Upload
lynn-farmer
View
218
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Designing the European Road Accident Observatory
Pete Thomas (IP-coordinator), Andrew Morris, VSRC, UK
George Yannis, NTUA, Greece
Philippe Lejeune, CETE-SO, France
Paul Weseman, SWOV, Netherlands
Gilles Vallet, INRETS, France
Ward Vanlaar, IBSR, Belgium
30th International Traffic Record Forum
Nashville, Tennessee, July 25-29, 2004
Contents1. Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU2. Background to EU decision making3. European Road Safety Observatory
1. Integrated project2. Challenges3. Three main areas
4. Macroscopic data5. In-depth data6. Data Application
1. Work Package 62. Work Package 7 – Data analysis and synthesis
1. Complex data structures in time2. Complex data structures in space
7. Project Implementation8. Conclusion
1. Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU
2001
Over 40,000 people killed 3.3 million people injured Costs exceeded €180 billion (i.e. twice the annual
budget of the EC; 2% of EU GDP)
1. Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU (cont.)
1st of May 2004
10 accession countries joined the EU Total population increased to over 450 million people Estimated number of road crashes is expected to
increase by 25% to over 50,000 each year
1. Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU (cont.)
EC Adopted a target of reducing fatalities by 50% Identified several areas where it could make a direct
contribution within the constraints of subsidiarity
Road Safety Action Program (RSAP) Reaffirmed the target Provided further detail about actions it planned to
introduce
2. Background to EU decision making
RSAP
• Structural deficit at EU level of harmonized data• More detailed and systematic information needed
– Inability to compare crashes between countries– Prioritization of countermeasures more difficult– Lack of detailed feedback on the effectiveness of
countermeasures
2. Background to EU decision making (cont.)
CARE database
• Assembles the national accident data from Member States
• Was the most developed
IRTAD database
• Does provide harmonized fatal accident data for many EU countries
• But only at aggregate level
2. Background to EU decision making (cont.)
Fifth Framework Program research projects
• e.g. RISER, CHILD, ECBOS• Generally focused in on specific research issues• Were only available within the respective projects
Conclusion• Significant data gaps existed that prevented inter-
country comparisons, particularly for the 10 new Member States and at in-depth level
2. Background to EU decision making (cont.)
Level Availability at
EU level Functions
Base Level CARE Priorities Trends Progress to targets
Intermediate level
No
Identification of blame Reconstruction of pre-crash events
In-Depth level
Pendant for injury causation Nothing for accident causation
Accident causation Injury causation Basic research Engineering feedback Technical standards
Specialist Various research studies
Specific research questions
No single database can meet all needs
Inc r
eas i
ng n
umbe
rsIncreasing detail
3. European Road Safety Observatory
Integrated Project SafetyNet
EC decided to initiate the development of the Road Safety Observatory
By funding the IP SafetyNet under the Sixth Framework Program
3. European Road Safety Observatory (cont.)
Integrated project SafetyNet (cont.)
Project lasts over 4 years Plans to build the basic structure as well as gathering
new data at several levels Observatory will eventually cover all 25 member states
and further additional countries outside EU (e.g. Switzerland)
3. European Road Safety Observatory (cont.)
Policy Makers(National
Administrations)
SafetyNet IP Steering Committee
Consultation with Data Users
WP 1CARE
WP 2Risk-
Exposure data
WP 3Safety
Performance Indicators
Macroscopic data
WP 4Independent
accident investigation recommend-
ations
WP 5In-depth Accident and Injury Causation databank
WP 6EU Safety Information
system
WP 7Data
analysis and
synthesis
In-depth data Data application
3. European Road Safety Observatory (cont.)
Challenges
Creation of a common independent gateway
For the benefit of road safety practioners and the
general public
New tools for gathering and analyzing EU road safety
data
3. European Road Safety Observatory (cont.)
Challenges
To provide for the first time to the EC the necessary
scientific support
Exchange of experience and stimulus from the multi-
country comparisons
3. European Road Safety Observatory (cont.)
Three main areas
Macroscopic data
In-depth data
Data application
4. Macroscopic data
Three work packages
To develop new harmonized methods for gathering and processing accident information
Will not gather data themselves but will work in close collaboration with Member States
Data will be gathered at national level and supplied to the project (via EU CARE and Safety Performance Indicators Working Groups)
4. Macroscopic data (cont.)
WP 1 CARE (Leader – George Yannis, National Technical University of Athens, Greece)
What is CARE? CARE is the compilation of national
accident databases for EU member states (http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/home/care/index_en.htm)
Objectives Extend CARE to 10 new member states
+ Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Switzerland
Support to Member States Estimate underreporting and non-fatal
totals
4. Macroscopic data (cont.)
WP 2 Risk/Exposure Data (Leader – Philippe Lejeune, Centre d'Etudes Technique de l'Equipement du Sud Ouest, France)
What is Risk/Exposure Data? RED involves measuring the exposure to specific conditions to
allow calculations of risk between member states e.g. are autobahns safer than autoroutes
Objectives Develop new structure to gather exposure data from member
states Link data to CARE and apply at EU level Support to Member States
4. Macroscopic data (cont.)
WP 3 Safety Performance Indicators (Leader – Paul Weseman, SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, Netherlands)
What are Safety Performance Indicators?
SPIs are measures of the traffic system that are directly related to accidents. Eg travel speeds, alcohol use or seat belt use
Objectives Identify a suitable common
format Gather data from member
States Bring together in database
5. In-depth data
WP 4 Independent Accident Investigation Recommendations (Leader – Gilles Vallet, Institut National de Recherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité, France)
Objectives Methods to determine independence of accident data Specification of institutional and legal arrangements for
EU-wide accident data gathering
Outcomes Recommendations and protocols for independent
accident investigation
5. In-depth data (cont.)WP 5 In-depth Accident Causation Databank (Leader – Pete
Thomas (IP-coordinator) and Andrew Morris, Vehicle Safety Research Centre, UK)
What is in-depth data? In-depth crash investigations
involve a detailed analysis of each crash to identify the causal factors
Objectives Develop new fatal accident
database with 1000 cases Develop new accident
causation database with 1000 cases concentrating on infrastructure safety and eSafety
6. Data application
WP 6 EU Road Safety Information System (Leader – Paul Weseman, SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, Netherlands)
Objectives
Develop new information gateway for all SafetyNet data
Include other road safety related information
Outcome
Broad ranging accident data website to be handed over to EC for public access
6. Data application (cont.)
WP 7 Data Analysis and Synthesis (Leader – Ward Vanlaar, Institut Belge pour la Sécurité Routière, Belgium)
Objectives To demonstrate the added value of analytic outcomes based on
co-ordinated data sources Conduct linked analyses of SafetyNet data Develop methods for time-series analysis and evaluation of
clustering effectsOutcome
Recommendations for further analysis of EU level accident data
6. Data application (cont.)
WP 7 Data Analysis and Synthesis (Leader – Ward Vanlaar, Institut Belge pour la Sécurité Routière, Belgium)
Two angles
Complex data structures in time: via time-series analysis
Complex data structures in space: via multilevel analysis
7. Project Implementation
• Official start of the IP: May 1st 2004• Partnership: 22 partners; 18 countries• Project Steering Group:
Vehicle Safety Research Centre, Loughborough University, UK (Coordinator)National Technical University of Athens, GreeceCentre d'Etudes Technique de l'Equipement du Sud Ouest, FranceSWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, NetherlandsInstitut National de Recherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité, FranceInstitut Belge pour la Sécurité Routière, Belgium
7. Project Implementation (cont.)
Partners: Közlekedéstudományi Intézet Rt,
Hungary Kuratorium für Schutz und
Sicherheit, Austria Laboratório Nacional de Engenharia
Civil, Portugal Medical University of Hanover,
Germany Road Directorate - Ministry of
Transport - Denmark Swedish National Roads
Administration, Sweden Swiss Council for Accident
Prevention, Switzerland Technion - Israel Institute of
Technology, Israel TNO, Netherlands TRL Limited, UK
•Agència de Salut Pública de Barcelona, Spain•Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, Germany•Centrum dopravního výzkumu, Czech Republic•Chalmers University, Sweden•University of Rome, Italy•Finnish Motor Insurers' Centre, Finland•Institute of Transport Economics, Norway
7. Project Implementation (cont.)
No isolation:
• Key groups are EU and national level policymakers• EC working groups on CARE and SPIs• EC 6FP projects in infrastructure and eSafety• Pendant, Rosebud, EuroNCAP, ASTERYX, SARTRE 3,
IMMORTAL, etc.
8. Conclusion
• SafetyNet is an ambitious project• For the first time it brings a broad ranging, co-ordinated
set of accident data together• When established it will become an EC core activity• Wide support to road safety policy, new resources for
infrastructure and eSafety