| MUARC home | About MUARC | Reports | Projects | VISU | Links | Contact MUARC |
| Monash Staff directory | A-Z index | Site map |
| MUARC home | About MUARC | Reports | Projects | VISU | Links | Contact MUARC |
| Monash Staff directory | A-Z index | Site map |
|
Road safety programs undertaken by local governmentMonash University Accident Research Centre - Report #163 - 1999 Authors: N. Haworth and N. Kowadlo Full report in .pdf format [2.9MB] Abstract:This report presents the results of a mail survey of road safety programs undertaken by local government in Victoria in 1998. The aims of the study were to
The survey had a good response rate and provided general and detailed information about road safety programs undertaken by local government. Road safety was mentioned in the strategic planning documents of about half of the Councils who responded. Provision of safe infrastructure was the major focus of road safety in planning and in expenditure terms. Size of the Council was a major determinant of its involvement in road safety (rather than metropolitan or regional location), however, among Councils of the same size, some were much more involved in road safety than others. Recommendations for the repeat survey are made. A telephone follow-up of 10 Councils (7 metropolitan and 3 in regional Victoria) identified a range of road safety initiatives and activities currently undertaken by municipalities and opportunities to promote such initiatives. Executive SummaryThe aims of the study were to
BASELINE SURVEY The baseline survey was conducted by means of a mail questionnaire sent to all Councils in Victoria in October 1998. The survey had a good response rate and provided general and detailed information about road safety programs undertaken by local government. Size of the Council (as measured by annual budget) was a major determinant of its involvement in road safety (rather than metropolitan or regional location). However, among Councils of the same size, some were much more involved in road safety than others. Road safety was mentioned in strategic planning documents of about half of the Councils who responded. Provision of safe infrastructure was the major focus of road safety in planning and in expenditure terms. Interestingly, recent plans and strategies were more likely to mention road safety, indicating a growing awareness of this issue. Very few Councils had a Road Safety Plan or Strategy. The most commonly reported methods of identifying and prioritising road safety issues for a Road Safety Plan were community feedback, accident records (including CrashStats) and staff assessments. Insufficient resources was the most commonly cited reason for not having a Road Safety Plan. There was a small number of Councils without a Road Safety Strategy who were keen to develop one. However, some Councils who could not locate their Road Safety Plans. Road construction and/or realignment was the largest and most common type of road safety-related expenditure. Other large expenditures were local area traffic management and pedestrian needs. Educational programs were nominated by only a small number of Councils. The most common factors leading to the development of road safety programs were the level of general community concern, number of crashes/injuries, pressure from specific road user groups and encouragement by MAV or VicRoads. Almost half of the Councils spent $5,000 or more to reduce speeding in local streets. Few of the road safety activities were evaluated. Several Councils had planned a variety of programs and activities for the 1998/99 financial year. However, many small regional Councils had no road or traffic safety activities planned. All councils collaborated with VicRoads and almost all with Police to improve road safety. Large regional Councils were more likely to collaborate with Community Road Safety Councils than metropolitan and small regional Councils. Some Councils who collaborated with CRSCs focused on engineering road safety activities and relied on CRSCs to provide educational programs for the community. There was no formal training in road safety in most Councils. Road safety auditing and promoting road safety in the community were the most commonly nominated training needs. Several Councils felt it was important to have road safety training for non-engineering staff. Councils reported that staff shortages made it difficult to train personnel in road safety. REPEATING THE SURVEY Conversion of some questionnaire items to multiple-choice format for the repeat survey may improve data quality and completeness and have advantages for both respondents and data analysis. Comparisons between the surveys can be made for those Councils who respond to both surveys to track changes and among the general sample of those Councils responding. If road safety planning is of strong interest, the repeat survey should not be conducted before 2001 to allow changes in plans to occur. If road safety activities (rather than planning) are of prime interest, then the survey may be repeated sooner. ROAD SAFETY INITIATIVES IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT The following examples of road safety initiatives and activities were identified from the follow-up of 10 selected Councils. Improving road safety as part of other changes. This includes:
Working with Community Road Safety Councils. CRSCs can:
PROMOTION OPPORTUNITIES Promotion opportunities were identified which related to road safety plans, raising the profile of road safety and improving road safety training. Road safety plans – The opportunity exists to develop techniques to ensure that development once commenced, continues and that finalised plans are actually available and used. The profile of road safety can be raised by:
Opportunities for improving training include:
Sponsoring Organisation: Baseline Research Program - Department of Justice, Transport Accident Commission, Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV) Ltd, VicRoads |