cost effective measures and planning of traffic safety planning philosophies and preferences use of...
TRANSCRIPT
'Cost effective measures and planning of traffic safety
Planning philosophies and preferencesUse of CBA in Sweden/Europe
Physical planningFour step principal
Speed Limit Review
Planning philosophies
More complex
Rail investments – road development
Industries and villages
Conditions for living and welfare
Caused by many individual reasons and decisions not by strategic planning
Processes of decisions
• Extreme 1: Rational perspective• Extreme 2: Wagging the way forward
• Visionary: Main problem and future status in clear picture (Vision Zero)
• Planning: Defining goals from problems to solve. Goals define valuations.
• Consensus oriented: Acceptance through discussions with parties; goals, problems
European cities use of different decision models. Source: EU project PROSPECTS
Consider this! Russia model today and in the future? Russia and Tatarstan/Kazan?
Visionary
Visionary & Planning
Planning
Planning & Consensus
Consensus
Consensus & Visionary
1) He/she fixed the key and that made it possible to get into the basement. Compensation after work/Aristoteles
2) He/she is the strongest of them all and if he/she don’t get the puppet she will start a fight, which she probably will win. Negotiation positioning/Hobbes
3) He/she spotted the puppet first and thats why she must have it. Practical philosofic arguments/Locke, Nozick
4) It means most for he/she, because the collection will be completed then. Utility maximization principle
5) He/she is underprivileged and has no puppet at all. Maximize-Minimize principle/Rawls
Consider this! Who should have the puppet?
Welfare preferences5 children have found a puppet in a basement.
Cost Effective Measures and Planning of Traffic Safety in Sweden
• Beauty Contest!
• Cost Benefit Analysis Method
• Four step principal
• Physical planning
• Review of Speed Limits in Sweden
Goals in transport policy (1)
The overall goal of transport policy in accordance with the Swedish Parliament’s decision in 1998:
• to ensure a socio-economically efficient transport system that is sustainable in the long term for individuals and the business community throughout the country.
Goals in transport policy (2)
This goal is divided into six subsidiary goals:• An accessible transport system: The transport system is to be
designed so as to meet the basic transport needs of individuals and the business community.
• High transport quality: The design and function of the transport system is to permit a high level of transport quality for individuals and the business community.
• Positive regional development: The transport system should promote a positive regional development, both by evening out differences in the potential of various parts of the country to develop, and by counteracting the drawbacks of long transport distances.
Goals in transport policy (3)
This goal is divided into six subsidiary goals:• Safe traffic: The long-term goal for road traffic safety is for nobody to
be killed or seriously injured as a result of traffic accidents. The design and operation of the road transport system should be brought into line with the requirements that this goal entails.
• A good environment: The design and performance of the transport system should be adapted to the requirements for a good and healthy living environment for everyone, where natural and cultural environments are protected against damage. Good management of land, water, energy and other natural resources is to be promoted.
• A gender-equal road transport system: The road transport system is to be designed to fulfil the transport needs of both women and men. Women and men are to be offered an equal opportunity to influence the creation of the transport system, its design and management, and their values are to be equally important.
Since 1997
• In October 1997 the Swedish Parliment adopted a ”Vision Zero” approach as a basis for Sweden´s long-term road safety objectives.
Beauty Contest!
• The most effect per invested capital– killed and seriously injured persons /
investing capital cost (euro)– Priority to maximize number of saved persons for a
given budget.
• Effects and impacts have been collected and documented in a knowledge based document used by all planning in road sector.
• Equivalent for other transport mode system
Estimate Effect examples
• Speed reduction - (speed after/speed before)4,5. If speed is reduced from 100 km/h to 90 km/h it will give about 38% reductions for expected fatalities.
• A pedestrian sidewalk can give somewhere between 40-80 percent reduction, depending on if the sidewalk is on both sides of the road or on one side; if its completely separated from vehicles or partly separated.
• Steel guard rails and/or removing obstacles from roadside can reduce the severity of accident outcome with 15-60%.
Estimate effects example
• Pedestrian crosswalks are estimated to about 20-30 %, with island and footpath extension and fences up to 50%.
• Medians give a reduction for pedestrian with about 20-25% and for head
on collisions almost 100%. • Improved visibility and guidance, including illumination is estimated to
give an accident reduction about 20-30%. Illumination can even give a bigger reduction, up to 65%, if a “black spot” is found where accidents appear in dark hours.
• Important that the situation in the specific village under investigation is taken into consideration when estimating the effects.
Estimate investment costs
• Calculate construction costs per unit of typical road construction works
• Calculate costs for the designed modules
• Determinate costs for maintenance and costs for individual measures, land aquisation, ..
Presentation about the Cost–Benefit Analysis
for the Road-Safety-Measure project
Cost–Benefit Analysis
• Weighing the total expected costs against the total expected benefits of one or more actions in order to choose the best or most profitable option
HEATCO
Developing Harmonised European Approaches for Transport Costing and Project Assessment.
Project in 6 frame programme 2002-2006.Project owner: European Commission, DGTREN
Final version report 17 maj 2006.
Consortium: IER University of Stuttgart Tyskland, University of Bath UK, EIT
University of Las Palmas Spain, COWI Denmark, BUTE Hungary, ISIS Italy, Ecoplan Schweiz, TNO Dutch Nederland, VTI Sweden, SWECO Norway, ITS Leeds UK, Herry Consult Germany, NTUA Greece and
Sudop Tjeckien.
• Evaluation methodes of projects with several countries involved• Evaluation of EU fonds projects• Harmonizing of assessment with one framework. (Some countries
without consistent method).• Purpose: Guidelines based on criterias socioeconomic efficiency,
open and clear studies, and support from member countries decision makers.
Decision criterias
• NPV (net present value) = (positive=recommend)• BCR (benefit cost ratio) = (>0 =recommend)• RNPSS (ratio of NPV and public sector support)
(>1=recommend, valid for priorities with limited budget)• FYRR (first year rate of return) – valid for decison of
optimal opening year for a project.
• Real changes during project lifetime years• Factor prices/market prices• No monetized effects• Lifetime period• Risk and uncertainty• Discounting• Allocation of effects• Marginal Cost of Public Funds
• Values of Time• Values of risk and accidents• Noice• Air pollutions• Climate gases• Other specific situations of environmental aspects• Construction cost• Planning cost: Only costs after decision made• Land use costs: land value, cost for buying process.• Cost for trafficants during activities: (=Trafficant extra cost):
Estimate effect and value as ordinary time value• Maintenance costs
Accident dataWe assume that reported fatalities are probably most
accurate. With the figures of fatalities as a starting point
one could expect the number of severe injured to be
about 3 times the fatalities and light injured and damage
only about 8 times the fatalities
Accident cost in European countries related to GDP (Gross Domestic
Product)
Consider this!!A positive CBA-ratio is an information to the decision maker that the project is
positive for the society.
The non monetized effects can on the other hand be positive (better) or negative (worse) for the society.
How to prioritize between investment package A, B, C and D?
Non monetized effect better
Non monetized effect worse
CBA Positive A C
CBA Negative B D
Typical costs - if made right from the beginning
Current costsin EURO
Costs for highest safety Increase Effectiveness
Road 1500 1,515 (barriers) 1% 90%
Vehicle 20,000 20,002 (SBR) 0.01% 20%
Vehicle 20,000 20,020 (alcohol) 0.1% 20%
Vehicle 20,000 20,200 (speed) 1% 20%
MID-BARRIERS / CENTRE GUARD RAILS
• A centre guard rail prevents head-on collisions, thereby making a rural road of standard width considerably safer.
• Appr. 1000 km in 2004• Goal: 2000 km in 2007• Test started in 1998
with 6 projects• AADT 4000 - 22000
What purpose have socioeconomic analysis and calculations had so far, and how should it be tomorrow?
• It’s obvious that decisions divert from results. This goes for beneficial and non-beneficial projects!– Rail tunnel in Malmoe (NPV/C<0)– Road plans in Stockholm (NPV<0)– A number of rail projects (bothnia stretch, Hallands tunnel)
(NPV/C < 0)– Bypass Sveg (NPV/C= 6)
– Russia projects?
The Four Step Principle
Short-comings/
Needs
Measures that affect transport needs and choice of mode of
transport
Possible measuresstep 1
Measures that lead to more efficient
utilisation of the existing road
network
Possible measuresstep 2
Road improvements and minor
conversions
Possible measuresstep 3
New investments and major conversions
Possible measuresstep 4
Balancing and
prioritising
measures with
different effects,
costs and time
perspectives
The use of Cost Benefit Analysis at SRA
The Planning Procedure in three levels
1. Planning in a strategically level.
Concerning all traffic modes: road, railway, air and shipping
2. System analysis of the road network.Improvement of the road network in a large scale
3. Road projects.Individual actions to the roads
CBA is used in all three levels
Factors to CBA
- Land use
- Recreatio
n
- Touris
m
- Water Supply
- Impacts of a region
ValuedImpacts
EstimatedImpacts
Impacts not tobe settled
Valued Impacts• Travel time• Vehicle costs• Traffic Safety• Environmental issues• Maintenance costs• Noise
Estimated Impacts• Barrier impacts
- Environmental protection
Foundation of decisions
Total judgement
The PopulationThe Economy etc
Forecast concerning the future need of transportation
The Road network
Can be improved by..
Cost Benefit Analysis
Impacts Valued into money
Impacts Not valued into money
Fulfilment ofthe Aims
Alternative actions
Lead to impacts..
Decision of action
As a basisfor ...
Transport demand forecasting models Overall assumptions now and in the future
National institute Models for national long term for statistik etc. economic forecast
- EMEC - rAps
SAMGODS – The Swedish model system for freight transports- Foreign trade- VTI/TPR
- STAN (system optimizing)
SAMKALK GODS
SAMPERS – The Swedish model system for passenger traveling - Car ownership- Regional travel (5 models)- National travel- International travel- EMME/2 (user optimizing)
ACCESSIBILITY SAMKALKMODUL
- Population - Business sector, export and import - Employment, incoms - Infrastructure- Car ownership - GDP-growth - Taxation, charges, regulation
Use of SAMGODS / SAMPERS
• Strategic infrastructure planning for the planning period 2004-15
• Freight transport forecast for 2010 and for 2020• Freight corridor study• Transport mileage forecast for 2020 – analys
enviroment impacts• Impacts from congestion charges Stockholm• Bothnia railway
Effect profile Summary of impacts according to the
Transport policy
Transport sub goal Negative Positive
Effect --- -- - 0 + ++ +++ Comments
Accessibility
..for pedestrians and bicyclists
..for public transports/buses
..for cars
..for heavy vehicles
Flexibility between modes
Transport quality
Bearing capacity, surface, winter service level
Safe Traffic
Number of killed and severely wounded
..and pedestrians/unprotected
Effect profile - continued ..Transport sub goal Negative Positive
Good environment
Emissions of Carbondioxid (CO2)
Health effects
Noise and vibrations
Sustainability
Nature, culture and landscape
Positive Regional Development
Regional growth
Regional distribution
Gender equality
Gender-equal road transport system
Fulfilment of transport policy
Impacts
Action to the road network
Transport policyGoals and aims
Contribution to the goals ?
Summary and conclusions
• CBA is a useful method to the long-term planning, but be useful in some other cases of planning matters.
• CBA is one of many foundations for decision-making.
• CBA doesn’t present the whole truth.
• CBA could in some cases be misused by the decision-makers.
• CBA is used more a less for investments only
• Need to extend the use of CBA for other actions.
• Lack of measure / effect correlation for some of actions.
Physical Transport Planning Process
INITIAL STUDY
FEASIBILITY STUDY
DESIGN PLAN
BUILDING DOCUMENT
”GAP ANALYSIS”
1
2
3
4
Transport needs and means of transport
More efficient use of the road network
Improvements and minor conversions
New investments and major conversions
The four-step principle
The four steps1.Measures that effect transport
needs and choice of mode of transport
2.Measures that lead to more efficient utilisation of the existing road network
3.Road improvements and minor conversions
4.New investments and major conversions
Work method
Short-comings/
Needs
Measures that affect transport needs and choice of mode of
transport
Possible measuresstep 1
Measures that lead to more efficient
utilisation of the existing road
network
Possible measuresstep 2
Road improvements and minor
conversions
Possible measuresstep 3
New investments and major conversions
Possible measuresstep 4
Balancing and
prioritising
measures with
different effects,
costs and time
perspectives
Example
Severe head on
coll-isions
Lower traffic intensity ?
Traffic regulation ?
Minor road construction measures ?
Major road construction measures?
No measure found
Lowered speed
Construction midbarrier 2+1
Construction motorway 2+2
Choise of measures:
• Immidiate Lower speed 110 to 80 km/h
• Short perspective Midbarrier 2+1
• Long perspective Motorway 2+2
E4 Ljungby
Review and Implementation of new Speed Limits Sweden 2008 – 2009
incorporated to present speed limits 30 50 70 90 110
New Speed Limits Parliament decision may 2007: Road Administration, Regional
Governments and Municipalities have the right to decide on speed limits from 30 to 120 km/h with succession of 10 km/h step.
Government decide in traffic regulation so Road Administration can implement speed limits 80, 100 and 120 km/h.
The new regulation starts from 2 may 2008.
General Director of Road Administration decide on guidelines for the implementation of new speed limits, December 2007.
In a long term perspective shall…
”… a consecutive adjustment of speed limits towards vision zero and that demand on accessibility, good environment, positive regional development and an equal transport system been taken in consideration.
Governmental Proposition of New Speed Limits
New Speed Limits – Why ??? Present system from 1971 (1955 urban areas) ”Inconsistency” of decisions during that time period. Speed limits have not been considered from humans ability to
handle physical violence. New transport policy goals have been decided. From safety- and environmental perspective, is 20-step to big. Road transport system can be utilized more efficiently with respect
to all transport policy goals. Acceptance for new speed limits should increase. New road types since 1971.
How shall this be implemented?? Road Administration review of roads outside urban
areas (mostly 90 and 110 roads)
Municipalities implement new speed limits within planned urban areas.
Regional governments adjust local speed limit decisions and private roads.
Review in close coperation with new long term plan 2010 – 2020.
(When) Time schedule state roads
Phase 1 - National roads Autumn 2008 European road and major other roads
- Motorway 120 km/h Autumn 2008 European road and major other roads
Phase 2 - Other major roads
Spring 2009 Secondary roads
Phase 3 – Other roads Autumn 2009 Other roads
Criteria for speed limit decision Accessibility – road connections important to keep or preserve higher
speed limit, is road connections important for commuting, extended local labour market functionality, high share of long distance transports, rural areas with longer transports in sparsely populated areas or high importance for freight transports.
Traffic Safety – physical damage violence on human being
Environment – harmonically speed limits, national Carbondioxide (CO2) goals, local concentrations of pollutions and noice level. Increased externalities on a certain road network can be compensated of reductions on other road network.
Trafficant acceptance – Fare, logical, clear and self explanatory speed limits
Consequences
• Reduction of killed persons annually: 10 persons• Carbondioxide (CO2) reduction: 10’000 ton/year • Travel time increase with 2 miljon hour/year cars
and buses• Indifferent transport time for heavy lorries.• Valuable socioeconomic benefits annually 6 MECU
(Milj Euros)
• But … 700’000 ton/year CO2 and 150 saved lifeJust follow the present speed limits
5 4,5
6,5
0,95 1,35 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Relative risk
2 la
ne ro
ad 6
m 7
0 km
/h
2 la
ne ro
ad 8
- 9m
90
km/h
2 la
ne ro
ad 1
3m 9
0 km
/h
2+1
separ
ated
90
km/h
Separ
ated
moto
rway
110
km
/h
Moto
rway
110
km
/h
Relative risk of killed
City streets Schools
Mixed trafficants
Streets on main net Pedestrian ways Bicycles on road Walking strips
Urban areas
Major Traffic links Few/distant intersections Separated pedestrian roadway
Two lane roads with high risk accidents with killed and severly damage
(Today 90-road without mid barrier fence, non satisfied standard on side areas)
Road important for business and industry transports – today 70 - road
> 1 k m> 1 k m 5 -1 0 k m
7 - 9 m
Roads with rumble strip barrier and placed streches for passing (2+1) < 4000 vehicle/day
Normal speed limit with mid barrier fence
Separated lanes with mid barrier fence (2+1, 2+2, 1+1) with good standard on road side areas
Motorways
Normal 110 km/hour
120 km/hour with high safety standard and relatively low traffic volume
Schematic review new speed limits in Sweden 2008
Higher Lower
Communication with partners
Meetings, suggestions, discussions
Police Swedish spedition org
NTF (traffic safety org) Swedish Municipalities and Health care
Taxi/Cab org Bus org
Motormännen/Org for trafficants Regional governments
Traffic education org . . .
Car testing institute . . .
Municipalities . . .
More Information
• www.vv.se/nyahastighetsgranser
Questions?