A New Traffic Safety Paradigm

Innovative Strategies For Achieving Ambitious Traffic Safety Goals

Todd LitmanVictoria Transport Policy Institute

Presented

CARSPVictoria, BC11 June 2018

2

3

4

5

6

8

9

New Traffic Safety Paradigm

Factor Current New

Goal Make vehicle travel safer. Make transportation systems safer.

Risk

measurementDistance-based, such as casualties per billion vehicle-kms or passenger-kms Total (all mode) traffic casualties per capita.

Solutions

considered

Targeted strategies that reduce special

risks:

• Hotspot roadway improvements.

• Anti-impaired and distracted driving campaigns .

• Graduated licenses and senior driver

testing.

• Vehicle design improvements.

• Seatbelt and helmet requirements

Strategies that reduce special risks, plus

vehicle-travel reduction strategies that

reduce risk exposure:

• More multimodal planning (improved

walking, cycling and public transit).

• More efficient transport pricing

• Smart Growth development policies

• Transportation demand management programs

Analysis

scope Program costs and traffic safety benefitsAll economic, social and environmental impacts

Canadian Traffic Deaths

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

An

nu

al

Tra

ffic

Death

s

US Traffic Death Rate

1967 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Death

s p

er

100,0

00 R

esid

en

ts

Traffic Death and Fuel Price Trends

Global Urban Traffic Death Rates

Jaipur, 37.1

Chennai, 32.9

Delhi, 31.4Pune, 30.7

Guadalajara, 26.8

Indore, 24.3

Leon, 24.2

Curitiba, 21.8

Cuidad de Mexico, 19.1

Johannesburg, 18.9

Sao Paulo, 17.1

Belo Horizonte, 17.0Bengaluru, 16.1 Kalkata, 15.7Rio de Janeiro, 14.8

Montevidio, 14.0

Lima, 11.6Mumbai, 10.9

Porto Alegre, 10.5Surat, 9.4

Bogota, 9.1Ahmadabad, 7.8

Tuscaloosa, AL, 20.0

Michigan City, 19.3

Hinesville, GA, 18.0

Joplin, MO, 17.3

Bakersfield, CA, 14.5

Chattanooga, 14.4

Jacksonville, NC, 14.0Atlanta, 10.97Stockton, 10.9

Riverside, CA, 10.8

Miami, 10.3Kansas City, MO, 10.1

Houston, 10.0

Los Angeles, 7.64

Chicago, 5.89

Washington DC, 4.37

New York, 3.49Amsterdam, 3.36

Paris, 3.09London, 2.69

Hong Kong, 2.1Toyko, 1.7

Berlin, 1.6 Stockholm, 1.23

Developing Developed but Sprawled Compact Compact and TDM

Developing

Developed but Sprawled

Compact

Compact and TDM

Per Capita Traffic Deaths

0

2

4

6

8

10

Tra

ffic

Death

s p

er

100,0

00

Resid

en

ts

Vehicle Travel Vs. Traffic Deaths

R2 = 0.6405

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Annual Vehicle Kilometers Per Capita

Tra

ffic

Fa

taliti

es

Pe

r 1

00

,00

0 P

op

. Canada

Denmark

Germany

Iceland

Italy

Japan

Netherlands

Norw ay

Sw eden

Sw itzerland

United Kingdom

United States

18

Crash Fatalities by Province

Crash Fatalities by U.S. State

0

5

10

15

20

25

Death

s P

er

100,0

00 R

esid

en

ts

Crash Fatalities Vs. Vehicle Mileage

R² = 0.8047

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

Tra

ffic

Fa

tali

tie

s P

er

10

0,0

00

Re

sid

en

ts

Per Capital Annual Vehicle Mileage

Rural

UrbanA state’s per

capita traffic

death rate tends

to increase with

per capita vehicle

travel,

particularly in

rural areas.

Crash Fatalities by City

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Ne

w Y

ork

City

San F

ran

cis

co

Cle

vela

nd

Bosto

n

Seatt

le

San D

ieg

o

Washin

gto

n, D

C

Ch

icago

Port

land

Co

lum

bus

Ha

rtfo

rd

Ra

leig

h

Baltim

ore

Buffa

lo

Milw

aukee

Phila

delp

hia

Pitts

bu

rgh

Min

neap

olis

Lo

s A

ng

ele

s

De

nver

Da

llas

San J

ose

Austin

Co

lum

bus, O

hio

Salt L

ake C

ity

Me

sa

Auro

ra

St. L

ouis

Virgin

ia B

each

Fort

Wort

h

Cin

cin

nati

Phoe

nix

India

nap

olis

Ric

hm

on

d

Ch

arlott

e

Na

sh

vill

e

Ne

w O

rlea

ns

Lo

uis

vill

e

Arlin

gto

n

Ric

hm

on

d

Riv

ers

ide

Atla

nta

San A

nto

nio

Jackson

vill

e

De

tro

it

Kansas C

ity

Ho

usto

n

Jackson

vill

e,

Fl

Tam

pa

Sacra

men

to

Birm

ingh

am

La

s V

eg

as

Mia

mi

Gle

nda

le

Me

mp

his

Tra

ffic

De

ath

s P

er

10

0,0

00

Re

sid

en

ts

US Cities Traffic Death Rates

Among U.S. urban

regions, and other

geographic areas

where data are

available, there is a

strong positive

relationship between

per capita annual

mileage and traffic

death rates.

(EMBARQ 2012)

Public Transit Increases Safety

R² = 0.6243

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 50 100 150 200 250

An

nu

al

Tra

ffic

De

ath

s P

er

10

0,0

00

Re

sid

en

ts

Annual Transit Trips Per Capita

The Vancouver region has

3.7 traffic deaths per

100,000 residents, one of

the lowest among North

American cities. This results,

in part, from high quality

public transit and associated

high transit ridership.

Vancouver

Traffic Fatalities

Youths (15-25 years old)

have about twice the traffic

fatality rates as the total

population average.

Both total and youth fatality

rates tend to decline with

increased transit ridership.

Transit-oriented cities

average about half the traffic

fatality rates as more

automobile-oriented cities.

R² = 0.3425

R² = 0.0598

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 50 100 150 200 250

Tra

ffic

Fa

tali

tie

s P

er

10

0,0

00

Re

sid

en

ts

Annual Transit Trips Per Capita, 2012

Youth

Total

Smart Growth Safety Impacts

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

New Yo

rk C

ounty, N

Y

Kings

Coun

ty, N

Y

Bronx

Cou

nty, N

Y

Queens C

ounty

, NY

San F

ranc

isco

County

, CA

Hudson

County

, NJ

Phila

delp

hia C

ounty,

PA

Suffo

lk C

ounty, M

A

Richm

ond C

ounty, N

Y

Baltim

ore ci

ty, M

D

Stoke

s Coun

ty, N

C

Mia

mi C

ounty

, KS

Davie

County

, NC

Isanti

County

, MN

Wal

ton C

ounty, G

A

Yadk

in C

ounty,

NC

Goochla

nd C

ounty

, VA

Fulto

n Count

y, O

H

Clinto

n County

, MI

Geaug

a County

, OH

An

nu

al T

raff

ic D

ea

ths

Pe

r 1

00

,00

0 R

es

.

Most Sprawled

Smartest Growth

Safety In Numbers

R² = 0.3451

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Tra

ffic

De

ath

s p

er

100

0,0

00

Re

sid

en

tsActive Mode Commute Share

Per capita traffic death rates tend to decline as active (walking and

cycling) commute mode shares increase in U.S. urban regions.

This and other research indicate that more active travel tends to

increase overall traffic safety.

What About Autonomous Vehicles?

How will

autonomous

vehicles affect

people’s lives, and

transport planning

issues such crash

rates?

Safety Impacts

Advocates predict that,

because human error

contributes to 90% of all traffic

crashes, autonomous vehicles

will reduce crashes by 90%.

This overlooks additional risks

these technologies introduce.

Hardware and software failures. Complex electronic

systems can fail. Self-driving vehicles will certainly have

errors that cause crashes; the question is how frequently.

Malicious hacking. Self-driving technologies can be

manipulated for amusement or crime.

Increased risk-taking. When travellers feel safer they

tend to take additional risks, for example, reduced

seatbelt use and less caution by other road users.

Platooning risks. Many potential benefits, such as

reduced congestion and pollution emissions, require

platooning. This can introduce new risks.

Increased total vehicle travel. Autonomous driving may

increase total vehicle travel and therefore crashes.

Travel Impacts

Increases Vehicle Travel Reduces Vehicle Travel

• Provides vehicle travel to non-drivers

(people who are disabled, young or

impaired).

• Increased convenience and productivity

increases travel.

• Empty vehicle travel when dropping off or

picking up passengers

• Encourage sprawled development.

• Reduces traffic congestion and vehicle operating costs.

• Convenient shared vehicle services reduce

vehicle ownership and use.

• Increases vehicle ownership and operating

costs.

• Self-driving buses improve transit services.

• Reduced traffic risk and parking facilities

make urban living more attractive.

• Reduces some vehicle travel, such as cruising for parking.

Autonomous driving can increase vehicle travel in some ways and reduce it in

others. Total impacts will depend on the public policies implemented in a

jurisdiction. This will affect external costs including congestion, roadway subsidies,

accident risk and pollution emissions.

Shared Mobility Principles (www.sharedmobilityprinciples.org)

1. Plan our cities and their mobility together.

2. Prioritize people over vehicles.

3. Support shared and efficient use of vehicles,

lanes, curbs, and land.

4. Engage with stakeholders.

5. Promote equity.

6. Lead the transition towards a zero-emission

future and renewable energy.

7. Support fair user fees across all modes.

8. Aim for public benefits via open data.

9. Work towards integration and seamless

connectivity.

10. In urban areas autonomous vehicles should

only operate in shared fleets.

Autonomous Vehicle Implementation

• Benefits, costs and travel impacts are

uncertain. Net benefits will probably be

smaller than optimists predict

• Recent predictions that autonomous vehicles

will soon be cheap and ubiquitous, and by

2030 will displace most private vehicle travel,

are mostly made by people with financial

interests in the industry.

• During the 2020-30s they are likely to be

expensive and limited in ability. It will

probably be the 2040s before most middle-

income families can purchase reliable and

affordable autonomous vehicles, and longer

for lower-income households.

• It is unlikely that most vehicles will be

autonomous before 2050 unless many

functional vehicles are scrapped.

New Traffic Safety Strategies

Conventional Safety Strategies New Paradigm Strategies

• Anti-impaired and distracted

driving campaigns

• Graduated driver’s licenses

• Special senior driver testing

• Roadway improvements

• Vehicle improvements

• Vehicle occupant crash protection

• More multimodal planning (improved

walking, cycling and public transit)

• More efficient transport pricing

(distance-based insurance and

registration fees, parking fees, road

tolls and higher fuel taxes)

• Reduced parking supply and subsidies

• Smart Growth development policies

• Complete streets policies

• TDM programs (such as commute trip reduction)

Pay-As-You-Drive Insurance Pricing

• Motorists pay by the vehicle-kilometre, so a

$600 annual premium becomes 3¢/km and a

$2,000 annual premium becomes 10¢/km.

This gives motorists a significant financial

incentive to drive less, but is not a new fee at

all, simply a different way to pay existing fees.

• Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) insurance provides

large safety benefits by giving motorists an

incentive to reduce their vehicle mileage,

reducing total traffic volumes. Higher-risk-

per-mile motorists have a greater incentive to

reduce their mileage, which should lead to an

extra increase in road safety.

Win-Win Transport SolutionsPlanning

Objectives

Expand

Roadways

Alt. Fuel

Vehicles

Targeted Safety

Strategies

New Safety

Strategies

Reduce traffic congestion ✓ ✓

Roadway cost savings ✓

Parking cost savings ✓

Consumer savings ✓

Improve mobility options ✓

Improve traffic safety ✓ ✓

Energy conservation ✓ ✓

Pollution reduction ✓ ✓

Land use objectives ✓

Public fitness & health ✓

Comparing Costs

$0.00

$0.05

$0.10

$0.15

$0.20

$0.25

$0.30

Do

llars

Per

Veh

icle

M

ile

New Safety Strategy ConsiderationReports and Programs Considers New Strategies?

Countermeasures That Work, NHTSA None

Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors, ITE None

Developing Safety Plans: Manual for Local Rural Road Owners, FHWA None

Getting to Zero Alcohol-impaired Driving Fatalities: A Comprehensive Approach to a Persistent Problem

Recommends improving public transportation and ridehailing services

Global Status Report on Road Safety, World Health OrganizationRecommends walking, cycling and transit

improvements

Highway Safety Manual, AASHTO None

Highway Safety Program Guidelines, GHTSC None

Motor Vehicle PICCS, CDC None

Roadway Safety Guide, Road Safety Foundation None

Safe Ride Programs, Mothers Against Drunk Driving None

The Injury Research Foundation None

Toward Zero Deaths None

Traffic Safety Fundamentals Handbook, MDOT None

Transportation and Health Tool, USDOT and CDCRecommends multimodal planning for safety and

health

Transportation Planner's Safety Desk Reference, US DOTRecommends some vehicle travel reduction

strategies

World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention, GRSP Recommends demand management strategies

Zero Road Deaths and Serious Injuries: Leading a Paradigm Shift to a Safe System

Recommends some vehicle travel reduction strategies

39

Example: Malahat Highway

Several options are being

considered to address

congestion problems on the

Malahat highway north of

Victoria, BC. Current

proposals have $500 million

to $1.5 billion capital costs,

or about $30 to $60 million in

annualized costs.

40

Multi-Modal Malahat Solutions

• Bus frequency: 30-60 minute headways

(18-24 daily trips).

• Bus fares: $3-$6 per trip, $120 monthly

passes.

• Commute trip reduction programs.

• Bus priority: saves 3-10 minutes per trip.

• Improve transit user information and

marketing.

• Results: 10-20% shift

• Annualized Costs: $3-6 million

Motorists Benefit Too

More balanced transport policy is no more “anti-car” than a healthy diet is anti-food. Motorists have every reason to support these reforms:

• Reduced traffic and parking congestion.

• Improved safety.

• Improved mobility options for non-drivers.

• Reduced chauffeuring burden.

• Often the quickest and most cost effective way to improve driving conditions.

Supported by Professional Organizations

• Canadian Institute of

Transportation Engineers

• Transport Canada

• American Planning Association

• American Public Health Assoc.

• Center for Disease Control

• Federal, state, regional and

local planning agencies

• World Health Organization

• National Governor’s

Association

• And much more...

Conclusions

• Traffic death rates are increasing. Additional safety strategies are needed to achieve ambitious safety goals such as Vision Zero.

• New research improves our understanding of traffic risks. Numerous studies indicate that exposure - the amount people travel – is a critical risk factor: all else being equal, increased travel increases crashes.

• A new paradigm recognizes that all vehicle travel incurs risks, so policies that stimulate vehicle travel increase crashes and those that reduce travel provide safety.

• New safety strategies complement existing programs, which become more effective, equitable and acceptable if implemented with improved mobility options that help higher-risk travellers reduce driving and risk exposure.

• New safety strategies tend to provide co-benefits, and so are supported by comprehensive analysis.

Research on Pricing Effects

Paul J. Burke and Shuhei Nishitateno (2015), "Gasoline Prices and Road Fatalities: International Evidence,” Economic Inquiry (DOI: 10.1111/ecin.12171); at http://bit.ly/1QBY62Z.

G. Chi, et. al. (2010), “Gasoline Prices and Traffic Safety in Mississippi,” Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 41(6), pp. 493−500; at http://nexus.umn.edu/Papers/GasPricesAndTrafficSafety.pdf.

G. Chi, et al. (2011), A Time Geography Approach to Understanding the Impact of Gasoline Price Changes on Traffic Safety, TRB (www.trb.org); at http://nexus.umn.edu/Papers/TimeGeography.pdf.

G. Chi, et al. (2013), “Gasoline Price Effects on Traffic Safety in Urban and Rural Areas: Evidence from Minnesota, 1998–2007,” Safety Science, Vol. 59, pp. 154-162; at http://bit.ly/2nkESVx.

Joseph Ferreira Jr. and Eric Minike (2010), A Risk Assessment of Pay-As-You-Drive Auto Insurance, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (http://dusp.mit.edu).

David C. Grabowski and Michael A. Morrisey (2006), “Do Higher Gasoline Taxes Save Lives?” Economics Letters, Vol. 90, pp. 51–55; abstract at www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176505002533.

Todd Litman (2012), “Pricing for Traffic Safety: How Efficient Transport Pricing Can Reduce Roadway Crash Risks,” Transportation Research Record 2318, pp. 16-22 (www.trb.org); at www.vtpi.org/price_safe.pdf.

Michael A. Morrisey and David C. Grabowski (2011), Gas Prices, Beer Taxes and GDL Programmes: Effects on Auto Fatalities Among Young Adults in the US, Applied Economics, Vol. 43:25, pp. 3645-3654, (DOI: 10.1080/00036841003670796).

Other Related ResearchHamed Ahangari, Carol Atkinson-Palombo and Norman Garrick (2017), “Automobile Dependency as a Barrier to Vision Zero: Evidence from the States in the USA,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 107, pp. 77-85 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.07.012); at https://bit.ly/2IMCfdc.

Eric Dumbaugh and Robert Rae (2009), “Safe Urban Form: Revisiting the Relationship Between Community Design and Traffic Safety,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 75, No. 3, Summer (DOI: 10.1080/01944360902950349)

Reid Ewing, Shima Hamidi and James Grace (2016), “Urban Sprawl as a Risk Factor in Motor Vehicle Crashes,” Urban Studies, Vol. 53/2, pp. 247-266 (https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098014562331); at https://bit.ly/2L9zGQT.

Fyhri, et al. (2017), “Safety in Numbers for Cyclists—Conclusions from a Multidisciplinary Study of Seasonal Change in Interplay and Conflicts,” Traffic Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 105, pp. 124-133 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.04.039).

Norman W. Garrick and Wesley Marshall (2011), “Does Street Network Design Affect Traffic Safety?” Accident; Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 769-81, DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.024.

Brad N. Greenwood and Sunil Wattal (2015), Show Me the Way to Go Home: An Empirical Investigation of Ride Sharing and Alcohol Related Motor Vehicle Homicide, Fox School of Business Research Paper No. 15-054; at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2557612

Wesley E. Marshall and Norman W. Garrick (2011), “Evidence on Why Bike-Friendly Cities Are Safer for All Road Users,” Environmental Practice, Vol 13/1, March; at http://files.meetup.com/1468133/Evidence%20on%20Why%20Bike-Friendly.pdf.

Brendan Murphy, David M. Levinson, and Andrew Owen (2017), “Evaluating the Safety in Numbers Effect for Pedestrians at Urban Intersections,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 106, pp. 181–190 (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.06.004)

Jim P. Stimpson, et al. (2014), “Share of Mass Transit Miles Traveled and Reduced Motor Vehicle Fatalities in Major Cities of the United States,” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, (doi:10.1007/s11524-014-9880-9)

Ben Welle, et al. (2018), Sustainable & Safe: A Vision and Guidance for Zero Road Deaths, World Resources Institute (www.wri.org).

Jiho Yeo, Sungjin Park and Kitae Jang (2015), “Effects of Urban Sprawl and Vehicle Miles Traveled on Traffic Fatalities,” Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 397-403 (https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2014.948616).

“Transportation Talk” Article

A summary of this research is published in

“A New Traffic Safety Paradigm,”

Transportation Talk, The Journal of the

Canadian Institute of Transportation

Engineers, Winter 2017-18.

(https://issuu.com/cite7/docs/tt39.4-

winter201718)

“If Health Matters: Integrating Public Health Objectives into Transportation Decision-Making”

“Safe Travels: Evaluating Mobility Management Traffic Safety Benefits”

“The Hidden Traffic Safety Solution: Public Transportation”

“Autonomous Vehicle Implementation Predictions”

“Transportation Pricing for Traffic Safety”

“A New Traffic Safety Paradigm”

“Online TDM Encyclopedia”

“Smart Growth Savings”

“PAYDINBC.ca”

and more...

www.vtpi.org