discusses mostly the valuations of fatalities and injuries whereas a CBA
usually needs average accident costs. In a simple case, the average accident cost can be
estimated as the sum of injury costs multiplied by the average number of injuries with
different severity levels, which were observed in the target accidents’ group; the damage
value per accident should be stated and added to the injury costs.


f. Implementation costs
The implementation costs should be determined
for each safety measure considered. The
implementation costs are the social costs of all
means of production (labour and capital) that
are employed to implement the measure.
The implementation costs are generally
estimated on an individual basis for each
investment project. As no strict rules are
available on the issue, performing a WP4’s
evaluation, all the components of the
implementation costs should be explained.
Typical costs of engineering measures, which are recommended for the CBA evaluations
in the country, are desirable.


28
     see Chapter 2 of WP3’s Handbook
                                                                                  Page 246
                         SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT



The implementation costs should be converted to their present values, which include both
investment costs and the annual costs of operation and maintenance. Similar to the case
of accidents costs, for the sake of comparability of the evaluation results, the monetary
values will be converted to € at 2002-prices.
g. Treatment of uncertainty
In most cases, all effects, particularly the safety
effects cannot be determined exactly. It is
necessary to consider the level of uncertainty
within the calculation, give exact figures and
explain the variation of the results at their mean
and at the borders of a (in most cases 95%)
confidence interval. If uncertainties cannot be
calculated or estimated, they have to mentioned
at least and figures of the possible outcomes
have to be described.


h. Examples
For a better understanding it is strongly recommended to use examples of well elaborated
efficiency studies. It is also recommended, when using the short training course, to use
other examples. Certainly, the examples used have to taken from well elaborated
(according to the standards mentioned above, state-of-the-art EA) EA studies and be
presented in a similar way as shown below for one of the ROSEBUD WP4 cases.




                                                                                  Page 247
SHORT TRAINING COURSE ON EFFICIENCY ASSESSMENT




                                                 Page 248
                                  ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS




CONCLUSIONS

by Victoria Gitelman and Shalom Hakkert
Overview and Summary tables by George Yannis and Eleonora Papadimitriou
WP4 descriptions by Martin Winkelbauer


1          Summaries of WP4 activities

The procedure adopted within ROSEBUD - WP4 was designed to gain experience from
various countries in performing efficiency assessment (EA) studies of road safety related
measures along the lines developed in earlier Work-packages. Particularly, the intentions
were:
•   To test the availability of data and values for the performance of EA studies such as
    exposure data, accident data, etc; values of safety effects, accidents costs,
    implementation costs, environmental and other impacts.
•   To test the EA methods towards their applicability for road safety measures.
•   To perform EA studies of a considerable number of cases of safety-related
    measures ("case studies") which may serve as evaluation examples for similar
    cases, e.g. for the same or comparable road safety measures in other countries.
•   To examine the usability of procedures, methods and recommendations developed
    by the previous work-packages of ROSEBUD.
•   To gather problems which have not been targeted so far within the ROSEBUD
    framework and to develop solutions and recommendations.
•   To present the results of the case studies to decision makers, to document their
    feedbacks and to develop recommendations for such presentations and the
    assessment process and documentation as a whole.
To cover all these goals, the following steps were undertaken:
•   Road safety measures were selected for assessment within WP4 (10 cases).
•   Among these measures, two cases were selected for detailed discussion with
    decision-makers. One of the cases was presented to a group of decision makers in
    a one-day workshop. The other case study was sent to a decision maker in a
    printed version. In both cases, the feedback of the decision makers was recorded
    and afterwards discussed within the workgroup.
•   In a one day conference (3rd ROSEBUD Conference, Vienna, March 18th, 2005),
    both cases were presented to a broader audience with a majority of the participants
    being members of the User Representation Group of ROSEBUD.




                                                                                     Page 249
                                     ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



1.1          The WP4 – workshop

On the 16th of December 2004, a workshop in Bordeaux hosted by CETE SO was
conducted and dedicated to
•     receiving feedback on the "Short Training Course" for decision makers;
•     present case G "Measures Against Collision with Trees" to decision makers in order
      to get feedback on both the results of the study and the applicability of the efficiency
      assessment.
•     test if this approach can be applied to a larger audience, e.g. at the 3rd ROSEBUD
      Conference.
The agenda of the Bordeaux-workshop was as follows:
•     Introduction of the decision makers and their role within decision making.
•     Description of ROSEBUD.
•     "Short Training Course" on efficiency assessment.
•     Presentation of the results of efficiency assessment (CBA) on measures against
      collisions with trees.
•     A broad discussion of the results focused on the usability of these results within the
      decision making process and the "Short Training Course". This was supported by a
      set of specific questions, which was developed specifically.
The feedback from decision makers was recorded and discussed within the WP4 working
group in a meeting on the next day. A procedure for the conference was developed and an
agenda was drafted.
Furthermore, the current status of all case studies was presented and discussed among
the working group.

1.2          The 3rd ROSEBUD Conference

In accordance with the results of the WP4 – workshop in Bordeaux, the agenda for the 3rd
ROSEBUD conference was prepared (excluding formal parts):
•     Intentions and Current Status of WP4
•     A keynote lecture which addresses the need for integrating EA in the decision
      making process and encourage a fruitful discussion afterwards.
•     A "Short Training Course" on efficiency assessment.
•     Overview of all WP4 cases
In two parallel sessions:
•     Results of the two case studies were presented and discussed
•     Presentation of the decision makers' impressions on those studies with specific
      respect to their feasibility within the decision making process.
•     A discussion of the case study results focusing on the usability of the results within
      the decision making process.
In a plenary session:
                                                                                          Page 250
                                    ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



•     A plenary discussion including the two case studies and general issues of EA and
      decision making. Chairmen of the discussion were two decision makers and two
      experts. This was also supported by a set of specific questions, which was based
      on the questions used in the workshop and improved with respect of the feedback
      gathered there.
•     Preview on ROSEBUD - WP5 and the final results and products of ROSEBUD.


2            Discussion and Conclusions


2.1          An overview of the case-studies

Within the framework of ROSEBUD WP4, the efficiency of various road safety measures
was assessed through case-studies conducted in different countries. The selected
measures covered different road safety related categories, decision-making levels and
target accident groups. The evaluations were in line with standard evaluation techniques,
with additional adaptations if necessary.
Table 1 summarizes the results of the EA analyses and the characteristics of evaluation
methods applied. In total, within the WP4, 18 case-studies were carried out, which covered
10 groups of safety-related measures. Out of the 18 case-studies:
- 3 cases concerned vehicle-related measures (fitting motorcycles with ABS; compulsory
DRL for the whole year);
- 9 cases concerned infrastructure-related measures (traffic calming measures in urban
areas; grade separation of at-grade rail-road crossings; installation of roadside guardrails;
introducing signal control at a rural junction; constructing 2+1 road sections) and
- the remaining 6 cases concerned user-related measures (automatic speed enforcement;
large-scale projects of intensive police enforcement; compulsory helmet wearing for
cyclists).
It can be seen that:
•     Enforcement-related measures appear to be more cost-effective than other measures,
      obviously due to lower implementation costs. The efficiency of other user-related
      measures and of vehicle-related measures is also relatively high due to the same
      reason (low implementation costs per unit of implementation). On the other hand, the
      efficiency of infrastructure-related measures varies widely, depending both on the
      construction costs and safety effects of the measures.
•     National-level measures are generally more cost-effective than local-level measures.
      However, this finding mostly stems from the fact that the majority of local-level
      measures are road infrastructure improvements.
•     No significant differences can be found in the efficiency of similar measures applied in
      different countries.
•     The target accident group/ target population usually includes all road accidents/ all
      drivers, with some obvious exceptions such as case A ("fitting motorcycles with ABS")
      for which "motorcycle riders" are the natural target population; case G ("implementation
      of roadside guardrails") which is dedicated to the prevention of roadside collisions with
      trees; case J ("2+1 roads") which struggles with head-on collisions; and case K which
      concerns bicycle riders only.

                                                                                        Page 251
                                   ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



•   Typically, the accident costs come from official national data; in a few cases (mostly,
    Israeli and Greek case-studies on infrastructure-related measures and intensive police
    enforcement) some adaptations of the official injury costs were made to provide a
    valuation of an average accident.
•      The availability of implementation costs was problematic in many cases.
    Nevertheless, in the majority of cases the estimates of implementation costs were
    based on the official data provided by relevant authorities. In the cases where the
    evaluation was performed prior to the measure's implementation (e.g. ABS for
    motorcycles, DRL, compulsory helmets for cyclists) some practical assumptions or the
    valuations of similar measures applied in other countries (i.e. the "literature" source)
    were accounted for in the costs.
•       For the calculation of safety effects, before-after considerations with control-groups
    were the most common. In other cases, estimates from the literature or from previous
    research were applied. Only a few cases applied a number of simple assumptions,
    estimating the safety effect of the measure.
•   Additional (other than safety) effects were estimated in half of the cases. In some other
    cases a need to account for the additional effects was mentioned but not realized due
    to lacking data/ models which could isolate the effects (i.e. changes in air pollution,
    noise level, travel time or fuel consumption) associated with the measure.




                                                                                       Page 252
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS


                                                                                                                                                                                     Table 80: Summary characteristics of the case-studies
                                                                                                                                                 Level of                                                                                                                                                                                       Implemen                                                                                       Source of
                                                          Category of                                                                           implemen                                                                                                                                        Target                                            tation                                    Accident                                          safety effect
                                                           measures                                                                               tation                                                                                                                                        group                                             costs                                      costs                                               value                                                        Other effects                                     CBA results




                                                                                         User-related - Enforcement




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Accident/ driver sub-group




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Before-after comparison
                                                                Infrastructure-related


                                                                                                                      User-related - others




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Regression model




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Fuel consumption
                                              Vehicle-related




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Time savings
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Assumptions
                                                                                                                                                                            Country of measure




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                All accidents




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Official data




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Official data
                                                                                                                                                                                                 Case-responsibility




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Air pollution
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Estimates




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Estimates
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 All drivers




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Literature




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Literature




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Literature
                                                                                                                                                         Regional
                                                                                                                                              National
    Nr.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Benefits to




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Noise
                                                                                                                                                                    Local
                      Case Study                                                                                                                                                                                                     Description of measure
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                costs ratio




                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Fitting motorcycles with ABS and reducing ABS                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             1.1-1.4
A         1   ABS-Motorcycle                      √                                                                                             √                           AT                   AT                    taxes                                                                                         √                                         √           √             √                                                                                    √            √                                                                     9.4-11.7
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Automatic speed enforcement in a tunnel
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    5.4
B         1   Section Control                                                                    √                                                                   √      AT                   AT                    (motorway)                                                   √                                                           √                                        √                                            √                                                                   +
          2   Section Control                                                                    √                                                                   √      NL                   AT                    Automatic Speed Enforcement on a motorway                    √                                                                       n/a                          √                                                                                    √                           +            +                                             n/a
C         1   Daytime running lights              √                                                                                             √                           CZ                   CZ                    DRL for the whole year                                                       √                                                        √ √                         √                                                                                    √                           -                                        -                 4.3
          2   Daytime running lights              √                                                                                             √                           AT                   CZ                    DRL for the whole year                                                       √                                                        √                                          √                                                                     √                           -                                        -                 3.6
E         1   Traffic calming (urban areas)                           √                                                                                              √      IL                   IL                    Speed humps (1 road)                                         √                                                           √                                        √                          √                 √                                                                                           -                                2.0-4.0
          2   Traffic calming (urban areas)                           √                                                                                              √      GR                   GR                    Speed humps, woonerfs (area)                                 √                                                           √                                        √                          √                 √                                                                                           -                               1.14-1.2
          3   Traffic calming (urban areas)                           √                                                                                              √      CZ                   CZ                    Roundabouts instead of four-arm intersections                √                                                           √                                        √                                            √                                                                                                                              1.5
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                1.4 (urban)
F         1   Rail-road crossings                                     √                                                                                              √      IL                      IL                 Grade separation of at-grade rail-road crossing              √                                                           √                          √             √                          √                                        √                                                                   +                +              2.8 (rural)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                0.94 (urban)
          2   Rail-road crossings                                     √                                                                                              √      FI                      FI                 Grade separation of at-grade rail-road crossing              √                                                                                      √             √                                                                                                 √                                     +                +              2.5 (rural)
              Measures against collisions
G         1   with trees (guardrails)                                 √                                                                                              √      FR                   FR                    Implementation of roadside guardrails                                                         √                          √                                        √                                            √                                                                                                                             8.7
              Road improvement mix (rural
H         1   areas)                                                  √                                                                                              √      IL                      IL                 Introducing traffic signal control at a rural junction       √                                                           √                          √             √                          √                 √                                                                                                                            1.25
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       5-year project (interurban roads), with emphasis on
I         1   Intensive police enforcement                                                       √                                              √                           GR                   GR                    speed and alcohol                                            √                                                           √                          √             √                          √                                        √                √                                                                                   6.6-9.7
          2   Intensive police enforcement                                                       √                                              √                           IL                   IL                    1 year project (interurban roads)                            √                                                           √                          √             √                          √                 √                      √                                                                                                    3.5-5.0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Constructing a 2+1 road section (without median                                                                                                                                                                                                                     √
J         1   2+1 roads                                               √                                                                                              √      FI                      FI                 cable)                                                                                        √                          √                                        √                                                                                                                                                                         1.25
                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Constructing a 2+1 road section (with a median
          2   2+1 roads                                               √                                                                                              √      SW                    FI                   cable)                                                                                        √                          √                                        √                                                                                                 √                                     +                                 2.26
              Compulsory helmet regulation
K         1   for cyclists                                                                                                  √                   √                           AT                   AT                    Compulsory bicycle helmet wearing                                                             √                                                     √             √                                                                                    √                                                                                  1.14-2.28
              Compulsory helmet regulation
          2   for cyclists                                                                                                  √                   √                           DE                   AT                    Compulsory bicycle helmet wearing                                                             √                                                     √             √                                                                                    √                                                                                  2.23-4.45




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                PAGE 253
                                   ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS




2.2        The evaluation techniques applied

All the case-studies followed the standardised procedure of cost-benefit analysis (CBA).
None of the studies selected the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) due to obvious
limitations of the CEA when a single measure is evaluated and, especially, when the
evaluation should also account for other (other than safety) effects. Besides, the
discussions on the EA results with decision-makers seem easier when the results are
presented in usual money-terms.
None of the studies considered project alternatives; by default, each study compared
"implementation of the measure" with a "do nothing" alternative. All other steps of the CBA
evaluation procedure, i.e. a consideration of safety effects and side effects (on mobility
and environment), monetising all effects, estimating implementation costs, calculation of
present values of costs and benefits, and of efficiency measure (cost-benefit ratio - CBR) –
were applied by the majority of the studies. The exceptions were basically due to lacking
data.
Estimating safety effects of the measures, the emphasis was put on the application of a
correct safety evaluation. In the "ex-ante" evaluations the best available values of safety
effects (which are based on a summary of previous experience/ research) were typically
applied. In the "ex-post" evaluations, the safety effect value was typically estimated by
means of the odds-ratio with a comparison group. A weighted value of the effect, based on
the safety experience of a group of treated sites, was applied, when possible. In these
cases, confidence intervals for the estimated safety effects were also provided.
For the economic evaluation, typical scenarios adopted were "conservative" or "best
estimate", although these were based on different approaches in each case. In some
cases, different scenarios were dictated by several values of safety effects; in others – by
a consideration of safety effects only versus a combination of safety effects with other
side-effects. In any case, consideration of a number of scenarios appears to be useful for
testing sensitivity of the results and, therefore, should be recommended for the usual
evaluation practice.
Summarizing the performance of the evaluation studies, several points can be mentioned
indicating common technical problems which might occur during the CBA evaluations.
They are:
- a correct application of the odds-ratio technique, e.g. in the case of zero-values of some
of the numbers;
- ways for checking the statistical significance of the evaluation results;
- the selection of side-effects to be considered along with safety effects;
- a correct distinction between the implementation costs and negative side-effects of the
measure (e.g. increased fuel consumption or travel time).
For a more correct and uniform performance of CBA for safety-related measures it would
be useful to elaborate a categorization of cases, indicating the types of impacts (e.g.
safety, mobility, noise, air pollution) to be considered in the evaluation of each category of
measures.
For example, in the cases of infrastructure or enforcement measures, which have an
implication on travel speeds, a consideration of changes in travel time would be useful.
Another question concerns the inclusion of fines in the economic evaluation of
                                                                                      PAGE 254
                                   ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



enforcement measures. A possible recommendation may be as follows: to fully include the
investments made for enforcement measures in the costs is a necessary condition for
consideration of fines as benefits.
When a number of impacts are combined in the evaluation of a measure, a distinction
should be made between the implementation costs and negative benefits of the measure.
According to the recommended procedure (WP3, 2004), the implementation costs are the
social costs of all means of production (labour and capital) that are employed to implement
the measure, whereas the benefits include all effects which stem from the measure's
application. Some benefits may be negative, e.g. increased travel time; in this case, their
values are subtracted from the total benefits.
Aiming at a better methodological basis of the evaluation studies as well as at a
comparability of the results, it would be useful to address the above and other issues in
the extended version of guidelines for the performance of the EA studies.
In general, safety effects estimated should satisfy the criteria of a correct safety evaluation,
i.e. to account for general accident trends, selection bias and possible confounding factors
(e.g. changes in traffic volumes in "after" as opposed to "before" periods). The effect on
accident numbers needs to be based on a comparison of the null hypotheses (accidents
which would occur had no measure been taken) with actual accident numbers observed
after applying the measure. A comprehensive theory of the topic is presented in Hauer
(1997). The applicable techniques can be found in many publications (e.g. Elvik, 1997;
Elvik, 1999). It is believed that a distribution of a brief guide on standardized techniques for
the evaluation of safety effects would be helpful for safety practitioners, in general, and
particularly, for the improvement of quality of the EA studies.

2.3        The EA components: data and values

Generally, accident data were easily accessible to the authors of the EA studies. The
valuations of road accident injury costs are usually provided by recently published
evaluation studies. However, it was more difficult to attain costs of road safety measures.
In the cases of infrastructure improvements and enforcement projects, the investments are
paid from public budgets, therefore it frequently appears difficult to determine total values
of these costs. Consultations with the responsible decision-makers and/ or analysis of
valuations from similar studies may serve as the sources of values in this case.
Establishing databases with typical implementation costs of safety improvements seems to
be a practical solution for the systematic use of these values for EA studies.
While the "ex-post" studies typically estimate the actual safety effect which can be
associated with the application of safety measures, the "ex-ante" studies apply the
available values, which should be based on previous research. To stimulate the application
of more uniform and well-based values of safety effects, it would be useful to establish a
database with typical values of the effects, based on international experience. Such a
database might be open to a European network of experts and provide for general values
of safety effects on initial steps of CBA/CEA as well as assist in judging the local effects
observed.
Lack of models for evaluating side-effects associated with the safety measure (i.e.
changes in air pollution, noise level, travel time or fuel consumption) and, sometimes, lack
of local valuations of theses effects, deter the consideration of theses effects by the EA
studies. The problem may be tackled by a systematic accumulation of recommended

                                                                                        PAGE 255
                                   ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



values and solutions (depending on safety measures considered) within the guidelines for
the EA performance.

2.4        Role of barriers

The fundamental (or absolute) barriers to the application of the EA to road safety
measures were left beyond the scope of the current consideration. None of the decision-
makers involved rejected the principles of efficiency assessment. Concerning the local
level of decision-making some experts doubted the practical influence of the evaluation
results, however, not because of a principle non-acceptance of the approach but mostly
due to the awareness of other factors (political, emotional) which usually influence such
decisions.
On the other hand, the relative barriers (of institutional or technical nature) did influence
the cases' performance. The technical barriers such as typical problems with the
evaluation techniques or lacking data (as mentioned above) were generally overcome by
the evaluation studies. In some cases, thoroughly based statistical models were developed
to ascertain the lacking values of the effects. In general, the majority of technical barriers,
which might appear during the performance of an EA study, seem treatable.
A lack of obligatory procedure for the performance of cost-benefit evaluations of safety
effects is known as a major institutional barrier for the application of the EA of safety
measures. However, in many cases (mostly, "ex-post" evaluations of enforcement and
infrastructure measures) the CBA results emphasized the accident reduction effects and
the economic savings associated with the measures' application. As a result, the decision-
makers were interested in the distribution of the EA results and in further performance of
the analyses.
As to the barriers for implementation of safety measures, which were evaluated by the
studies and found effective in the majority of cases, different forms of these barriers were
identified by the studies. The wide application of the measure is frequently limited due to
economic reasons (lack of finance, high costs, etc). Sometimes, safety reasons may
conflict with other considerations (e.g. environmental issues like in case G – “measures
against collisions with trees”). In other cases (e.g. helmets for bicycles, DRL, automatic
speed enforcement) lack of publicity support or lack of acceptance by the general public
deters the decision-makers from the measure’s promotion. However, in several cases (e.g.
DRL for the Czech Republic, grade-separation of rail-road crossings in Israel, traffic
calming in urban areas in Greece) the CBA results highlighted the expected/ attained
benefits of the measures and, in this way, contributed to the acceptance of the measure by
the decision-makers.

2.5        The usefulness of efficiency assessment for decision-making

Frequently, consideration of EA is part of the preparation of regional or local road safety
plans. At the initial stage of evaluation, safety effects are usually unknown. To influence
any decision making process, EA studies have to be prepared ex-ante using impact data
from similar other measures taken from somewhere else. This stresses the need for
availability and accessibility of evaluation studies on road safety measures as well as
dissemination of EA results on an international basis. Authors of efficiency studies should
be encouraged to use results from similar cases for this purpose.


                                                                                       PAGE 256
                                   ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



In some cases, safety studies of road infrastructure measures are required to justify a
choice among different solutions to the same problem. EA can be very useful for decision
making in such cases, including the taking into account of other, non-safety, effects and
costs.
At the local level, the application of a safety measure is in many cases not just an
economic question but also a matter of subjective judgement. This problem can occur
where the program of "good measures" is developed at the national level but executed at
regional or local level. Benefits estimated at the national level are frequently not visible at
the local level, where costs and local political interests dominate the decision makers'
perspective. During the preparation of EA studies within such an environment, the financial
benefits need to be explained considering the level of future decision making in the best
possible manner.
As stated by one local decision-maker on the local level, not the millions of Euro expected
to be saved, influence the decision but the fact that somebody familiar to the decision
maker was killed in an accident. This highlights the conflict between traditional arguments
used in decision making and EA as an instrument to be promoted.
As mentioned above, decisions at the local level involve a mix of global and local interests.
In presenting the study results it is important to fit the arguments to the level of decision-
makers. This comment refers to the specific situation of national road safety programs
applied at regional or local level. To preserve the intentions of the national safety
programs, the arguments need to include a presentation which is useful for the promotion
of the original intentions at the regional or local level.
The difference in usefulness of CBA versus CEA will also very much depend on the formal
process of funding. As far as the French model, which was discussed at the workshop in
Bordeaux, was concerned, the question of selecting guard-rail installation versus tree
felling could be based on CEA, but again, emotional arguments were dominating the
negotiations in the detailed planning process.
Local decision makers in charge of road safety decisions seem to think that issues other
than casualties (i.e. mobility costs, time use, environmental costs) will hardly be of use in
local decision-making.
In general, the feelings resulting from the discussions with local safety decision makers is
that EA should be more directed to road safety and economic experts than to local
decision makers.
In the countries where the safety budget is centralized (i.e. the majority of local safety
projects are financed by the government), the requirement of a CBA of safety measures
may be distributed by stating it as a necessary condition for the application of projects
coming from the central budget.
CEA can be more applicable at the local level as no comparison with conflicting targets is
usually performed and needed. The method of CBA at lower levels of decision making
appears to be quite abstract. Specifically, in discussion with e.g. local peer groups,
benefits at the national or even global level are weighted low or even disregarded, since
impacts are not visible at the local level. The WP4 workshop showed the importance of
decision markers' understanding of the principles of EA. The "short training course" was
helpful on this issue.
Some decision-makers voiced the opinion that when politicians make decisions they do not
want to have too much input for these decisions. Elaborate EA studies narrow their range
of decisions. Therefore EA seems to be "actively disregarded" or even objected to in
                                                                                       PAGE 257
                                  ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



general. Rather cynically another opinion stated that EA is welcome as long as the results
support the intentions of decision makers.

2.6       The form of presentation of case study results

On the basis of discussions with the decision-makers it was found to be useful to
elaborate the presentation forms – the summary forms with the EA results, for different
levels of decision makers.
For laymen and non-professionals, the presentation of case results should be rather short.
Figures on fatalities usually have a strong effect on decision makers. It is recommended to
present local decision-makers with just one sheet (one page-presentation) of data, which
should include a comparison of before and after accidents. The whole case report is
needed when dealing with topics of national concern.
At a higher level of decision-making the information presented needs to be more detailed.
More detailed information improves the quality of the background material and improves
the quality of decision-making.
Presenting (marketing) the results, it is important to make a distinction between
"technicians" (the professional level) and others. The language should be adapted to the
targeted population. The educational background and function of the recipient need to be
considered. For the professional level of decision makers it is important to explain the
framework of components, which should be performed depending on categories of safety
measures evaluated.
From the various contacts with experts and decision makers in WP4, different suggestions
were made concerning the amount of information that should be presented as a result of
an EA study. It was felt that only in a small share of the cases, presenting all results of a
study will be the optimum. Some voices recommended preparing a one-page information
sheet. Frequently, the working group members received suggestions, only to present a
rating of road safety measures (comparable to "star-ratings" e.g. used for safety of new
cars), which would be very striking, particularly in discussions at local level and with the
public.
In summary: each recipient needs to be treated with an individual presentation of the
results and individual background information adapted to the recipient. Although it was
frequently stated, that the higher the level of decision making, the stronger the need for
comprehensive information, the other issues mentioned above also have to be considered
in each unique case.
An important question is how to present the results to the public. In general, it can not be
supposed that the public understands all the methods and processes of EA. Therefore,
results need to be simplified to forward an understandable message to the public. While
economic valuation of injuries and (particularly) fatalities may be accepted among experts,
the average citizen is likely to oppose a monetary valuation of life. The presentation of EA
results to the public needs to be carried out very carefully to avoid public resistance
against the basic principles of EA.

2.7       Distribution of knowledge

The WP4 workshop again showed the importance of decision markers' understanding of
the principles of EA. Training is also needed for those carrying out EA studies. There is a
                                                                                     PAGE 258
                                     ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



need for international standards (guidelines) for preparing such studies. Both shall improve
the quality of EA studies.
Within the frame of the ROSEBUD Thematic Network such guidelines will be prepared.
Deriving from WP4 experience, experts should be encouraged to publish their evaluation
results on effects of road safety measures and results of EA studies. Reports should be
inserted in international library databases (e.g. the ITRD) to become internationally
available. To enable information exchange in day-to-day-business an internet forum for EA
related issue could be installed.
Possible ways for the dissemination of ROSEBUD results and messages in a country may
be in the form of a workshop for national decision-makers, which includes: (a) a training
course on principles of the EA of road safety measures; (b) the results of evaluation
studies performed for local conditions.
One of the most important findings within the practical testing done in WP4 is that the
presentation of EA results has to be set up in close relation with the recipients. The level of
decision making (international, national, regional or local), function (experts, researchers,
government employees, politicians, etc.), educational background (lawyers, engineers,
economists, etc.) and even individual characteristics of the recipient need to be
considered. Particularly, it is recommended to take in account their personal experience
and knowledge in the field of EA. The need for preparing the presentation of EA studies is
very diverse, ranging from full training on EAT to no information at all.

2.8          Recommendations

Recommendations addressing the “best practice” guidelines and the evaluation framework
in general:
•     Further development of the EA procedures and methods is required.
•     Particularly, for a more correct and uniform performance of CBA for safety-related
      measures it would be useful to elaborate a categorization of cases, indicating the
      types of impacts (e.g. safety, mobility, noise, air pollution) to be considered in the
      evaluation of each category of measures.
•     Safety effects estimated should satisfy the criteria of correct safety evaluation. A
      distribution of a brief guide on standardized techniques for the evaluation of safety
      effects would be helpful for safety practitioners, in general, and particularly, for the
      improvement of quality of the EA studies.
•     The implementation costs of safety measures are usually lacking. Establishing
      databases with typical implementation costs of safety improvements would be of
      help for the systematic use of these values in the EA studies.
•     A database with typical values of safety effects, based on international experience
      would be useful for correct and systematic performance of the "ex-ante" studies.
•     Consideration of a number of scenarios is useful for testing sensitivity of the results
      and should become common for the usual evaluation practice.
•     Definition and main components of a mini-CBA as well as its applicability for
      different levels of decision-making should be clarified.
•     It is important to clarify the definitions of projects for which the EA of safety impact
      should be performed. It is suggested that the EA of safety impacts should be
                                                                                          PAGE 259
                                 ROSEBUD WP4 - CONCLUSIONS



    applied mostly for two types of projects: (a) the improvements which were financed
    by safety-dedicated budgets and (b) the projects aimed at improving safety.


Recommendations addressing the distribution of EA procedures/ evaluation results:
•   It would be useful to elaborate the presentation forms – the summary forms with the
    EA results, for different levels of decision-makers.
•   Presenting the results, it is important to make a distinction between "technicians"
    (the professional level) and others. The language and the details should be adapted
    to the targeted population.
•   CBA seems to be more suitable for national- and regional-level decision-making
    where the safety budgets are planned. CEA seems more suitable for local level,
    especially when several safety solutions are compared while tackling a specific
    safety problem.
•   In the countries where the safety budget is centralized, an EA of safety measures
    may be distributed by stating it as a necessary condition for the application to
    central budget.
•   Training of decision-markers is important to strengthen their understanding of the
    principles of EA. Training is also needed for those carrying out EA studies.


References
Elvik, R. (1997). Effects on Accidents of Automatic Speed Enforcement in Norway.
Transportation Research Record 1595, TRB, Washington, D. C., pp.14-19.
Elvik, R. (1999) Cost-benefit analysis of safety measures for vulnerable and
inexperienced road users, Work package 5 of EU-Project PROMISING, TØI-Report
435, Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo.
Hauer, E. (1997). Observational Before-After Studies in Road Safety. Pergamon.
WP3 (2004) Improvements in efficiency assessment tools. ROSEBUD.




                                                                                    PAGE 260
                                            ANNEXES




ANNEXES

Annex 1:Set of Questions used at the WP4 Workshop
•   Short statement of the decision-makers: What are your opinions on the case?
•   Our comments (of the team)?
•   "Interesting questions" - opinions.
•   What questions do you expect, if you take the results of this CBA to another forum?
•   What do you expect when these results are published by mass media?
•   What do you expect from a public discussion in general?
•   Is there any information missing for the further decision-making process?
•   Which will be the most critical points in further discussion - among decision-makers,
    among experts and in the public.


Annex 2: Set of Questions used for the panel discussion during the 3rd ROSEBUD
Conference
General Topic:
•   How useful is EA for decision-making?
Concerning the method:
•   Can we exchange value of life for time savings?
Concerning dissemination to different audiences:
•   Would you use EA and the results based on EA in your own communication with third
    parties?
•   How will the public accept EA?
•   Is EA understood as an objective instrument?
•   Which will be the most critical points in further discussion of EA results?
Concerning the usability in practical decision making:
•   What is needed to make EA practically useful?
•   How will EA influence the decision-making process?
•   Can decision-makers be convinced by EA?
•   Will the use of EA tools improve road safety efforts?




                                                                                     PAGE 261

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:51
posted:8/8/2011
language:English
pages:261