Establishing A Benchmark of Safety on Melbourne Roads During 2001

Monash University Accident Research Centre - Report #198 - 2003

Authors: Michelle Whelan, Kathy Diamantopoulou, Teresa Senserrick & Max Cameron

Abstract:

This project was conducted as part of Monash University Accident Research Centre's Baseline Research Program due to a perceived lack of data available on Melbourne-based road safety indicators. The study aimed to report on car driver, motorcyclist, and bicyclist safety indicators on Melbourne roads, including: levels of seat belt use by drivers and passengers; levels of child restraint usage; levels of helmet and conspicuous clothing use by bicyclists; levels of helmet and protective clothing use by motorcyclists; vehicle occupancy rates; and speed profiles.

The majority of vehicles observed (68%) had a single occupant. Higher non-wearing seat belt rates were observed for male drivers (2.6%) than for females (1.9%). The highest non-wearing seat belt rates amongst passengers were for those in the middle rear seating position (14.2%). Within this position, females (20.8%) and those aged between 26-39 years (60%) had the highest non-wearing rates. Amongst child passengers those aged 4-7 years had the highest rate of incorrectly worn seat belts (25.3%), whilst children aged 8-13 years had the highest non-wearing rate (10.7%). The seat belt wearing rate for child passengers (70.5%) was considerably less than for adult passengers (89.5%). Whilst all motorcyclists wore a helmet, only 12% wore all the types of recommended protective clothing (i.e. upper and lower body, footwear and gloves). Forty percent of bicyclists wore a helmet, and 56% wore conspicuous clothing.

Across the surveyed Melbourne sites in 60 km/h speed zones, the majority of vehicles were recorded travelling at speeds between 41-60 km/h (52%) or between 61-70 km/h (32%); 40.4% of vehicles were exceeding the speed limit; 8.1% were exceeding the speed limit by at least 10 km/h; 1.0% were exceeding the speed limit by at least 20 km/h, and 0.18% of vehicles were exceeding the speed limit by at least 30 km/h. A high proportion of vehicles was observed exceeding the speed limit during night-time hours: approximately 75% between 1 a.m.-5 a.m. on weekdays, and over 70% between 3 a.m.-6 a.m. on weekends. Drivers in the Northern regions of Melbourne exhibited the highest proportion of vehicle speeds exceeding the speed limit (75%), and also had a higher proportion of excessive speeds above 90 km/h (i.e. 5% c.f. 2.8% for all Melbourne regions).

Target groups and road safety issues that need to be addressed through enforcement, education and advertising campaigns are discussed, as are the proposed recommendations aimed at increasing the safety of road users.

Executive Summary

This research project was conducted as part of Monash University Accident Research Centre's Baseline Research Program due to a perceived lack of data available on road safety indicators for Melbourne and rural regions of Victoria.

Original Objectives

The initial aim of the project was to examine a number of road behaviours, in order to establish a benchmark of safety on Victoria's roads. Knowledge of behavioural indicators of road safety is critical for a thorough and accurate understanding of the levels of safety on Victorian roads. Such data can be collected on an annual or bi-annual basis in order to identify emerging trends and safety issues.

Regular measurements of specific on-road behaviours have the potential to provide information to road safety organizations about the effectiveness of their education and advertising programs, and to illustrate which safety messages need to be restructured to better reach the community. Such measurements complement evaluations based on actual road trauma outcomes, by allowing stronger conclusions to be reached regarding the causal role of each initiative. Emerging safety issues may also be identified, enabling intervention programs to address problem behaviours before they impact on road trauma levels. Therefore, a behavioural survey program can provide important information to road safety organisations, not only on their current programs but how to best target future programs.

Another of the original objectives of the study was to compare and calibrate the findings of observational surveys with those of telephone surveys, in a cost-effective way. This would assist understanding of the extent to which telephone surveys are biased, by investigating the similarity of results to the observational surveys. The inclusion of a telephone survey was based on the notion that this type of data collection is more cost-effective than large-scale observational surveys. However, due to the rising costs and low response rates of telephone surveys, this strategy has been questioned, and hence only observational surveys were carried out. In addition, only behavioural data on Melbourne roads was collected instead of data representing all regions of Victoria.

Aims of Current Study

The present study aimed to provide benchmark data for car driver, motorcyclist, and bicyclist road safety indicators on Melbourne roads. Behavioural data was collected through an observational survey on selected Melbourne roads in 60 km/h speed zones. Speed survey data, containing vehicle speed measurements from sites in Melbourne occurring in 60 km/h speed zones, was obtained from VicRoads. The following behavioural safety indicators were measured:

levels of seat belt use by drivers and passengers;
levels of child restraint usage;
levels of helmet and conspicuous clothing use by bicyclists;
levels of helmet and protective clothing use by motorcyclists;
vehicle occupancy rates;
age of vehicle; and
speed profiles.

It was envisaged that the above data, together with other important road safety indicators, would be collected annually to allow for a comprehensive assessment of emerging road safety trends. This report presents the results from a first wave of data collection to meet this end. The findings provide information about current trends; reflecting the extent to which road safety messages have been internalised by Melbourne drivers. Conclusions and recommendations are aimed at road safety organisations in terms of current trends and likely effectiveness of existing educational and advertising programs.

Main Findings

Observational Survey Data

Observational data was obtained from five sites in Melbourne during 2001, one in each Victorian Police Region, on all of the above indicators except speed profiles. A total of 4,665 observations were made at the selected Melbourne sites. Of these 4,595 were cars, 45 were motorcycles and 25 were bicycles. More male drivers were observed, however there were slightly more female passengers observed.

The main findings from the observational survey of behavioural safety indicators were:

Vehicle occupancy rates

The majority of vehicles observed had a single occupant, i.e. driver only (68%), followed by driver plus one passenger vehicles (24%). This indicates that vehicles with high occupancy rates (i.e. 3 or more occupants) are not as common as driver-only vehicles, or driver plus one passenger vehicles.
Higher vehicle occupancy rates (i.e. driver with at least 2 passengers) were observed on weekends (16.1%) compared to weekdays (5.8%).
Higher occupancy rates were observed during the weekday evening peak period (7.8%) compared to the early morning peak period on weekdays (4.0%).

Restraint Usage

For all vehicle occupants the majority wore their seat belts correctly (over 91%), however, males had slightly higher non-wearing rates than females (3.7% c.f. 3.0%). In contrast the proportion of incorrectly worn seat belts was higher for females than males (4.2% c.f. 3.1%).
The majority of incorrect seat belt usage by vehicle occupants was due to the straps being loose (30%), twisted (26%) or in contact with the neck (22%).
For drivers, higher non-wearing rates were observed for male drivers than for females (2.6% c.f. 1.9%) whilst female drivers had the higher 'incorrectly worn' rates (2.6% c.f. 1.8%).
The proportion of passengers not wearing their seat belts was highest for the rear middle seating position at 14.2%. This is contrasted with the proportion of non-wearing rates for drivers at 2.3%. The rear left seating position had the highest proportion of incorrectly restrained observations, at 10.7%.
The highest non-wearing rates were for passengers in the rear middle seating position (14.2%). Within this position, females (20.8%) and those aged between 26-39 years (60%) had the highest non-wearing rates.
Amongst adult passengers, young adults aged between 14-17 years and those aged 18-25 years had the highest non-wearing rates (8.1% and 7.9%, respectively).
The proportion of adult passengers not wearing their seat belt was higher for males than females (7.7% c.f. 3.5%), whilst females had a slightly higher rate of incorrect seat belt wearing (3.9% c.f. 3.7%).
The most common incorrect use of seat belts by adult passengers was failing to have straps firmly in place (48.9%).
Child passengers aged between 4-7 years had the highest incorrectly worn seat belt rate (25.3%), whilst children aged 8-13 years had the highest non-wearing rate (10.7%).
The seat belt wearing rate for child passengers (70.5%) was considerably less than that observed for adult passengers (89.5%).

Motorcyclists

Whilst all riders and pillion passengers wore a helmet, very few wore the recommended combination of protective clothing or increased their visibility for other road users by wearing conspicuous clothing.
Overall, the most common protective clothing worn was around the upper body. However, only 12% of motorcyclists wore all types of recommended protective clothing (i.e. upper and lower body, footwear and gloves).
The majority of motorcyclists were not wearing conspicuous clothing (about 83%).
Only 50 motorcyclists were observed, 45 riders and 5 pillions, which limits the extent to which the results can be generalised to the overall population of motorcyclists on Melbourne roads.

Bicyclists

Bicyclists had a 60% helmet non-wearing rate. Over half (56%) of all bicyclists wore conspicuous clothing.
Similar to the motorcycle safety indicator results, the low observation rate of bicyclists limits the extent to which the results can be generalised to the population of bicyclists riding in Melbourne. The results do indicate a low helmet-wearing rate, which, combined with the relatively poor proportion of bicyclists wearing conspicuous clothing, is discouraging.

Speed Surveys

Profiles of speed for drivers and riders of cars and trucks were obtained from VicRoads, and were analysed for each Region. The findings obtained from the surveys of speed profiles at selected Melbourne sites showed that:

Across all sites, the majority of vehicles were recorded travelling at speeds between 41-60 km/h (52%) or between 61-70 km/h (32%).
Across all sites, 40.4% of vehicles were exceeding the speed limit, 8.1% were exceeding the speed limit by at least 10 km/h; 1.0% were exceeding the speed limit by at least 20 km/h, and 0.18% of vehicles observed were exceeding the speed limit by at least 30 km/h.

Regional Differences

The major Regional difference was the higher percentage of vehicles observed travelling within the speed limit, i.e. between 41- 60 km/h in the Inner South East (49.5%) and in the North East (41.1%), compared to the West (38.2%) and North (24.9%) Regions.
The North (Region 3) revealed the highest proportion of vehicles exceeding the speed limit (74.4%). In contrast, the Inner South East (Region 1) showed the lowest proportion of vehicles exceeding the speed limit (46.7%).

Time of week

The majority of vehicles were travelling within the speed limit during daylight hours on both weekdays and weekend days. However, there was a substantially higher number of vehicles exceeding the speed limit during early morning periods. Between 1 a.m.- 5 a.m. on weekdays more than 75% of the vehicles observed were travelling over 60 km/h, whilst between 3 a.m.- 6 a.m. on weekends over 70% of vehicles were exceeding the speed limit.
The proportion of vehicles exceeding the speed limit by more than 20 km/h or by more than 30 km/h during the early hours of the morning on weekdays was higher in the North Region than in the other regions. Approximately 5% of vehicles were exceeding 90 km/h between 1 a.m.-5 a.m. in the North Region on weekdays (c.f. 2.8% for all Melbourne regions).

Vehicle type

Across all times of the week and sites, there was a greater proportion of trucks travelling within the speed limit than cars. However, there was a greater proportion of cars observed exceeding the speed limit by up to 10 km/h than trucks, 33% and 20% respectively.
Similar 'time of day' speed distributions were observed on weekdays and on weekends. For travelling speeds >60 km/h and >70 km/h, a greater proportion of cars were observed exceeding the speed limit than trucks. For travelling speeds > 80 km/h and > 90 km/h, there was a greater proportion of trucks at these travelling speeds across most times of the week. The exception was between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. on weekdays.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this first wave of data collection, the target groups and road safety issues that need to be addressed through enforcement, education and advertising campaigns are:

Low seat belt wearing rates by child passengers aged 4-7 years;
Incorrect seat belt usage by child passengers aged 8-13 years;
Low seat belt wearing rates by young adult passengers aged 14-25 years;
Low seat belt wearing rates by rear seat passengers, particularly those in the middle seating position who were female or who were aged 26-39 years;
Incorrect seat belt usage - the most common types were failing to have straps firmly in place; having twisted straps or having straps in contact with the neck;
A low proportion (12%) of motorcyclists wearing the recommended combination of protective clothing (i.e. upper and lower body clothing, footwear and gloves);
A high proportion (about 83%) of motorcyclists not wearing conspicuous clothing;
The relatively high proportion of bicyclists not wearing a helmet (60%);
A high proportion of vehicles exceeding the speed limit during night-time hours: more than 75% between 1 a.m. - 5 a.m. on weekdays, and over 70% between 3 a.m. - 6 a.m. on weekends;
Drivers in the North region of Melbourne who exhibited the highest proportion of vehicle speeds exceeding the speed limit (75%), and who also had a higher proportion of excessive speeds above 90 km/h (5% c.f. 2.8% for all Melbourne regions).

Limitations of the Study

Whilst some of the above findings relied on the observers' judgements, and were based on relatively few observations, particularly for motorcyclists and bicyclists, they are still suggestive of emerging road safety issues that need to be addressed.
In addition to the data collection being limited to a few sites in the Melbourne Statistical Division, a number of important measures had to be excluded because of budgetary constraints. These were:

Drink-driving profiles of drivers, motorcycle riders, pedestrians and bicyclists

Travel and exposure data for all road users

Other pedestrian measures (e.g. use of bicycle-only paths); and

Other bicyclist measures (e.g. patterns of bicycle path use).

Mobile phone usage by drivers.

One of the original aims of the study, to compare and calibrate the findings of the observational survey with those of telephone surveys in a cost-effective way, was not attempted. This was due to the project's budgetary constraints as well as the rising costs and low response rates of telephone surveys. It is hoped that the collation and calibration of the findings of a variety of surveys (i.e. observational surveys, telephone surveys, surveys undertaken by organizations other than MUARC) will be addressed in a future Baseline Research Program study, scheduled to commence during 2003. The proposed methodological research aims to develop survey techniques that would allow observational surveys of behaviour and exposure to be conducted more frequently by developing a method that used a cost-effective integration of observational and telephone interview/questionnaire surveys fully recognizing likely budgetary constraints. Data collection of the above measures will also be considered in the proposed Baseline Research Program study.

Recommendations

The following recommendations have been proposed for increasing the safety of road users based on the safety indicators that the project has focused on.

A reduction in the seat belt non-wearing rates of drivers and passengers could be achieved by targeting certain age groups, seating positions and times of day (e.g. child and young adult passengers, rear-seat passengers).
Whilst the high helmet wearing rate for motorcyclists was encouraging, the helmet wearing rate for bicyclists was 60%. An extension of the project may be to undertake further observations of these road users to gain a more representative sample.
To increase the sample, observational survey data could be obtained from more sites in the Melbourne Statistical Division, as well as from sites in rural areas of Victoria.
Education and publicity campaigns targeting the restraint usage of children could be an effective approach in decreasing the proportion of incorrectly restrained child passengers that was observed in the current survey.
Increasing the range of safety indicators by including mobile phone usage by drivers as well as drink-driving profiles.
The current study observed cars in the left-hand lane only. The observations of cars in all lanes could decrease the bias in the sample and increase the size of the sample.
Whilst speed data was collected at only two sites in the Northern region, an approach to reduce excessive speeding amongst drivers may be to target those who exceed the speed limit according to region and time of week. e.g. drivers in the Northern suburbs of Melbourne and those travelling during the early hours of the morning on both weekdays and weekend days.
Speed survey data should be collected that allows for a more comprehensive analysis of driver speeds. It would be beneficial to analyse speed survey data in 5 km/h increments instead of 10 km/h increments. Data that is collected in 5 km/h increments would allow for the assessment of the effectiveness of the TAC's recent "Wipe off 5" campaign targeting speed, as well as the recent speed limit changes that occurred on some residential roads in Victoria. It should also be investigated whether more speed data can be obtained from VicRoads that allows for an examination of differences across a range of rural and metropolitan sites, and in different speed zones (e.g. 50 km/h, 70 km/h, 100 km/h).
Sponsoring Organisation: Baseline Research Program - Department of Justice, Transport Accident Commission, Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV) Ltd, VicRoads