IIHS A Data Approach to Highway Safety: What Do the Numbers Tell Us? Susan Ferguson Ph.D GHSA Annual...
-
Upload
heather-potter -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of IIHS A Data Approach to Highway Safety: What Do the Numbers Tell Us? Susan Ferguson Ph.D GHSA Annual...
IIHS
A Data Approach to Highway Safety:What Do the Numbers Tell Us?
Susan Ferguson Ph.D
GHSA Annual MeetingSeptember 20, 2003 Oklahoma City, OK
IIHS
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)
Nonprofit research and communications organization founded in 1959
IIHS mission to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce property damage in crashes
Research goal to determine what works and what doesn’t to improve highway safety
Funded entirely by automobile insurance companies
Nonprofit research and communications organization founded in 1959
IIHS mission to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce property damage in crashes
Research goal to determine what works and what doesn’t to improve highway safety
Funded entirely by automobile insurance companies
IIHS
Ability to translate research findings into practice is critical in reducing losses
Need strong communications component
Get research findings out to wide audience in non- technical language
Providing consumers with relevant and timely safety information
Serve on research and policy committees
Need strong communications component
Get research findings out to wide audience in non- technical language
Providing consumers with relevant and timely safety information
Serve on research and policy committees
IIHS
GHSA and IIHS share common goals
IIHS’s mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce property damage in crashes
GHSA’s mission is to provide leadership in the development of national policy to ensure effective highway safety programs
We provide the research to help you do your job
Worked successfully together on a number of issues including, airbag safety, speed, cell phones, occupant restraint use
IIHS’s mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce property damage in crashes
GHSA’s mission is to provide leadership in the development of national policy to ensure effective highway safety programs
We provide the research to help you do your job
Worked successfully together on a number of issues including, airbag safety, speed, cell phones, occupant restraint use
IIHS
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
1985
year
90 200095
1-3-year-old vehicles
vehicles >1 year old
Driver death rates per million registered vehiclesBy vehicle age and calendar year
IIHS
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
1985
year
90 200095
1-3-year-old vehicles
vehicles >1 year old
Driver death rates per million registered vehiclesBy vehicle age and calendar year
IIHS
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
Driver death rates per registered vehicleActual
1985 90 200095
year
IIHS
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
Driver death rates per registered vehicleActual vs. hypothetical 1985 fleet
hypothetical
actual
1985 90 200095
year
IIHS
Driver behavior priority areas
Alcohol-impaired driving
Belt use
Speeding
Motorcycle riders
Driver distraction
IIHS
0
10
20
30
40
50
1982
Percent of fatally injured passenger vehicle drivers with BACs at or above 0.08 percent 1982-2005
85 90 95 2000 05
IIHS
Three goals
Deter potential offenders
Catch those who offend
Sanction those you catch
Deter potential offenders
Catch those who offend
Sanction those you catch
IIHS
Assessment of checkpoint effectivenessCenters for Disease Control, 2002
number of studies
median decrease in alcohol-related
crashes
random breath test checkpoints
12 18%
sobriety checkpoints
11 20%
IIHS
Percent of drivers with BACs > 0.05 percentWeekend nights, spring 2003 and 2004
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Before BeforeDuring During
Study counties Comparison counties
IIHS
MADD International Technology Symposium
MADD will work with states to increase use of breath alcohol ignition devices for convicted DWI offenders
Blue Ribbon Panel for Development of Advanced Alcohol Detection Technology
– cooperative research spearheaded by MADD, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, IIHS, and NHTSA to develop advanced alcohol detection system
– IIHS to chair
Build public support for vehicle-based approach
IIHS
Driver belt use in United States
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1981 83 8684 88 9190 94 9896 99 012000 02 03 04 05
20%
40%
60%
80%
year
IIHS
Percent belt use reported by states, 2005
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
90-95
85-89
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54 NH*
MS
AR, KS, KY, MA, SD
FL, WI, WY**
AK, CO, ID, ME, MO, NE, ND, OH, RI LA
UT, VT, WV
AZ, NV
number of states
DC, IL, IA, NJ, NY, NC
MN, MT, PA, VA
*estimated rates from 2003
SC. TN
AL, CT, DE, IN, OK
CA, GA, HI, MD, MI, NM, OR, TX, WA
**2004 data
secondary
no law
primary
IIHS
Strong laws and publicized enforcement
Equipping vehicles with belt reminder systems
What works to increase belt use
IIHS
Intermittent flashing lights and sometimes chimes for extended period to prompt unbelted drivers
About 85% of 2006 models have some kind of belt reminder system
Ford system increased driver belt use from 71% to 76%; Honda system from 84% to 90%
Belt reminder systems
IIHS
Relation of speed to crashes and crash severity
Increases in speed are associated with increases in crashes; reductions in speed are associated with reductions in crashes
The risk of being injured or killed in a crash increases with increasing speed
IIHS
Speed cameras are effective but underutilized
Proven countermeasure against speed violations and crashes
Widely used throughout the world
Proven countermeasure against speed violations and crashes
Widely used throughout the world
IIHS
Evaluation of speed cameras in Washington, D.C. Percent change at camera sites relative to control 6 months after enforcement
-90%
-80%
-70%
-60%
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%average speed
proportion exceeding speed limit by 11+ mph
IIHS
Effects of speed cameras on speeds and crashes Cochrane review, 2006
Effects on speed Reductions of 50-65% in the proportion of speeding
vehicles traveling 15km/h or more above the speed limit
Effects on crashes Reductions in injury crashes from 8–46%;
40–45% for serious and fatal crashes
Effects on speed Reductions of 50-65% in the proportion of speeding
vehicles traveling 15km/h or more above the speed limit
Effects on crashes Reductions in injury crashes from 8–46%;
40–45% for serious and fatal crashes
IIHS
Conclusions
Speed is an important factor in crash likelihood, as well as risk of injury and death
Strong enforcement is key
Automated speed enforcement is the way forward and needs to be used more widely in the U.S.
IIHS
Motorcyclist deaths By age, 1975-2005
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
1975 80 85 90 95 2000 05
30-39 years old
< 29 years old
> 40 years old
IIHS
Helmet use laws in U.S. statesJanuary 1997 compared with March 2005
MD
DE
DC
MA
OR
RINJ
NH
ME
PA
WV
NC
SC
GA
FL
OH
MI
INIL
WI
IA
MO
LA
NM
CO
SD
ID
CA
WA
TN
VT
MS
MT ND
NV
AZ
UT
WY
NE
KS
OK
TX
AR
MN
AL
KY VA
NY
CT
AK
HI
universal law
no law or limited law
Helmet use laws in U.S. statesJanuary 1997
IIHS
States with universal helmet laws
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
1991: Incentive grants for helmet and safety belt laws
1976: Highway Safety Act removed authority to withhold funds from
states without helmet laws
1995: Grants removed
1967: Helmet laws required for states to qualify for federal highway funds
1966 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04
IIHS
Observed motorcycle helmet use in U.S. (percent)NHTSA
0
20
40
60
80
100
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2005
DOT-compliant
non-compliant
any helmet
IIHS
Motorcycle helmet laws
Helmet use is virtually 100% in states with universal laws versus about 50% in other states
Motorcyclist deaths and injuries decline when helmet use is mandated and increase after laws are weakened or repealed
In Florida motorcyclist deaths per crash increased 25 percent after the law was weakened in 2000
Helmet use is virtually 100% in states with universal laws versus about 50% in other states
Motorcyclist deaths and injuries decline when helmet use is mandated and increase after laws are weakened or repealed
In Florida motorcyclist deaths per crash increased 25 percent after the law was weakened in 2000
IIHS
What is driver distraction?
"A grave problem that developed in New Hampshire… now has all the motor-vehicle commissioners of the eastern states in a wax. It's whether radios should be allowed on cars. Some states don't want to permit them at all - say they distract the driver and disturb the peace…The commissioner (of Massachusetts) thinks the things should be shut off while you are driving…The whole problem is getting very complex, but the upshot is that you'll probably be allowed to take your radio anywhere, with possibly some restriction on the times when you can play it."(Nicholas Trott in 1930 as cited by Goodman et al., 1997)
IIHS
Vehicles have built-in hands free technology, like OnStar, with voice activation. Other
wireless technologies, such as Bluetooth, eliminate the need for wired connections
between cell phones and other electronic products
and accessories.
Bluetooth
OnStar
IIHS
Other potentially distracting in-vehicle
technologies and gadgets are increasingly available.
navigation systemnavigation system
navigation systemnavigation system
IIHS
Percent of drivers observed talking on hand-held phones, 2000-2005 NHTSA
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2000 2002 2004 2005
IIHS
Making it easier to use- will it lead to less distraction?
Making it easier to use- will it lead to less distraction?
IIHS
Is injury crash risk associated with phone use?
IIHS study in Western Australia, 2005
Phone use associated with fourfold increase in risk of injury crash
Increased risk similar for hands-free and hand-held phones
Increased risk similar for males and females, for drivers 30+ and younger than 30
IIHS
Cell phone bansSeptember 2006
by local jurisdiction
teenage drivers
school bus drivers
statewide hand-held ban
last updated: 9-15-06
IIHS
Percentage of drivers using hand-held cell phones before and after New York law Connecticut and New York
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Law implemented Nov. 2001
New York Connecticut
before law
3 months after
15 months after
IIHS
Percentage of drivers using hand-held phones Washington, D.C., metro area
0
2
4
6
8
10
D.C. Maryland Virginia
March 2004
October 2004
October 2005
IIHS
Don’t look to laws to solve the problem
Effects of hand-held phone bans on crashes unknown
Both hands-free and hand-held phones increase crash risk
May be potential benefits from hand-held phone bans if drivers who don’t switch to hands-free use phone less or not at all
Unclear how to enforce ban on hands-free phone use
Use of hands-free phones likely to increase with availability of Bluetooth technology
Effects of hand-held phone bans on crashes unknown
Both hands-free and hand-held phones increase crash risk
May be potential benefits from hand-held phone bans if drivers who don’t switch to hands-free use phone less or not at all
Unclear how to enforce ban on hands-free phone use
Use of hands-free phones likely to increase with availability of Bluetooth technology
IIHS
The Way Forward
More progress in the last decade in vehicle crashworthiness than in changing driver behavior
Large gains in seat belt use in recent years, but higher use rates would save many additional lives
Alcohol-impaired driving and speeding should be top priorities for enacting stronger laws and enforcement
Motorcycle ridership and deaths are up, especially among baby boomers, but progress could be made with universal helmet laws in every state
More progress in the last decade in vehicle crashworthiness than in changing driver behavior
Large gains in seat belt use in recent years, but higher use rates would save many additional lives
Alcohol-impaired driving and speeding should be top priorities for enacting stronger laws and enforcement
Motorcycle ridership and deaths are up, especially among baby boomers, but progress could be made with universal helmet laws in every state