U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000


Skip to content U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration

Office of International Programs

FHWA Home / Office of International Programs

Chapter Two

Click on a link below to jump to the next part of the report:

General Report Information
Executive Summary
Chapter One - Introduction
Chapter Two - Key Findings
Chapter Three - Common Safety Program Themes
Chapter Four - Recommendations and Implementation Strategy
References
Appendix A - European Contacts
Appendix B - Team Members
Appendix C - Amplifying Questions

Click on a link below to go to a specific topic in this chapter:
Key Findings
Findings in Sweden
Findings in Germany
Findings in the Netherlands
Findings in the United Kingdom


KEY FINDINGS

Each country visited during the scanning study provided information with potential to significantly advance the effectiveness of highway safety programs in the United States. This chapter summarizes safety programs, policies, and implementation activities observed in each country that the scanning team considers key to the effective management and organization of comprehensive highway safety. Examples of safety program elements and activities in each country are also listed. Some of the examples were the focus of previous scanning studies and may have been implemented in the United States already. In other cases, elements and activities are described to reinforce the idea that international agreement exists on many safety approaches.

Back to topic list

FINDINGS IN SWEDEN

In Sweden, the scanning team met with representatives of the Swedish National Road Administration and Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute. Team members discussed a number of safety policies, programs, and activities with Swedish experts. The discussions summarized in this report focus on the “Vision Zero” philosophy, corridor-level crash analysis, and a program to investigate all fatal crashes. Examples of safety program elements used in Sweden also are provided.

Vision Zero: National Philosophy and Continuing Discussion
A subject of international discussion for several years has been the concept of “Vision Zero.” This concept is the overarching safety philosophy that guides highway safety decisions in Sweden. The ultimate objective of Vision Zero is a roadway system in which no fatalities or serious injuries occur. It is recognized that roadway users will always make errors, but Vision Zero is considered to be the basis for a social contract with roadway users that implies they will not be killed or seriously injured in a crash if they are responsible, wear seat belts, follow road rules (such as speed limits), and do not drive under the influence of alcohol. Sweden’s safety goal is a total fatality reduction of 50 percent between 1996 and 2007.(2) Note that this is a reduction in total fatalities and not a fatality rate reduction.

The philosophy of Vision Zero is that roadway fatalities and serious injuries are morally and ethically unacceptable, and that when they do occur it is a shared failure of the individuals and groups in the transportation system. These include, but are not limited to, transportation policymakers and politicians, planners, drivers and road users, police agencies, highway agencies and road managers, driving educators, transportation companies, and vehicle manufacturers. In the past, much of the responsibility for a safe trip was placed on roadway users. This has been a point of discussion, however, because roadway safety is one of the responsibilities of the Swedish National Road Administration, which now has a plan of measures for increased roadway safety.

Not surprisingly, the scanning team found a continuing dialogue in Sweden and elsewhere on the theory of shared responsibility for roadway fatalities and the impacts of Vision Zero on day-to-day safety program implementation. As mentioned previously, one component of Vision Zero is a shared responsibility approach, and many believe this will have to occur for it to be successful. At the same time, the Swedish National Road Administration and its roadway designers always have had ultimate responsibility for roadway safety throughout Sweden. Others believe that effective safety improvements require a shared responsibility between the government and the roadway user. The Vision Zero focus on fatalities and serious injuries has resulted in discussions about its impact on the need to implement day-today safety improvements to reduce the number of crashes. One argument is that about half of Sweden’s fatalities occur on 15 percent of the roadway network, and focusing programs on these dangerous roads is the most cost-effective solution.(3) The other side of the argument is that a focus on fatalities and serious injuries ignores the need and funding for general safety improvements that reduce total crashes.

The focus on highway fatality and serious injury reductions in Sweden has resulted in a programming framework that encourages safety improvements related to the tolerance of a human body to kinetic energy. The multidimensional model followed uses measures that manage kinetic energy during a crash as its key components. The model focuses on vehicle crashworthiness, occupant restraints and their use, and vehicle speed. This model is the framework followed for safety improvements and fatality investigations that occur in Sweden. The focus is on crash severity reduction, not total crash prevention.

Comprehensive Fatality Investigations
Since 1997, all crashes in Sweden that resulted in fatalities have been investigated individually.(4) The objective of the investigations is to determine what factors caused the fatality (see the previous kinetic energy discussion) versus what caused the crash. Crashes are divided into three groups:

In general, the three groups of fatal crashes above are defined by which component of the roadway environment failed. For example, 62 percent of fatalities investigated were found to result from a mismatch between roadway speed and the passive safety designed into the roadway.(5) The results of the investigation have been used to improve safety standards and implement safety improvements in Sweden. They support the shared responsibility basis of Vision Zero because all interacting components of the crash environment were investigated (e.g., vehicle, design, and driver) and the ultimate cause of the fatality determined. In other words, the potential involvement in a crash of many different groups was considered. For example, if a crash involved a drunk driver who crossed the roadway centerline, hit a taxi, and caused the death of a baby, the responsibility of several different roadway safety groups might be represented by the following newspaper headlines:

Suggested solutions to avoid future fatalities also are often multidisciplinary, such as driver education on seatbelt use combined with roadside design improvements. These types of solutions, however, also require comprehensive coordination and communication within and between safety agencies.

Corridor Crash Analysis
The general approach to safety or crash analysis in Sweden is interesting. The approach corresponds to the requirements and focus of Vision Zero, and a basic understanding of the location and extent of the safety concerns in Sweden. For example, the objective of the analysis approach is to reduce fatalities and serious injuries in a cost-effective manner. In addition, safety improvement locations are chosen by a comparison of fatality rates per kilometer along similar roadway classes.

For the most part, identification of "black spot" or high-crash locations is done on a limited basis in Sweden. The focus instead is on "black environments," those roadway subclasses, or roadways with similar characteristics, that have a higher-than-expected number of crashes per mile (kilometer). If an analysis of the data shows that an entire subclass - such as two-lane rural highways with no shoulders - has a higherthan-acceptable number of crashes, roadways within that subclass may become the focus of a safety improvement program. Improvements would be made to the entire subclass of roadways, and not be based on the crash experience at individual locations. The focus on the safety experience of a roadway environment or corridor also reduces the need for the accuracy necessary in crash location data for black spot analysis. Black spot investigations are still used to monitor safety concerns and suggest improvements at local and regional government levels, but the application of Vision Zero has had an impact on the ability to continue these activities.

Safety Program Elements and Activities
Examples of safety program elements and activities in Sweden are listed below. This list includes only a small portion of those occurring in Sweden and is not comprehensive. The list represents those safety program elements of particular interest to scanning team members.

Back to topic list

FINDINGS IN GERMANY

In Germany, the scanning team met with representatives of the following groups:

Team members discussed a significant number of safety policies, programs, and activities with German experts. The discussions summarized in this report focus on the federal road safety program, local accident commissions, and the training and technology transfer of law enforcement and accident commission members. Examples of safety program elements and activities also are listed.

Federal Program for Improved Road Safety

In February 2001, the German federal government published the "Program for Improved Road Safety," which includes more than 100 suggested highway safety initiatives in the areas of engineering, education, and enforcement.(6) It is an advisory document for safety application in the German lander, or states. The initiatives recommend five safety program priorities:

Safety measures described in the program address:

Similar, more detailed plans also have been prepared to guide specific safety activities in some German lander.

The "Program for Improved Road Safety" does not include fatality and serious injury crash reduction goals or targets. It appeared that a 50 percent reduction in fatalities and serious injuries within the next 10 years was proposed initially, but it was not included in the document approved by the government. One expert who met with the scanning team expressed hope that quantitative goals would be included when the next program was approved in two years. He believes quantitative safety goals would help inspire and motivate, indicate a stronger political commitment, allow more effective use of safety measures, and be a measure to evaluate completed safety improvements. Another proposal for the future is to use the government's annual "Road Accident Prevention Report" as a controlling document for the federal road safety program. This document would be expanded to report the effectiveness of different safety measures and could be used to help monitor, measure, evaluate, and guide the safety program.

Highway safety analysis and improvements are high priorities in Germany, and many organizations are involved, including those the scanning team met with. The federal safety program guides the activities of these organizations. The similarity of subjects addressed by the groups the team visited, as well as their organizational plans and agendas, showed that a significant amount of coordination and cooperation exists among the national, state, and local governments, research organizations, and nongovernmental organizations. The German Road Safety Council, for example, coordinates all public and nongovernmental activities of its members within Germany. It focuses on road-user education and is financially supported by the national and state ministries. Overall, the scanning team observed a sense of pride and competition among groups in improving Germany's highway safety.

Local Accident Commissions
The German government has required locally based accident commissions since 1971. More than 500 of these city and county commissions exist, and they are required to meet at least twice a year. The multidisciplinary commissions typically are composed of seven or eight members, including police officers and representatives from the road construction and traffic authorities. The legislative requirement to have these commissions has formalized and made commonplace the process of multidisciplinary local safety analysis in Germany. The commissions may be one reason a high level of safety coordination and communication occurs throughout the country.

The local accident commissions are required to identify, investigate, and suggest solutions for high-risk or black spot locations within their jurisdiction. They review pin maps, which are documents with colored pins to indicate locations of crashes of various types and severity levels. The police agency representative on the commission prepares pin maps for the previous year and the preceding three years. The one-year map includes all crashes that have occurred at each location, and the three-year map includes only those with fatalities or serious injuries. About a third of the localities also review collision diagrams prepared by the highway agency.

The suggested criteria for identifying a safety black spot in a German locality is five similar crashes at a location in the past year, three fatalities or serious injuries in the past three years, or five personal injury crashes within the past three years. Commissions typically know where black spot locations are in their locality, and may consider all locations with five or more crashes in a year. They identify the 20 to 30 locations that cause the most concern, with a focus on locations with recent fatalities and crashes involving children. At least two programs have been introduced in Germany to assist in the partial automation this process, but for the most part it is done manually.

Crash analysis in Germany is also done on a larger scale and at different stages of a roadway improvement. In addition to black spots, roadway segments and areas are also considered. For example, safety performance might be evaluated on roadways with specific characteristics, such as rural two-lane roadways with no shoulders. Also, there is a goal to incorporate safety into the process of designing and planning roadways through the introduction of an official road safety audit process, completion of cost-benefit safety analyses, and development of network safety analysis tools.

Training and Technology Transfer
A significant amount of safety training and technology transfer occurs or is planned in Germany. For example, police officers, including those on local accident commissions, receive consistent and comprehensive training in the areas of traffic management and crash analysis at the Federal Police Leadership Academy. They are trained in developing pin maps, as well as in analyzing and evaluating traffic safety situations. For this reason, they are key participants in accident commission discussions. Their training and the data they provide make them essential and knowledgeable commission members.

Some accident commissions, of course, are more effective than others. A training program for commissions recently has been developed, and instructors are being trained. Recently published documents available to the accident commission include "Measuring and Evaluating Accident-Type Maps" and "Measures Against Frequent Accident Sites."(7) (8) These documents help commissions with their use of pin maps and provide examples and photos of possible countermeasures for black spot locations.

Safety Program Elements and Activities
Examples of safety program elements and activities in Germany are listed below. This list includes only examples of particular interest to scanning team members and should not be considered comprehensive.

Back to topic list

FINDINGS IN THE NETHERLANDS

The scanning team met with representatives of the following groups in the Netherlands:

The scanning team discussed a significant number of safety policies, programs, and activities with experts in the Netherlands. The discussions summarized in this report focus on what team members believe are key components of the Dutch roadway safety improvement approach. Subjects discussed include the country's "National Traffic and Transport Plan," the concept of sustainable safety, the Dutch approach to decentralization and cooperation in highway safety, and the application of corridor and area-wide safety improvements. Examples of safety programs and activities also are listed.

National Traffic and Transport Plan
The Netherlands' "National Traffic and Transport Plan," distributed in October 2000, is a summary of the expected approach to traffic and transport issues between 2001 and 2020.(9) The plan acknowledges the need for mobility, but adds that it must be balanced with accessibility, safety, and quality-of-life issues. A section of the plan focuses on roadway safety. Key areas of consideration for roadway safety include creation of a sustainable safe roadway infrastructure, intensified traffic enforcement and new regulations, information campaigns and permanent traffic education, and introduction of in-vehicle technologies.

The Netherlands is believed to have been the first country to commit to quantitative roadway safety goals.(10) The country has had long-term national safety goals since at least the late 1980s. The roadway safety improvement goal stated in the "National Traffic and Transport Plan" is a 25 percent reduction in fatalities and hospitalizations between 2001 and 2010. This goal is equivalent to a 30 percent reduction in fatalities (with a annual maximum of 750) and a 25 percent reduction in serious injuries (with a maximum of 14,000) by 2010, compared to the 1997-1999 average. The Institute for Road Safety Research has determined that achieving the target reduction for fatalities by 2010 is possible, but the reduction in serious injury and hospitalizations will require more work.

The goals in the "National Traffic and Transport Plan" form the basis of the safety plans, policies, and goals created at lower levels of government. For example, regional or provincial safety improvement reduction goals are the same as those stated in the national plan, but are adjusted for areas expecting large population increases. Details of regional plans are based on programming and implementation documents, as well as on capabilities and resources. Municipal safety plans are not required in the Netherlands, but these jurisdictions do indicate how they will help achieve national safety targets.

Sustainable Safety Concept
The Netherlands' current approach to roadway safety is the most recent stage in a series of advancements over several decades. During the 1980s and early 1990s, roadway safety was directed by a spearhead policy. The measures in this policy were generally reactive and mitigated the improvement of locations with known safety problems, such as black spots. It focused on activities related to the identification and improvement of black spots, speeding and speed management, drunk driving, cyclist and moped driver training, heavy vehicle safety, and promotion of such safety devices as seatbelts, helmets, and roadside barriers. The current strategy, "sustainable safety," was introduced in 1990. This approach to safety improvements is more proactive and preventive than past strategies.

The underlying philosophy of the sustainable safety approach is that roadway designs should be oriented to the human being, and that prevention and proactive safety improvements are better than a reactive approach of improving facilities after crashes have occurred. The sustainable safety approach encourages roadway environments designed to address the limitations of roadway users, vehicles with technologies that simplify the driving task and protect other road users, and roadway users who are educated and well informed.

The roadway design principles of sustainable safety are:

Sustainable safety calls for roadways with similar functions to be designed in a similar manner to serve the appropriate roadway user and facilitate acceptable decisions, such as speed choice. These types of roadways are called "self-explaining."

The Netherlands is implementing the sustainable safety approach in two phases. The first phase (1997 to 2001) focused on feasible and practical applications of safety improvement measures. The start-up program for the first phase included 24 actions. They included creating roadway classification plans, expanding urban 18 miles-perhour and 36 miles-per-hour (30 and 60 kilometers-per-hour) zones, better assignment of priority on traffic arterials, standardized priority at roundabouts, roadway rules for mopeds, increased enforcement and education programs, and priority to cyclists from the right. In addition, the protocol for roadway safety audits was developed and tested in 1998, and audit training was conducted in 2001. Roadway safety audits, however, have not been formally adopted in the Netherlands as a requirement for transportation infrastructure projects.

Phase two of the sustainable safety implementation plan starts in 2002 and is planned to end in 2010. This phase will include education and enforcement measures, vehicles and vehicle technologies, spatial planning issues, and measures for the private transport sector. In addition, the 18 and 36 miles-per-hour (30 and 60 kilometers-per-hour) zones will be expanded, arterials will be re-engineered, and more communication and enforcement on alcohol and drug use will be added. In addition, safety activities will be targeted at schools, parents, and students, and a general increase in safety awareness will be promoted. More post-school education and safety training are envisioned.

Decentralization and Cooperation
Two key components of effective highway safety implementation in the Netherlands are appropriate decentralization of responsibility and a culture of coordination and cooperation. In the "National Traffic and Transport Plan," the Dutch government recognized that its ability to meet national fatality reduction goals would require the decentralization of roadway safety improvement responsibilities. Many crashes occur on 30 and 48 miles-per-hour (50 and 80 kilometers-per-hour) roadways, and the goal was to assign responsibility to those levels of government where the improvement could be accomplished most effectively. An official roadway safety decentralization agreement was signed in 1994, and required establishment of Regional Road Safety Agencies to systematically coordinate safety organizations and their improvements. In general, the Dutch government wants to "[d]ecentralize where feasible, centralize where imperative."(9) (11)

The decentralization agreement and the content of the "National Traffic and Transport Plan" were determined through a negotiation process called the "Polder" model. This model solves problems through close consultation and eventual agreement of all the groups interested in a particular subject. The Dutch understand that this process of cooperative and all-inclusive agreement may take longer than other approaches, but it is common in the Netherlands. The concept of sustainable safety was the result of consultation among national, regional, and local levels of government. In addition, a high level of cooperation and support exists between government entities and nongovernmental organizations.

Corridor and Area-Wide Improvements
The Netherlands traditionally has used an extensive reactive program of black spot identification for highway safety improvement programming. In fact, the Dutch developed a manual on black spot identification and correction and until 2001 subsidized local governments for these corrections. Over the years, however, roadway crashes in the Netherlands became more evenly distributed over the highway system, and as part of the sustainable safety concept the Dutch began to emphasize and implement corridor and area-wide safety improvements. For example, the Dutch have introduced 18 miles-per-hour (30 kilometers-per-hour) speed zones along local urban networks and streets with a relatively high level of pedestrian activity. They also have introduced 36 miles-per-hour (60 kilometers-per-hour) speed zones along local rural roadways, and begun to re-engineer urban and rural arterial roadways with 31 milesper-hour (50 kilometers-per-hour) and 48 miles-per-hour (80 kilometers-per-hour) speed zones, respectively. The locations of these zones often are defined by the preferred function of the roadways in an area and the expected crash frequency along a specific corridor or within a specific area. Measures to improve roadway safety within these defined zones are then developed, and often include geometric designs and traffic-calming elements to create self-explaining and self-enforcing roadways that encourage drivers to travel at appropriate speeds. The overall objective is to proactively improve locations with high expected crash frequencies.

Safety Program Elements and Activities
Below are examples of safety program elements and activities in the Netherlands that team members learned about during the scanning study. The list is not comprehensive, but includes activities of particular interest to team members.

Back to topic list

FINDINGS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

The scanning team met with representatives of the following organizations while visiting the United Kingdom:

The scanning team discussed a significant number of safety policies, programs, and activities with experts in the United Kingdom. The discussions summarized in this report are key components of the roadway safety programming and policy approach in the United Kingdom. They include the national safety strategic plan, national safety targets, integration of safety plans throughout the country, financial incentives for safety, and corridor and area-wide safety improvements. Examples of safety program elements and activities also are listed.

National Safety Strategy
The United Kingdom consists of Great Britain (Scotland, Wales, and England) and Northern Ireland. In 1987, Great Britain's roadway safety goal for the year 2000 was to reduce casualties by a third, a goal that was met and exceeded.(12) The three activities believed to account for most of the casualty reduction are increased use of occupant restraints, additional programs on driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and implementation of roadway safety engineering design improvements. In addition, motorcycle riding, walking and bicycling declined. Government officials believe having a specific fatality reduction goal is one of the most important aspects of effective roadway safety programming.

In March 2000, the United Kingdom published a new national safety strategic plan entitled "Tomorrow's Roads - Safer for Everyone."(12) This plan not only included new roadway safety improvement targets, but also described and prioritized more than 140 safety improvement strategies and actions related to the roadway environment and its users. Focus areas included:

The plan defined primary safety concerns related to each of the focus areas and described actions and strategies. Measures and actions identified include safety engineering, education, and enforcement mitigation. The measures and actions identified were prioritized as those that should be implemented immediately, in the next two-to-three years, or over the long term, as well as those requiring new legislation. Both national and local officials have expressed strong support for the content of the roadway safety strategy and its targets. The document content was a result of communication and cooperation in the roadway safety community throughout the country.

Defensible Safety Targets
The national safety strategy recommends implementation of several measures to achieve the 2010 fatality and injury reduction targets. The safety improvement targets, compared to averages from 1994 to 1998, include:

The first two goals are stated as a total magnitude reduction, but the goal for slight casualties, which is expected to be the most difficult to achieve, is a rate. It has been found that safety goals stated as magnitude reductions rather than rates are better understood by the public and allow easier monitoring and impact evaluation of the measures implemented. The government has required progress toward national goals to be reported in two three-year documents between 2000 and 2010.

Experts in the United Kingdom believe the government's three safety improvement targets are achievable. This conclusion is based on supporting research and analysis used in their creation.(13) Researchers believe the reduction targets for those killed or seriously injured are conservative and may actually be exceeded. For example, the expected contribution of measures related to 12 policy areas have been studied and documented. These contributions are listed in Table 4. Achieving the reduction in the slight casualty rate is expected to be more difficult because safety improvements implemented to reduce fatalities may result in an increase of these types of injuries. Research supporting the idea that the safety targets are achievable was a key factor in the acceptance, development, and implementation of the national safety strategy and other highway safety plans in the United Kingdom.

Coordination and Communication
The content of the United Kingdom's national safety plan was developed through a significant amount of communication and coordination among safety professionals and agencies throughout the country. Coordination on highway safety planning between national and local levels of government appears to be excellent. This approach has resulted in active support of the national strategic safety plan from the highest to lowest levels of government, and produced a situation in which localities take pride in achieving safety improvements. In fact, a sense of competition on roadway safety exists among neighboring jurisdictions. Having formal goals has focused safety organizations on the choices and priorities that truly can reduce fatalities and serious injuries.

The targets and measures in the national plan act as a focal point and form the basis for highway safety plans developed throughout the United Kingdom. The Highways Agency - an agency of the Department for Transport, Local Government, and the Regions - is responsible for operating, maintaining, and improving the motorways and trunk road network.(14) This system represents about four percent of the roadway miles in the United Kingdom, but carries about 35 percent of the traffic and has only 12 percent of the crashes.(14) (15) It is the safest system in England.

The Highways Agency's strategic plan for safety includes measures and targets based on the national plan. The plan identifies and describes safety improvement measures and actions related to achieving the Highways Agency's targets. These safety improvement goals are smaller than those in the national plan, but are considered more realistic because the agency has jurisdiction on a system that already is England's safest and that is constructed to high design standards. The Highways Agency targets are to reduce the number of killed or seriously injured on the motorways and trunk roadways by a third, cut the rate of slight casualties by 10 percent,

Table 4. Expected killed and seriously injured reductions.

Area of Implemented
Policy/Measure
Expected Killed and Seriously Injured
Reductions (Percent)
General Road Safety Engineering
7.7
Improved Secondary Safety in Cars
8.6
Other Vehicle Safety Improvements
4.6
Cycle and Motorcycle Helmets
1.4
Safety on Rural Single Carriageways
3.4
Novice Drivers
1.9
Safer Conditions for Walking and Cycling
1.2
Reductions in Speed
5.0
Greater Safety for Children
1.7
Reduced Drunk Driving
1.2
Car Driving in Course of Work
1.9
Other Improved Driver Behavior
1.0
Combined Impact
35.0

and contribute to the 50 percent reduction in child casualties.(15) The actions and measures described in the Highways Agency safety plan are related to 10 road user groups and involve improvements to infrastructure, technology, education, enforcement, partnerships, and management and monitoring. To achieve these targets, the agency plans to coordinate with a number of safety organizations and local councils that have road and road safety responsibilities.

In England, local highway authorities are required to create and update a Local Transport Plan. The plan is intended to be a local vision for all transportation decisions, including a local safety strategy that includes:

In general, local governments in Great Britain are required to identify safety improvement targets that will help achieve those declared nationally. They can choose the measures they expect to implement to meet local targets, but they must monitor their progress toward these targets on an annual basis. They are also encouraged to participate in the Monitoring of Local Authority Safety Schemes program. This program is a database of information related to the effectiveness of local safety improvements. It can assist with the identification, expected impact estimates, and benefit-cost calculations of safety improvement measures. Local Transport Plans also include safety education, training, and publicity measures.

The United Kingdom government has produced "A Road Safety Good Practice Guide" to help local government and other transportation officials achieve local and national safety targets.(16) This document describes some of the more effective measures used to improve roadway safety. It is based partially on measures used in existing Local Transportation Plans. It includes approaches to identify, prioritize, and improve locations with safety concerns. Safety improvements addressed include single-site actions, mass action to make improvements at all similar sites, area actions, and route treatments.

Financial Incentives
The United Kingdom's national government funds most local safety improvements. For the most part, this funding is based on the content, implementation, and results of Local Transport Plans. How local safety funding is provided has changed recently in the United Kingdom. The new approach provides all funds in a block amount to the local government, and each locality prioritizes the spending of funds as it sees fit. The amount of money the national government provides a locality is based on its measured performance. In fact, financial incentives for meeting a number of goals, including safety or transportation performance, are available. About 75 percent of local governments in the United Kingdom have chosen safety as their financial incentive performance measure.

Route and Area-Wide Safety Improvements Similar to several other countries the scanning team visited, highway safety agencies in the United Kingdom have begun to focus many of their safety improvements at corridor and area-wide levels. Black spots, or locations with safety concerns, are still investigated and improved, but often are included in more widespread initiatives. Past improvement of black spots has resulted in data that show a larger number of widespread locations with similar safety levels.

A new approach has begun to be implemented that emphasizes comprehensive safety improvements along extended sections of highway or within specific areas rather than just at black spots. This new approach is data driven and emphasizes planning to implement cost-effective safety measures. A review of crash data helps determine and prioritize the routes or areas to be improved. For example, research has been conducted to establish safety improvement intervention crash levels for rural roadway sections. It is at these intervention levels that improvement of a roadway may be considered justified.

The scanning team viewed corridor improvement safety projects in Highways Agency Area 14, which is southeast of Manchester in England's Peak District. Management and maintenance of Highways Agency roadways in Area 14 have been contracted to a private contractor, which has completed several whole-route safety-related projects. A number of safety improvement measures are consistently applied throughout the corridors, but locations with special safety concerns are mitigated as appropriate. Corridor-level safety improvement measures implemented in Area 14 projects include high-performance marking and signing, intelligent roadway studs, new and more consistently applied speed limits (such as the same speed limits in consecutive villages), gateways, splitter islands, speed cameras, flashing fiber optic signs, higherfriction and colored pavements, guardrails, passing lanes, and improved cycle and pedestrian facilities. Preliminary data indicate that safety along the corridors has improved.

The United Kingdom also has experimented with the application of area-wide safety improvements. A project in Gloucester, a city with a population of 120,000, is known as the Gloucester Safer City program.(17) Because of the scattered nature of crashes in the city, it did not lend itself to a traditional black-spot correction program. The program is a demonstration project for urban safety management, and was funded at about U.S. $8 million. One objective was to reduce roadway casualties in the city by 33 percent by April 2002. This program used a multidisciplinary approach, not just engineering schemes, to improve safety. Key components include properly defining the roadway hierarchy, focusing through traffic on arterial roadways and residential traffic on residential roadways, and managing speed. The project recently ended, but in 2001 community-wide fatalities and serious injuries dropped 38 percent. Although slight casualties remained the same in Gloucester, they increased seven percent nationally from 1996 to 1999. An unexpected result of the focus on roadway safety was a 13 percent increase in the number of crashes reported. A similar demonstration in an inner city area is being planned.

Safety Program Elements and Activities
Examples of safety program elements and activities in the United Kingdom include:

Back to topic list

Click here to return to the top of the document
or
Click here to return to the main page

Page last modified on November 7, 2014.
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000