xii-th international transport conference «road transport – problems, ways of their solution and

XII-th INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT CONFERENCE

«ROAD TRANSPORT – PROBLEMS, WAYS OF THEIR SOLUTION AND

DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS»

Successfull solutions for road safety(Hungarian exprerience)

Presented by: mr. Zsolt Csaba HORVATH

Master, assistant professor Budapest University of Technology and Economy

Yalta, 14-17/09/2011

Budapest University of Technology and Economy

mailto: [email protected] 2

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)



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



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



The ultimate goal: No road deaths

How to get there?

Introduce and implement safe system approach in a long-term

Adopt a level of ambition to eliminate road fatalities and serious injuries in the longer term - with steady progress through interim (good practice) strategies and targets in the short to medium term

OECD, 2008



Why and what to set goals for?

Setting goals in road safety alone leads to improvements by creating a structure for their realization, monitoring…

The overall goal needs to be accompanied by partial objectives so as to allow for evaluation, accountability

Wegman et al., 2004

Eksler, 2009



White Paper (2001)White Paper (2001)"European transport policy for 2010 : time to decide“

3rd Road Safety 3rd Road Safety ActionAction

Programme (2003)Programme (2003)Sharing responsibility

EU target

In 2002, the EU set an ambitious target to halve the number of road victims between 2001 and 2010

Shared target supposing different contribution from Member States

Limited accountability measures and tools availability



Shared responsibility (3rd RSAP)

Impro

ve r

oad

use

rs b

ehavi

or M

ake

safe

r

vehicle

s

Improve road infrastructure

Weakness comes from the lack of accountability – responsibility is not sufficiently attributed to concrete actors.



EU target

1st EU target triggered further road safety improvement particularly in Western Europe



54,40053,40050,40047,40045,40043,10042,60039,000

27,200

EU progress towards targets

Currently, a delay at least of 6 years for the EU as a whole.



Contribution of Member States (1)

Five countries at sight of the target

France and Luxembourg are almost there

ETSC, 2009



Contribution of Member States (2)

Most EU countries have a general road safety target Many of them a very detailed strategy with sub-targets

No accountability mechanisms exists and the EU has no legal instrument to put a pressure on underperforming countries.

Only approach available is “blame and shame” used by NGOs, associations, media

ETSC has been monitoring contribution of MSs and their performance in various areas of road safety



Policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020

3 Pillars:

1. A common European road safety area

2. Shared responsibility (EU, national, local…)

3. An integrated approach with other policies (health, environment, employment, etc.)



“A shared responsibility”

Action by ALL stakeholders is needed

Public Authorities: EU + Central Governments + Local Authorities…

Private Companies: Car industry + Transport companies + Road operators « Corporate responsibility »

Users: everybody !

The EU acts wherever it provides an added value



Integrated approach

USER

VEHICLEINFRASTRUCTURE

COMPONENTS

EDUCATION

ENGINEERINGENFORCEMENT

IMPLEMENTATION INSTRUMENTS



• Improve education and training of road users• Increase compliance with road traffic rules• Safer road infrastructure• Safer vehicles• Promote the use of modern technology to

improve road safety• Improve emergency and post-care services• Improve safety of vulnerable road users.

Main strategic items



• Targets introduced bottom-up

• Political will from the highest level - to bring credibility to the enforcement system

• “Zero Tolerance” of speeding offences

• Introduction of a fully automated speed management system

Case of France (1)

French Road Safety Observatory estimated that 75% of the massive

reduction in road deaths in early 2000’s was due to reduced speeds.



Case of France (2)

• A new target set in 2008: no more than 3,000 deaths in 2012

• Through speed management, drink-driving counter-measures, red-light passing and safe-distance keeping checks



Case of Portugal (1)

• Top-down approach in target setting

• In 2003, the 1st National Road Safety Plan adopted with the objective of -50% of road deaths by 2009

• More than 100 concrete measures involving revision of Highway Code, Extensive high risk site removal schemes

• Sub-targets: 90%+ seat belt wearing rate on front seats, 60%+ on rear seats

142

49

63

45 56

4227 18 13



• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network

• New National Road Safety Strategy includes new quantitative targets for the period 2008-2015

• New subtarget on injuries

Case of Portugal (2)



Case of Hungary (1)

Main targets:Main targets:

- Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 30 %-os till 2010- Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 30 %-os till 2010

- Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 50 %-os till 2015- Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 50 %-os till 2015

A közúti közlekedés i bales etek következtében meg halt s zemélyek s záma

1957-2009

822

996

1 239

2 432

859

500

700

900

1 100

1 300

1 500

1 700

1 900

2 100

2 300

2 500

1957 1959 1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

100 ez er gépjármű(1964)

3,6 millió gépjármű(2009)



• New powerfull orgazation for coordination (NTA)

• New National Road Safety Strategy i

• Objective resposibility

• „zero tolerance”

• „new tarffic penalty point system”

• New list for speed limit

• Higher penalty for using a mobile phones

• More legal support to pedestrains and children

Case of Hungary, modules



Case of Hungary, documented speed records(2009, 2010)



• Establish a new, powerfull and well-equipped central transport authority (NTA) for a coordination of:

• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network (and its safety)

• New National Road Safety Strategy implemented based on using a central database

• New legal action: „Objective resposibility” and „zero tolerance”

• Plus: „new tarffic penalty point system”

• New speed limit for each type of vehicle

• Higher penalty: for using a mobile phones

• New traffic rules implemented: based on „More legal support to pedetrains and children”

--

Case of Hungary, equipments and tools (1)



• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network

• New National Road Safety Strategy implemented

• Objective resposibility

• „zero tolerance”

• „new tarffic penalty point system”

• New and adectave speed limit

• Higher penalty for using a mobile phones

• More support to pedetrains and children

Case of Hungary, equipments and tools (2)



Based on law nr.: I./1988y New system for sharing of responsibilityNew system for sharing of responsibility Key issue I.: dedicated main responsibility to owner or Key issue I.: dedicated main responsibility to owner or

operator of the vehicle operator of the vehicle Key issue II.: the identify a driver „not so” important Key issue II.: the identify a driver „not so” important since: 02.05.2008.since: 02.05.2008. New legal action: Direct penalty to owner/operatorNew legal action: Direct penalty to owner/operator Covering (eg.): speed limit, railroad crossing, using a Covering (eg.): speed limit, railroad crossing, using a

highway emergency line, by-pass traffic lamp indication , highway emergency line, by-pass traffic lamp indication ,

Case of Hungary, Objective responsiblity



Decreased trumatic road accident with 9,4 % compare to 2009Decreased trumatic road accident with 9,4 % compare to 2009 Fatal accident decreased with 11,8 compare to 2009Fatal accident decreased with 11,8 compare to 2009 Drunken driving decreased with 21,5 % compare to 2009Drunken driving decreased with 21,5 % compare to 2009 Yearly more than 12000 driving licence cancelledYearly more than 12000 driving licence cancelled Compare with y2010. and y2001. a fatalities decreased with Compare with y2010. and y2001. a fatalities decreased with

39%39%

Case of Hungary, results (1)



Case of Hungary, results (2)Accidents due to drunken drivingAccidents due to drunken driving2001 – 2009.2001 – 2009.



Case of Hungary, results (3)Fatalities in road accidents2001 – 2009.

1239

14291326 1296 1278 1303

1232

996

822

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

2001. 2002. 2003. 2004. 2005. 2006. 2007. 2008. 2009.



Case of Hungary, results (4)cumulated1957-2009

A közúti közlekedés i bales etek következtében meg halt s zemélyek s záma

1957-2009

822

996

1 239

2 432

859

500

700

900

1 100

1 300

1 500

1 700

1 900

2 100

2 300

2 500

1957 1959 1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

100 ez er g épjármű(1964)

3,6 millió g épjármű(2009)



Continious increasing a road side controll (eg: DG, technical inspection, covered and uncovered speed limit check)

Develoving and updating a technical background, focusing a intensive utilization of central database

Direct communication with participants of traffic Sharing an experience with another authorities and partners

Case of Hungary, next steps



• Czech Republic: Over-ambitious target with the absence of a credible enforcement system failed to bring effects

• Belgium: Separatelly setting targets for 3 federal regions helped to drive actions at relevant level of governance and led to significant improvements

• Scandinavian countries: Sub-targets were established with the help of economic criteria and closely monitored

• Germany: No national target, but comprehensive approach at local administrative level bringing fruits in long-term

• Netherlands, UK: Targets in terms of number of Police controls

Lessons from other countries



• Road Safety Action Plan 2011-2020 under preparation

• Most likely -40% road fatality reduction target and separate target for road injuries

• Most likely separate targets for particular road-user groups

• Benchmarking and data driven policy-making on the rise

• More accountability and professionalism...

European perspectives



Commission transport website (road, care, driving licence):http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/index_en.htmlhttp://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/road/index_en.htmhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/care/index_en.htmhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/home/drivinglicence/ index_en.htm

www.baleset-megelozes.euwww.etsc.euwww.kti.huwww.bme.huwww.sze.huwww.police.huwww.uhasselt.be www.kozigbirsag.police.hu

Used sources: published papers of ETSC, OECD, EU, EC (2000-2011)

Special thanks to the following websites:



Thank you for your attention!

xii-th international transport conference «road transport – problems, ways of their solution and

Documents

road fatalities

road deathshow

eu countries

road safety improvement

general road safety

number of road victims

eu gdpmailto

shared target