1 / 28

“Safe speeds” Data for a safer system

“Safe speeds” Data for a safer system. Jan Sjorup. Road Safety Support. Saving lives delivering justice. Data for a safer system.

marx
Télécharger la présentation

“Safe speeds” Data for a safer system

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Safe speeds” Data for a safer system Jan Sjorup Road Safety Support Saving lives delivering justice

  2. Data for a safer system UK ran the National Safety Camera programme between 2000 to 2007, Monitoring and evaluating the programme using national rules and guidelines, collecting data nationally to measure the effectiveness of enforcement cameras. (UK is the only country to have done this at a national level)

  3. Data for a safer system • Resulted in • Two year evaluation • Three year evaluation • Four year evaluation 24 38 8

  4. Typical data utilised Stats 19 collision data Speed survey’s Offence Engineering surveys Communication survey’s Data for a safer system Provided a national standard for Monitoring and evaluation National Program

  5. Data for a safer system Data collected under the programme provided the intelligence for the future planning, implementation and evaluation of enforcement strategies at both a local, national level and seen as a benchmark internationally. Other national independent studies enforced the conclusion: That cameras are an effective tool at reducing Road casualties

  6. Data for a safer system Four year Report Three year Report 40% KSI Reduction 42% KSI Reduction

  7. Data Example

  8. Use of Offence and Postcode dataMeasurement of camera effectivenessAverage Speed

  9. Use of Offence and Postcode data

  10. Use of Offence and Postcode data

  11. What is enforcement Saving lives delivering justice

  12. What is enforcement Traffic speed Compliance Deterrence General and specific Subjective risk of apprehension Sound Legislation is the basis of law enforcement Legislation sufficient for compliance Objective risk of apprehension Enforcement Activities Legislation

  13. Red Amber Green (RAG) Random Road Watch (RRW) Types of Speed enforcement Strategy

  14. Types of Speed enforcement Strategy Red Amber Green (RAG): • Sites are selected on there casualty record and enforcement prioritised dependant on the worst affected sites. • Local criteria based on Dft Guidelines used to select site based on: • Casualty record • Speed • Engineering issues Used for Fixed & Mobile camera enforcement (not mandatory)

  15. Red Amber Green (RAG enforcement) • Effective at reducing casualties at specific sites (45% to 89% casualty reduction achieved). limits general deterrence over greater area • 2006 Dft recognised that continuance in existing enforcement policy would only maintain existing reduction. “ see graph below” • Provision in 06/07 guidelines to adopt Route enforcement.

  16. Random Road Watch (RRW):The randomness of enforcement is a major determinant of driver’s subjective assessment of risk of apprehension. The exact location and time of speed enforcement should be unknown to drivers. The unpredictability of enforcement will increase the effects in terms of time and space. Enforcement activities are best rotated randomly. RRW is a enforcement resource management technique that randomly schedules levels of enforcement with the aim of realizing long-term, widespread coverage of a road network.Evidence from the Australia scheme showed benefit/cost ratio for the programme was estimated to be 55:1. Types of Speed enforcement Strategy

  17. Types of Speed enforcement Strategy Random Road Watch (RRW): Sites are selected for maximum visibility at different times on routes and locations to increase “subjected apprehension” and hence the “General Deterrence”of being detected and prosecuted. • Phased in over time on routes and sites. • Public awareness campaign at program introduction It is interesting to note that speeds in France already began decreasing with the announcement of the automatic speed control programme, even before the first speed cameras were actually installed. • Increases “Perceived Perception of Enforcement” using limited resources Most effective for Mobile enforcement

  18. Types of Speed enforcement Strategy Random Road Watch (RRW): • Randomisation of enforcement enhances the deterrent effect giving the impression of a large-scale enforcement effort • Implementation provides a further step change that aids speed and casualty reduction. • Known to be particularly effective in reducing fatal casualties Australia evidence suggests 31% reduction in fatal casualties over 18 months “Newstead et al” • Cumbria observed similar results. (2007 to 2011)

  19. Halo effect 3 2 1 2 3 Time halo’ can be defined as the length of time that the effects of enforcement on drivers’ speed behaviour continue after the enforcement operations have ended. • The effects of visible camera operations along the road side tend to dissipate after 3 days. Days

  20. Halo effect 2500 2000 1500 500 1000 Distance Halo • Defined as the distance over which the effects of an enforcement operation last after a driver passed the enforcement site. • Larger distance halo effects can be achieved if the enforcement method is ‘randomised’. The minimum distance halo effect found at fixed speed camera sites (500 m) is almost five times smaller than the minimum distance halo effect of physical policing (2.4 km) Meters

  21. Real life exampleCumbriaRRW Saving lives delivering justice

  22. The Problem 2003 – County Perspective 71 the Maximum number of KSI casualties that could be dealt with by enforcing cluster sites under Dft guidelines 555 KSI Casualties spread around the county

  23. Area of Influence (Halo) On-Site Reduction 77.5%, Off-Site 20% between 2003 to 2006

  24. RRW – Increase Area of Influence RRW Sites introduced from 2007

  25. Outcome 2010 – County Perspective 9 the number of KSI casualties at cluster sites 194 KSI Casualties seen in 2010

  26. Layered EnforcementModel Saving lives delivering justice

  27. Layered Enforcement Model • Layer 6 Average Speed Camera • Data Publicised • Layer 5 Fixed Core spot cameras • Installed under Dft Hypothecation criteria • Data publicised • Layer 4 Mobile core site enforcement • Selected under Dft Hypothecation criteria • Layer 3 Community Concern • Mobile enforcement • Layer 2 Random Road Watch • Mobile enforcement • Layer 1 Traditional Police enforcement • Officer Stops Layer 6 Layer 5 Layer 4 Layer 3 Layer 2 Layer 1

  28. Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Layer 6 Layered Enforcement Model Communications All Layers need to be accompanied by an effective communication campaign to increase drivers perceived perception of enforcement so as to increase subjective apprehension and overall general deterrence. . Layered enforcement provides an overall enforcement solution that can be tailored to suit partnership requirements using the best practice of all enforcement strategies Enforcement layers work together to enhance the Haloeffect throughout the road network, increasing subjective apprehension and general deterrence to affect driver behaviour, reduce speed and road casualties throughout the enforcement area.

More Related