Post on 03-Apr-2020
TRIPPTRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND INJURY PREVENTION PROGRAMME
IND IAN INST I TUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DELH I
WHO COLLABORATING CENTRE
ROAD SAFETY IN INDIA
STATUS REPORT
2015
Dinesh Mohan, Geetam Tiwari and Kavi Bhalla
Transportation Research and Injury Prevention ProgrammeIndian Institute of Technology Delhi
Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016http://tripp.iitd.ernet.in/
Road Safety in India
Status Report
Dinesh Mohan
Geetam Tiwari
Kavi Bhalla
Transportation Research & Injury Prevention Programme
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
2015
ROAD SAFETY IN INDIA: STATUS REPORT © TRIPP
WHO COLLABORATING VOLVO RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION (VREF) CENTRE CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE
© Transportation Research & Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP) Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
Transportation Research & Injury Prevention Programme – Road Safety in India Status Report (2015)
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016 www.iitd.ac.in/-tripp
Contents may be reproduced with attribution to TRIPP.
TableofContents
RoadSafetyinIndia..........................................................................................................1
StatusReport...................................................................................................................1
1.Introduction.................................................................................................................1Nationalroadtrafficinjuryfatalityrate.....................................................................................1Vehiclepopulation....................................................................................................................1RoadtrafficCrashandinjurydata–nationallevel.....................................................................3
Recordingofcrashes............................................................................................................................3Reportingofcrashdataandanalysis...................................................................................................4InternationalComparison..........................................................................................................8Datausedinthisreport...........................................................................................................10
Injuryandfatalitydata......................................................................................................................10DatafromNCRBandMoRTHreports................................................................................................12Summary.................................................................................................................................13
2.Analysisofnationaldata.............................................................................................17Nationalfatalityrates..............................................................................................................17ModalshareofRTIfatalities....................................................................................................18Ageandsexdistribution..........................................................................................................19Statewiseanalysis..................................................................................................................20Summary.................................................................................................................................23
3.Urbansafety...............................................................................................................25Citydata..................................................................................................................................25
Million-pluscities...............................................................................................................................25Detailsforselectedcities.........................................................................................................30
ModalshareofRTIfatalities..............................................................................................................30Roaduservictimtypeandimpactingvehicle/object........................................................................31Roadtrafficfatalitiesbytypeofroaduserandtimeofcrash...........................................................32Ageofvictims....................................................................................................................................33Roaduserriskanalysis.......................................................................................................................33Conclusionsfromdetailedcitystudies..............................................................................................35Summary.................................................................................................................................35
4.Intercityhighways......................................................................................................37Introduction............................................................................................................................37TrafficcrashesonIndianHighways..........................................................................................37CrashPatterns.........................................................................................................................38Otherstudies...........................................................................................................................40Summary.................................................................................................................................41
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPP
2
5.Statusofresearchinroadsafety.................................................................................43Introduction............................................................................................................................43SystematicreviewofIndianresearchreports..........................................................................44
Results...............................................................................................................................................45Summary.................................................................................................................................45
6.Wayforward...............................................................................................................69INTERNATIONALKNOWLEDGEBASEFORCONTROLOFROADTRAFFICINJURIES.....................69
Resultsofsystematicreviews............................................................................................................69THEWAYFORWARD................................................................................................................72
Practicepoints...................................................................................................................................72Institutionalarrangements................................................................................................................73NationalDataBaseandStatisticalAnalysisSystems.........................................................................76Establishsafetydepartmentswithinoperatingagencies..................................................................76Fundestablishmentofmultidisciplinarysafetyresearchcentresatacademicinstitutions..............76
References.....................................................................................................................79
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
1
1. Introduction
NATIONAL ROAD TRAFFIC INJURY FATALITY RATE
Accordingtoofficialstatistics141,526personswerekilledand477,731injuredinroadtrafficcrashesinIndiain2014(NCRB,2015).However,thisisprobablyanunderestimate,asnotallinjuriesarereportedtothepolice(Gururaj,G.,2006,Mohan,D.etal.,2009).Theactualnumbersofinjuriesrequiringhospitalvisitsmaybe2,000,000-3,000,000persons.Thebasisfortheseestimatesisgiveninlatersection.ThesituationinIndiaisworseningandroadtrafficinjuries(RTI)havebeenincreasingoverthepasttwentyyears(Figure1).Thismaybepartlyduetotheincreaseinnumberofvehiclesontheroadbutmainlyduetotheabsenceofcoordinatedevidence-basedpolicytocontroltheproblem.Thesedatashowthatthenumberoffatalitieshascontinuedtoincreaseataboutsevenpercentayearoverthepastdecadeexceptoverthelastcoupleofyears.
VEHICLE POPULATION
Figure2showsthegrowthofpersonalmotorvehiclesregisteredinIndiabyyearaccordingtoofficialdata(TransportResearchWing,2014).Theofficialregistrationdataoverrepresentthenumberofvehiclesinactualoperationbecausevehiclesthatgoofftheroadduetoageorotherreasonsdonotgetremovedfromtherecords.Thisisbecausepersonalvehicleownerspayalifetimetaxwhentheybuyacaranddonotde-registertheirvehicleswhentheyjunkthem.
Figure 1. Road traffic deaths in India 1970 though 2014 (Source: NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
2
Theactualnumberofpersonalvehiclesontheroadisestimatedtobe50%-55%ofthoseontherecords(ExpertCommitteeonAutoFuelPolicy,2002,Goel,R.etal.,2015,Mohan,D.etal.,2014).Thenumberofcarsandmotorisedtwo-wheelers(MTW)registeredin2012was21.6and115.4millionrespectively.Ifweassumethat55%ofthemwereactuallyontheroad,thentheactualnumberofcarsandMTWspresentontheroadswouldbe10.6and57.7millionrespectively,andtotalownership6per100personsin2012.Table1showsthepersonalvehicleownershipandofficialroadtrafficfatalityratesper100populationfortencountriesincludingIndia(W.H.O.,2015).ThistableshowseightcountrieswithmuchhighervehicleownershipratesthanIndiabutlowerRTIfatalityrates.Thisindicatesthatincreaseinvehicleownershipneednotbeareasonforincreaseinfatalityrates.
Table 1. Personal vehicle ownership and official road traffic fatality rates per 100 population (Source : W.H.O.,
2015)
*Vehicle ownership rate adjusted for number of actual vehicles on road. See text.
Figure 2. Cars and MTW registered in India by year (Source: Transport Research Wing 2014).
Note: Actual numbers on the road would be considerably less, see text.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
3
ROAD TRAFFIC CRASH AND INJURY DATA – NATIONAL LEVEL
Recording of crashes
Asinmostcountries,trafficpolicearethesourceofofficialgovernmentstatisticsrelatedwithroadtrafficinjuriesinIndia.ThemainsourcesoftrafficcrashdataatthenationallevelaretheannualreportspublishedbytheNationalCrimeRecordBureau(MinistryofHomeAffairs)andtheannualpublicationoftheMinistryofRoadTransport&Highways(MoRTH)titledRoadAccidentsInIndia.Thebasicinformationforboththesereportscomesfromallthepolicestationsinthecountrybasedonthecasesreportedtothem.Abriefdescriptionoftheprocessthroughwhichstatisticsarecompiledatthenationallevelisasfollows.Whentheoccurrenceofatrafficcrashisbroughttothenoticeofapolicestation(byanyoneinvolvedinthecrash;anyonewhoknowsaboutthecrash;orapoliceofficerwhocomestoknowaboutthecrash)theinformationreportedisrecordedinaFirstInformationReport(FIR).Thissetstheprocessof‘criminaljustice’inmotionandthepolicetakeupinvestigationofthecase.AfteranFIRhasbeenfiledthecontentsoftheFIRcannotbechangedexceptbyarulingfromtheHighCourtortheSupremeCourtofIndia.Aftertheinvestigationiscompleteacasefileispreparedwhichrecordsthedetailsofthecrashasdeterminedbythepolicedepartment(whichneednotnecessarilytallywiththoseintheFIR)andthe‘offendingparty’(asdeterminedbytheinvestigation)ischargedwithoffencesunderprovisionsoftheIndianPenalCodeandtheMotorVehiclesActofIndia1988(MinistryofRoadTransportandHighways,1988).Someoftherelevantprovisionsare:
Indian Penal Code • Section279.Rashdrivingorridingonapublicway.• Section304A.Causingdeathbynegligence.• Section336.Actendangeringlifeorpersonalsafetyofothers.• Section337.Causinghurtbyactendangeringlifeorpersonalsafetyofothers.• Section338.Causinggrievoushurtbyactendangeringlifeorpersonalsafetyofothers.
Motor Vehicles Act • Section185.Drivingbyadrunkenpersonorbyapersonundertheinfluenceofdrugs.• Section184.Drivingdangerously.
Theaboveprovisionsarethedecidingfactorinhowapoliceofficerhastoassignblametooneoftheparticipantsinacrash(usuallyoneofthedrivers).Thisisanimportantissue,asthe‘cause’ofthecrashhastoberecordedasa‘fault’ofadriverunderoneormoreoftheaboveprovisionsinmostcases.Thisprocedureensuresthat80%ormoreofthecasesgetattributedto‘humanerror’andthereisnoplaceforunderstandingcrashesasaresultofahostoffactorsincludingvehicle,roadandinfrastructuredesign.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
4
Reporting of crash data and analysis
Statisticaltablesthatsummarizekeyinformationaboutroadtrafficinjuriesarereportedbypolicestationstotheirdistrict’sCrimeRecordsBureau,fromwhereaggregatedstatisticaltablesflowupwardstothestate’scrimerecordsbureau,andtheNationalCrimeRecordsBureau(NCRB),whichpublishestheofficialstatisticsforthecountry(e.g.NCRB,2015).Police-basedstatisticsunderreportroadtrafficdeathsandinjuriesinmanycountries(Bhalla,K.etal.,2014,Derriks,H.M.andMak,P.M.,2007,Rosman,D.L.andKnuiman,M.W.,1994,W.H.O.,2015).But,ithasbeenusuallyassumedthatinIndiawhilemanyinjurycasesmaybetakentoprivatehospitalsandnotgetrecorded,thepolicereportscapturemostroadtrafficdeathsbasedonlocalinvestigationsforthefollowingreasons:
• Forseriousinjurycasesanddeathsonthespot,orbeforearrivalatahospital,FIRsarefiledwiththepoliceespeciallyifthoseinvolvedwanttopursueacourtcaseorclaiminsurancecompensation.
• UnderSection165oftheTheMotorVehiclesAct1988(MinistryofRoadTransportandHighways,1988),allStateGovernmentshavebeenauthorisedtosetupMotorAccidentClaimsTribunalsforadjudicatinguponclaimsforcompensationinrespectofroadtrafficcrashesinvolvingdeath,bodilyinjuryorpropertydamage.Claimscanbemadebythepersonwhohassustainedtheinjury,byownerofdamagedproperty,andbylegalrepresentativesofthedeceased.Victimsortheirlegalrepresentativesinthecaseofhit-and-runcasescanalsomakeclaims.Forthisreasonalargenumberoflawyerslookoutforsuchcasesinhospitalsorpolicestationsandpromiselegalhelptomaketheclaim.
• WhenaRTIvictimisadmittedtoagovernmenthospitalanddeclaredasaRTIcase,thepatients’detailsarerecordedasa‘MedicoLegalCase’byapoliceofficerstationedatthehospital.Ifthevictimdiesinthehospital,irrespectiveofthelengthofstayinthehospital,thebodyisreleasedonlyafteramandatoryautopsyandtherelevantdetailsareprovidedtoapoliceofficersecondedbytherelevantpolicestation.
• Section146oftheIndianMotorVehiclesAct1988(MinistryofRoadTransportandHighways,1988)requiresthatallmotorvehicles(exceptthoseownedbytheCentralorStateGovernments)operatinginapublicspacemustbeinsuredagainstthirdpartyrisks.
Fatality estimates However,theextentofunderreportingofroadtrafficdeathsinIndiaisnotwellunderstood.For
instance,sucharecordlinkagestudyinBangalorecovering23hospitalsfoundthatpolicedataonlymissed5%ofroadtrafficdeaths(Gururaj,G.,2006).Recentstudiesthathaveestimatednationalroadtrafficdeathsusingdatafromthehealthsectorsuggestthepossibilityofhigherunderreportingbytrafficpolice.TheGlobalBurdenofDisease(GBD)studyestimatesthattherewere264,000(95%CI:214,000-321,000)deathsinIndiain2013almosttwicethedeathsreportedbytrafficpolice(GBD2013MortalityandCausesofDeathCollaborators,2015).GBDestimatesofcausesofdeathinIndiaarebasedonestimatesderivedfromcomparativeanalysisofseveralnationalhealthdatasystems,includingtheSurveyofCausesofDeath(SCD),theMedicalCertificationofCauseofDeath(MCCD),andtheMillionDeathStudy(MDS).WiththenotableexceptionoftheMDS,theotherdatasourceshavelargestatisticalbiases(e.g.MCCDonlytracksdeathsfromparticipatingurbanhospitals),andmaynotbeareliablesourceofinformation.TheMDS,however,providesestimatesofcausesofdeathinIndiausinga
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
5
largenationallyrepresentativemortalitysurvey.Themostrecentdatafromthestudyisfortheyear2001-2003andincludesover122,000deathsfromallcausesin1.1millionhomes(Hsiao,M.etal.,2013).TheMDSestimated183,600(95%CI:173,800-193,400)deathsintheyear2005,about47%-64%greaterthantheNCRB-reportedofficialstatisticsfor2005.
Inviewofthereasonsgivenearlier,itispossiblethatmostofthecriticalandimmediatelyfatalcasesgetrecordedincrowdedurbanareasofIndiaandthosewhodieingovernmenthospitalsalsoentertheofficialstatistics.Therefore,itislikelythatthefatalitystatisticforurbanareasinIndiamaybeunderestimatedbysay10%-20%.AccordingtotheMoRTH61%oftheRTIfatalitiesoccurinruralareasanditispossiblethatalargernumberofcasesgounreportedonruralroads.InareviewofEuropeanandJapaneseRTIdatalinkage,Lai,C.-H.etal.(2006)reportthattotalRTIvictimsdyingwithin30daysofthecrashareabout30%greaterthanthosedyingonthefirstday.Ifweassumethatasignificantproportionoffatalitiesthatoccurmanydaysafterthecrashinruralareasaremissed(thatwouldreducethenumberbylessthan30%ofthetotaldeaths)andasmallerproportionofdeathsonthespotoronthewaytothehospitalaremissed,thenwecanexpectunderreportingtobearound50%ofruraldeaths.Overall,thiswouldimplythattheunderreportingoffatalitiesinIndiamaybelessthan50%.ThiswouldindicatethattheMDSestimateofRTIfatalitiesbeingabout47%-64%greaterthantheNCRB-reportedofficialnumbermaybeclosertothetruththantheW.H.O.orGBDestimates.However,thisissuecannotberesolvedtosatisfactionuntilsuchtimewhentherecordingoftrafficcrashesisdoneinanmanneropentopublicscrutinyandmechanismsareestablishedtoauditthequalityofofficialstatisticsofroadtrafficdeathsonaregularbasis.
Non fatal injury estimates Whilethereisuncertaintyamongexpertsaboutthelevelofunderreportingofroadtrafficdeaths,
allexpertsagreethatpolicereportsareapoorsourceofinformationfornon-fatalinjurystatisticsinIndia.Policedatabasestypicallyreportasmallfractionofthenon-fatalroadtrafficinjuriesthatoccurinmostcountries,includingmostdevelopedcountries(Derriks,H.M.andMak,P.M.,2007,InternationalTrafficSafetyDataandAnalysisGroup,2011).AccordingtoarecentIRTAD(2014)reportpolicerecordsaloneareusuallyinadequatetocarryoutanalysisonthenatureandconsequencesofseriousinjuriesbecausethereportednumberisunderestimated.AreportfromFrancealsostatesthatunder-reportingisinverselyandstronglyassociatedwithinjuryseverity:thereisacleargradientofdecreasingprobabilityofbeingpolice-reportedwithdecreasinginjuryseverity,33-38%forsevereinjuriesand15%forminorinjuries(Amoros,E.etal.,2008,Amoros,E.etal.,2006).
StudiesfromIndiaalsoindicatesimilartrends.AstudydoneinBangaloreshowsthatwhilethenumberoftrafficcrashdeathsrecordedbythepolicemaybereasonablyreliable,thetotalnumberofinjuriesisgrosslyunderestimated(Gururaj,G.,2001).Accordingtothatstudy,theratioofinjuredpeoplereportingtohospitalstothatkilledwas18:1.Itisimportanttonotethateventhisratiowouldbeanunderestimateasamongthoseinjuredmanyotherswouldhavetakentreatmentathomeorfromprivatemedicalpractitioners.AnotherdetailedstudydoneinruralnorthernIndiarecordedalltraffic-relatedinjuriesanddeathsthroughbi-weeklyhomevisitstoallhouseholdsin9villagesforayearandshowedthattheratiobetweencritical,seriousandminorinjurieswas1:29:69(Varghese,M.andMohan,D.,1991).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
6
Internationalexperienceissomewhatsimilar.In2013intheU.S.A.police-reportedmotorvehicletrafficcrashesincluded30,057personskilled,1,591,000injured(probablyanunderestimate),and4,066,000damageonlycrashesgivingaratioof1:53:135respectively(NationalCenterforStatisticsandAnalysis,2015).Otherstudiesreportratiosbetweendeaths:serious-injuries:minorinjuriesas1:13:102(Martinez,R.,1996)and1:14:80(Evans,L.,1991).AmorerecentreportstatesthatinNetherlandstheratiooftheestimatednumberoffatalitiesandhospitalisedpersonsfortheyear2000was15.7(Derriks,H.M.andMak,P.M.,2007).
UsingtheepidemiologicalevidencefromIndiaandothercountrieswherebetterrecordsareavailable,aconservativeestimatecanbemadethattheratiosbetweendeaths,injuriesrequiringhospitaltreatment,andminorinjuriesinIndiaarelikelytobeabout1:15:50.IftheestimateofroadtrafficfatalitiesinIndia(official)intheyear2014istakenas141,526,thentheestimateofseriousinjuriesrequiringhospitalizationwouldbe2,122,890andthatforminorinjuries7,076,300.Theofficialestimateofnon-fatalRTIin2014was477,731,whichprobablyunderestimatesinjuriesrequiringhospitalisationbyafactorof4andallinjuriesbyafactorof20.
Theprobabilitythatanon-fatalinjuryisregisteredbypolicelikelydependsonwhetherthereisaneedtoestablishthattheinjuryoccurredduetothefaultofaparticularparty,forinstance,inordertoclaimfinancialcompensation.Thisimpliesthattheprobabilityofanon-fatalcrashbeingincludedinpolicereportingvariesbasedonawiderangeoffactors(e.g.ifmultiplepartieswereinvolved,extentofpropertydamage)thatmayhavelittletodowithinjuryseverity.Thereforepolicedatashouldnotbeusedforstudyingtheepidemiologyofnon-fatalroadtrafficinjuriesinthecountry.
Ranking in causes of death and population health
Tables2and3showtheleadingcausesofdeathandpopulationhealthlossbyagegroupsinIndiain2013(GBD2013MortalityandCausesofDeathCollaborators,2015).PopulationhealthlossismeasuredDisabilityAdjustedLifeYears(DALYs)lost,whicharedefinedasthesumofyearsofpotentiallifelostduetoprematuremortalityandtheyearsofproductivelifelostduetodisability.ThesetablesshowthatinjuriesresultingfromroadtrafficcrashesimposeasubstantialburdenonthehealthofthepopulationinIndia,especiallyamongyoungadults.Roadtrafficinjuriesarethe8thleadingcauseofdeathinIndiaandthe9thleadingcauseofoverallhealthloss.Roadtrafficinjuriesimposeapublichealthburdenthatexceedsthatofmanyinfectiousdiseases(e.g.malaria)andnon-communicablediseases(e.g.diabetes)thatareacknowledgedtobeimportanthealthissuesforthecountry.ThenethealthlossfromroadtrafficinjuriesinIndiaisapproximatelythreetimesthatfrommaternaldisorders.Amongyoungadultsaged15-49years,roadtrafficinjuriesarethefourthleadingcauseofdeathandhealthloss.Menareinjuredatamuchhigherratethanwomen.Amongyoungmenaged15-49years,roadtrafficinjuriesaretheleadingcauseofhealthloss.
Figure3showsthatoverthelasttwodecadestheburdenofroadtrafficinjuriesinIndiahasincreasedevenwhilethatduetomanyinfectiousdiseaseshasdeclined.In1990,roadtrafficinjurieswerethe16thleadingcauseofhealthloss.However,in2013theywereranked9thduetoanincreaseof
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
7
Table 2. : Top 10 leading causes of death in India in 2013 (Source GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators, 2015)
<5Years 5-14years 15-49years 50-69years 70+years AllAges
1Neonatal
encephalopathyIntestinalinfections Tuberculosis Ischemicheart
diseaseIschemicheart
diseaseIschemicheart
disease
2Neonatal
pretermbirth Diarrhealdiseases Ischemicheartdisease COPD COPD COPD
3Lowerrespiratory
infectionLowerrespiratory
infection Self-harm Cerebrovasculardisease
Cerebrovasculardisease
Cerebrovasculardisease
4 Neonatalsepsis Drowning RoadInjuries Tuberculosis Diarrhealdiseases Tuberculosis
5 Otherneonatal Malaria Fire&heat Hypertensiveheartdisease
Hypertensiveheartdisease Diarrhealdiseases
6Diarrhealdiseases RoadInjuries Cerebrovascular
diseaseDiarrhealdiseases Tuberculosis Lowerrespiratory
infection
7Congenitalanomalies Tuberculosis HIV/AIDS Diabetes Diabetes Self-harm
8Intestinalinfections Leishmaniasis Diarrheal
diseases Asthma Lowerrespiratoryinfection RoadInjuries
9 STDs Animalcontact Lowerrespiratoryinfect
Pneumo-coniosis Asthma Hypertensive
heartdisease
10Protein-energymalnutrition
Congenitalanomalies
Intestinalinfections
Interstitiallungdisease
Interstitiallungdisease Diabetes
Table 3. Top 10 Leading causes of health loss in India in 2013* (Source GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators, 2015)
<5Years 5-14years 15-49years 50-69years 70+years AllAges
1 Neonatalencephalopathy
Iron-deficiencyanemia Tuberculosis Ischemicheart
diseaseIschemicheart
diseaseIschemicheart
disease
2 Neonatalpretermbirth
Intestinalinfections Self-harm COPD COPD COPD
3 Lowerrespiratoryinfections Diarrhealdiseases Ischemicheart
diseaseCerebrovascular
diseaseCerebrovascular
diseaseLowerrespiratory
infections
4 Neonatalsepsis Lowerrespiratoryinfections RoadInjuries Tuberculosis Senseorgan
diseases Tuberculosis
5 Diarrhealdiseases Skindiseases Lowback&neckpain Diabetes Diarrheal
diseasesNeonatalpreterm
birth
6 Otherneonatal Malaria Depressivedisorders Senseorgandiseases Diabetes Neonatal
encephalopathy
7 Congenitalanomalies Drowning Migraine Lowback&
neckpain Tuberculosis Diarrhealdiseases
8 Protein-energymalnutrition Migraine COPD Diarrheal
diseasesHypertensiveheartdisease
Cerebrovasculardisease
9 Intestinalinfections
Depressivedisorders Fire&heat Hypertensive
heartdisease Asthma Roadinjuries
10 STDs Congenitalanomalies Skindiseases RoadInjuries Alzheimerdisease Lowback&
neckpain
*Health loss is measured in Disability Adjusted Life Years Lost, DALYs.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
8
54%indisabilityadjustedlifeyears(DALYs)losttoroadtrafficinjuries.Incontrast,overallhealthlossduetolowerrespiratoryinfectionsdeclinedby65%anddiarrhealdiseasesby65%.
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
The2015W.H.O.GlobalStatusReportonRoadSafetyprovidestwosetsofroadtrafficdeathstatisticsforeverycountry.Thesearetheofficialgovernmentstatistics(usuallybasedonpolicedata)reportedbyeachcountrytoW.H.O.,andestimatesproducedbyW.H.O.throughstatisticalanalysisofnationalhealthstatistics(includingvitalregistration).Figure4showstheofficialRTIfatalityratesfordifferentcountriesplottedagainstpercapitaincomeofthecountriesandFigure5showstheratesforthesamecountriesasestimatedbytheW.H.O.(W.H.O.,2015).ThesefiguresshowthatformorethanhalfthecountriestheW.H.O.estimatesaregreaterthan1.3timestheofficialratesreportedbythecountries.TheratiooftheW.H.O.estimateandofficialratefordifferentcountriesisshowninFigure6.ThisratioforIndiais1.5astheofficialreportedrateis11.0deathsper100,000personsandtheW.H.O.estimate16.6.Thesedataindicatethatsomecountrieswithsimilarincomeshavepossiblylowerlevelsofunder-reportingandsomewithhigherincomelevelshavealsohavehigherlevelsofunder-reporting.ThissuggeststhatcountryincomelevelcannotbetakenasexcuseforinefficientdatacollectionsystemsanditispossibleforcountrieslikeIndiatosetupprofessionallymanageddatacollectionsystemsthatgiveareasonablyaccurateestimateofRTIfatalities.
BoththeofficialcountrydataandW.H.O.estimates(Figures4and5)showthattherearecountrieswithincomessimilartoIndiathathaveRTIfatalityrateslowerthanIndia.Againdemonstratingthatlackoffinancesdoesnotnecessarilymeanthatasocietyhastohaveabsenceofsafetyontheroads.Atthesametime,manycountriesmuchricherthanIndiahavemuchhigherfatalityrates.Therefore,wecannot
Figure 3. Leading causes of health loss in 1990 and 2013 (Source GBD 2013 Mortality
and Causes of Death Collaborators, 2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
9
dependongrowthinnationalincomealonetopromoteroadsafety.Itwillbenecessarytoputinplaceevidencebasednationalsafetypoliciestoensureimprovementsintrafficsafety.
Figure 4. RTI fatality rate per 100,000 persons reported by different countries vs
per capita income (Source: W.H.O., 2015).
Figure 5. W.H.O. estimates of RTI fatality rate per 100,000 persons for different
countries vs per capita income (Source: W.H.O., 2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
10
DATA USED IN THIS REPORT
Injury and fatality data
Table4showsthedifferentindicatorsgenerallyusedforassessingRTIissues(Mohan,D.etal.,2006).Outofalltheseindicatorsweonlyusenumberoffatalitiesandfatalitiesper100,000populationformostofouranalysis.OnlyfatalitystatisticsfromNCRBandMoRTHreportsareusedforanalysis.WeassumethatthoughtheIndianfatalitystatisticsmaysufferfromsomeunderestimationtheremaynotbeasystematicbiasinrecordingoffatalitiesofspecificroadusers.Insuchasituationthefatalitystatisticsshouldbeadequateforpredictingtrendsandrelativecomparisonsbetweendifferentriskfactors.Fatalitiesper100,000populationisusedforallcomparisonsbecausethepopulationstatisticsareexpectedtobereliableandtheindexisagoodindicatorofthehealthburdenonthepopulation.Fatalitiesperpopulationcanalsobeusedasproxyforriskofdeathpertripasinternationalexperiencesuggeststhattheaveragenumberoftripsperpersonremainsrelativelystableovertime,incomesandplace(Knoflacher,H.,2007).Knoflacherfurtherstatesthataveragetripratesincitiesaroundtheworldvaryfrom2.8to3.8.Thattotaltripratesdonotvarymuchandgenerallyremainbetween3and4tripsperpersonperdayhasbeensupportedbymanystudiesaroundtheworld(Giuliano,G.andNarayan,D.,2003,Hupkes,G.,1982,Santos,A.etal.,2011,TransportforLondon,2011,Zegras,C.,2010)
Nonfatalinjurydataarenotusedatallinthisreportastheyarenotlikelytogiveanyusefulinsights.Injuryandaccidentstatisticssufferfromaveryhighmarginofunderestimationasdiscussedinanearliersection.Inaddition,internationalexperiencesuggeststhatinjuryandnon-fatalcrashdatacansufferfrommanyotherbiasessuchasrelativeunder-reportingforpedestrianandbicycleinjuries,night-
Figure 6. Ratio of W.H.O. estimates and official RTI
fatality rate per 100,000 persons for different countries vs per capita income (Source: W.H.O., 2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
11
timecrashes,hitandruncases,andcrashesonruralroads(Abay,K.A.,2015,Amoros,E.etal.,2006,Derriks,H.M.andMak,P.M.,2007,Rosman,D.L.andKnuiman,M.W.,1994).
Fatalitiesper10,000vehiclesandfatalitiespervehicle-kilometrehavenotbeenusedinthisreportexceptforafewspecificcomparisons.TheofficialnumberfornumberofvehiclesinIndiaandcitiesarealloverestimates(explainedinanearliersection),andtherefore,cannotbeusedforanycalculations.Inadditiontheindicatorfatalitiesper10,000vehiclesshouldnotbeusedforcomparisonifthemodalsharesdifferformplacetoplace(Mohan,D.andTiwari,G.,2000).Thenumberoffatalitiesper100,000populationalwaysdecreaseasthenumberofvehiclespercapitaincreaseinasocietyevenwhennospecificsafetymeasureshavebeenputinplace(Adams,J.,1987).
Table 4. Examples of commonly used indicators of the road traffic injury problem (Source: Mohan, D. et al., 2006).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
12
Data from NCRB and MoRTH reports
Table5showsasummaryofthedatathathavebeenusedforthisreportfromtheNCRBandMoRTHpublications(NCRB,2015,TransportResearchWing,2015)andthereasonswhysomedatahavenotbeenused.Sincenon-fatalcrashandinjurydataandmotorvehicleregistrationstatisticsarenotreliableasexplainedinearliersections,notablethatincludesthesestatisticshasbeenusedforanalysisinthepresentreport.
Items4and5inTable5fortheNCRBreportanditems16and17intheMoRTHreportrefertothefollowingdetails:
1. NumberofPersonsaffectedbyRoadAccidents(Culpabilityvis-à-visFatality)during2014(ModeofTransportwise)
2. NumberofPersonsDiedinRoadAccidentsandModeofTransport(Culpabilityvis-à-visFatality)–2014(State/UT&Citywise)
3. Totalnumberofaccidents,personskilledandinjuredbasedontheinvolvementbyvehicletypeduring2014
4. TotalNumberofPersonsKilledinRoadAccidentsintermsofRoadUserCategories:2014
Thereaderofthesetablesisnotabletounderstandwhatthesetablesmean.Initem1above(NCRB)theclassificationisdoneaccordingtonumberof‘OffendingDriver/Pedestrian’andnumberofvictimswhodiedbyroadusercategory.Ifwejusttakethecaseoffatalpedestriansinthetable,thereare747‘offending’pedestriansand5,943‘victim’pedestrians,givingatotalof6,690pedestriandeaths(4.7percentofthetotal)whodiedinIndiain2014.Thetableinitem2above(NCRB)alsogivesthesamenumberforoffendersandvictimsaspedestrians.Initemnumber4above(MoRTH)thereportgivesthetotalnumberofpedestrianskilledas8.8percent.TheseareverylowproportionsforpedestrianfatalitiesinIndia.Workdonebyindependentresearchersusingpolicereports(samesourcesareusedbyabovereports)fromdifferentcitiesandhighwaylocationsshowverydifferentresultsasshowninTable6.Inthenationallyrepresentativemortalitysurveyof1.1millionhomesHsiao,M.etal.(2013)reportedthatpedestriansandmotorcyclistsconstituted37and20percentoftotalRTIfatalitiesrespectively.ThesedatamakeitclearthattheproportionofpedestrianfatalitiesinIndiacannotbeaslowas8.8percent.Inallprobabilitythepedestrianfatalitiesmaycomprisearound40percentofallfatalities.Ifthepedestrianfatalityproportionsaresolowintheseofficialreports,thenitstandstoreasonthatproportionsandnumbersforallotherroaduserswillalsobewrong.Moredatawillbepresentedtostrengthenthisargumentinsubsequentsectionsofthisreport.ThenumbersandproportionsofdifferentroaduserskilledandinjuredasmentionedintheNCRBandMoRTHreportsareerroneousandcannotbeusedforanyanalysis.
AlthoughitisclearthatNCRBandMoRTHreportsdonotprovidevalidstatisticaltabulationsontypesofroad-userskilled,researchershavesuccessfullygeneratedreasonableestimatesbyinspectingdetailedpolicereports.Suchcasefilesarepaper-basedandusuallyavailableatthepolicestationwithjurisdictionoverthelocationwherethecrashoccurredoratthedistrict’scrimerecordsbureauoffice.Researcherswhoareabletoacquirerequisitepermissionsneedtoundertakeatediousprocessofworkingwithmultiplepolicestationstoacquirecopiesofallpolicereportsandextractinginformation.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
13
Clearlythiscannotbedoneoveralargeregionorprospectivelytotrackchangesovertimewithouttheuseofsubstantialresources.Nevertheless,collectingsuchdataevenforasmallregionorashortperiodoftimecanprovidevaluableinsightstoresearchersandpolicymakersinterestedinaddressinglocalroadsafetyissues.
ThedataregardingcauseofcrashesandpersonsresponsibleforcrashesasreportedintheNCRBandMoRTHreportsisalsonotreliable.AsmentionedearlieritistheIPCcodesthatdecidehowapoliceofficerassignsblametooneoftheparticipantsinacrash(usuallyoneofthedrivers).Thisisanimportantissue,asthe‘cause’oftheaccidenthastoberecordedasa‘fault’ofadriverunderoneormoreofthe4or5provisions.
Thisprocedureensuresthat80%ormoreofthecasesgetattributedto‘humanerror’andthereisnoplaceforunderstandingcrashesasaresultofahostoffactorsincludingvehicle,roadandinfrastructuredesign.ForexampletheNCRBreportattributesDrivingunderInfluenceofdrugsandalcoholas1.6percentofallcrashes.Independentstudiesdoneestimatealcoholanddrugsasacontributingfactorinmorethan20-30percentofthecrashes(Arora,P.etal.,2013,Das,A.etal.,2012,Esser,M.B.etal.,2015,Gururaj,G.,2006,Mishra,B.K.etal.,1984).Ifoneoftheriskfactorsisunderestimatedbyalargemarginthantheestimatesforalltheother‘causes’becomeunreliable.Therefore,tablesdealingwithcauseofroadtrafficcrashesshouldnotbeusedforanyanalysisorpolicymaking.
ThesummaryofdatausabilityinTable5suggeststhatonlyabout20percentofthetablesinNCRBandMoRTHreportsareusableforroadsafetyanalysisandpolicymakingandtherest80percentincludeunreliableinformation,whichshouldnotbeused.ThissituationcanonlybeimprovedbyMoRTHwithacompleterevampofthedatacollectionsystemsincollaborationwiththeMinistryofHomeAffairsandestablishmentofaprofessionaldataandanalysisdepartment(NationalTransportDevelopmentPolicyCommittee,2014a).
SUMMARY
• Accordingtoofficialstatistics141,526personswerekilledand477,731injuredinroadtrafficcrashesinIndiain2000(NCRB,2015).However,thisisprobablyanunderestimate,asnotallinjuriesarereportedtothepolice
• Thenumberoffatalitieshascontinuedtoincreaseataboutsevenpercentayearoverthepastdecadeexceptoverthelastcoupleofyears.
• Thenumberofcarsandmotorisedtwo-wheelers(MTW)registeredin2012was21.6and115.4millionrespectively.Theofficialregistrationdataoverrepresentthenumberofvehiclesinactualoperationbecausevehiclesthatgoofftheroadduetoageorotherreasonsdonotgetremovedfromtherecords.Theactualnumberofpersonalvehiclesontheroadisestimatedtobe50%-55%ofthoseontherecords.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
14
Table 5. Summary of RTI data used (or not used) from Indian official reports.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
15
TheextentofunderreportingofroadtrafficdeathsinIndiaisnotwellunderstood.TheGlobalBurdenofDisease(GBD)studyestimatesthattherewere264,000(95%CI:214,000-321,000)deathsinIndiain2013almosttwicethedeathsreportedbytrafficpolice.TheMillionDeathStudyestimateforfatalitiesisabout47%-64%greaterthantheNCRB-reportedofficialstatisticsandmaybeclosertothetruth.• Policedatashouldnotbeusedforstudyingtheepidemiologyofnon-fatalroadtrafficinjuriesinthe
country.Theofficialestimateofnon-fatalRTIin2014was477,731,whichprobablyunderestimatesinjuriesrequiringhospitalisationbyafactorof4andallinjuriesbyafactorof20.
• OverthelasttwodecadestheburdenofroadtrafficinjuriesinIndiahasincreasedevenwhilethatduetomanyinfectiousdiseaseshasdeclined.In1990,roadtrafficinjurieswerethe16thleadingcauseofhealthloss,however,in2013theywereranked9th.
• CountryincomelevelcannotbetakenasexcuseforinefficientdatacollectionsystemsanditispossibleforcountrieslikeIndiatosetupprofessionallymanageddatacollectionsystemsthatgiveareasonablyaccurateestimateofRTIfatalities.
• Lackoffinancesdoesnotnecessarilymeanthatasocietyhastohaveabsenceofsafetyontheroads.Wecannotdependongrowthinnationalincomealonetopromoteroadsafety.Itwillbenecessarytoputinplaceevidencebasednationalsafetypoliciestoensureimprovementsintrafficsafety.
• ThenumbersandproportionsofdifferentroaduserskilledandinjuredasmentionedintheNCRBandMoRTHreportsareerroneousandcannotbeusedforanyanalysis.
• Tablesdealingwithcauseofroadtrafficcrashesshouldnotbeusedforanyanalysisorpolicymaking• Onlyabout20percentofthetablesinNCRBandMoRTHreportsareusableforroadsafetyanalysis
andpolicymakingandtherest80percentincludeunreliableinformation,whichshouldnotbeused.ThissituationcanonlybeimprovedbyMoRTHwithacompleterevampofthedatacollectionsystemsincollaborationwiththeMinistryofHomeAffairsandestablishmentofaprofessionaldataandanalysisdepartment.
• Sincethe‘accident’and‘injury’dataarenotreliableatall,itwouldbeusefuliftheMoRTHandNCRBreportsseparatefatalandnon-fatalcasesinalltablesincludedinthereports.
Table 6. Modal share of road traffic fatalities in Mumbai, Delhi and four rural highway locations in India.
Notes: (1) Average of data 2008-2012, adapted from (Mani, A. and Tagat, A., 2013); (2) Source: (Delhi Traffic Police, 2014); (3) Data from locations on 34 national and state highways in India, (Tiwari, G. et al., 2000); (4) Source (Tiwari, G., 2015)
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
16
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
17
2. Analysis of national data
NATIONAL FATALITY RATES
Figure7showstheofficialestimatesfortotalnumberofRTIfatalitiesandfatalitiesper100,000personsinIndiafrom1970to2013(NCRB).Thetotalnumberofdeathsin2014was12timesgreaterthanin1970withanaverageannualcompoundgrowthrate(AACGR)of6%,andthefatalityratein2014was5.2timesgreaterthanin1970withanAACGRof3.9%.TherehavebeenafewperiodswhenthegrowthinRTIfatalitieshasdecreasedbrieflyandforasmallamount,butthecausesforthesamearenotknown.However,itisknownthatmotorvehiclecrashrateshaveatendencyofdecreasingalongwithadownturninthenationaleconomyforthefollowingreasons(InternationalTrafficSafetyDataandAnalysisGroup,2015):
• Economicdownturnsareassociatedwithlessgrowthintrafficoradeclineintrafficvolumes.• Economicdownturnsareassociatedwithadisproportionatereductionintheexposureofhigh-risk
groupsintraffic;inparticularunemploymenttendstobehigheramongyoungpeoplethanpeopleinotheragegroups.
• Reductionsindisposableincomemaybeassociatedwithmorecautiousroaduserbehaviour,suchaslessdrinkinganddriving,lowerspeedtosavefuel,fewerholidaytrips.ThismayexplainthereasonwhytherateofgrowthinfatalitiessloweddowninIndiainthelate
1990sandintheperiod2010-2014asthesewerealsoperiodsofloweconomicgrowth.Thereisnoindicationofalongtermtrendindicatingthattheincreaseinfatalitiesisgoingtoreducesignificantlyinthenearfuture.Twomodellingexerciseshaveattemptedtopredictthetimeperiodoverwhichwemightexpectfatalityratestodeclineindifferentcountries(Koornstra,M.,2007,Kopits,E.andCropper,
Figure 7. Total number of RTI fatalities and fatalities per
100,000 persons in India (Source: NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
18
M.,2005).KopitsandCropperusethepastexperienceof88countriestomodelthedependenceoftotalnumberoffatalitiesonfatalityratesperunitvehicle,vehiclesperunitpopulationandpercapitaincomeofthesociety..Thus,basedonprojectionsoffutureincomegrowth,theypredictthatfatalitiesinIndiawillcontinuetoriseuntil2042beforereachingatotalofabout198,000deathsandthenbegintodecline.Koornstrausesacyclicallymodulatedriskdecayfunctionmodel,whichinawayincorporatesthecyclicallyvaryingnatureofasociety’sconcernsforsafety,andpredictsanearlierdateof2030forthestartofdeclineinRTIfatalitiesinIndia.Ifweassumetheaveragegrowthrateof6%peryeardeclinestonilby2030,thenwecanexpectabout200,000fatalitiesin2030beforeweseeareductioninfatalities.
Theabovemodelsusetheexperienceofhigh-incomecountries(HIC)overthepastdecadesincalculatingrelationshipsbetweenvehicleownershiplevelsandriskofdeathpervehicle.Therefore,themodelspresupposetheonsetofdeclineatspecificper-capitaincomelevelsifthepastroadsafetypoliciesofHICsarefollowedinthefutureincountrieslikeIndia.BasedonananalysisofRTIfatalitytrendsinEuropeandtheUSA,Brüde,U.andElvik,R.(2015)suggestthat:
• Acountrydoesnotatanytimehavean“optimal”or“acceptable”numberoftrafficfatalities.• Incountrieswithagrowingnumberoftrafficfatalities,onecannotcountonthistrendtoturnby
itself;activepolicyinterventionsareneededtoturnthetrend.Ifthisistrue,thentheonlywaythedeclineofRTIfatalitiescanbebroughtforwardintimeisto
instituteadditionalIndiaspecificroadsafetypoliciesthatarenewandmoreeffective.
MODAL SHARE OF RTI FATALITIES
Table7showsestimatesoftheshareofdifferentroaduserfatalitiesbyMoRTH(TransportResearchWing,2015),W.H.O.(W.H.O.,2015),Hsiao,M.etal.(2013)andtheauthorsofthepresentreport.TheMoRTHestimateisbasedonpolicerecordsandtheW.H.O.estimateonreportsprovidedbytheIndiangovernment(basedonpolicerecords),Hsiaoetal.estimatesarebasedonanationallyrepresentativemortalitysurveyof1.1millionhomesinIndiawhichreported122,000RTIdeaths,andtheauthor’s(ofthisreport)estimateisbasedananalysisofpolicerecordsobtainedfrom8cities(DelhiTrafficPolice,2014,Mani,A.andTagat,A.,2013,Mohan,D.etal.,2013)andanumberoflocationsonruralroadsaroundthecountry(Gururaj,G.etal.,2014,Tiwari,G.,2015,Tiwari,G.etal.,2000).
TheMoRTHandW.H.O.estimatesaresimilarbecausetheycomefromthesamesourceandsuggestthatpedestrianandbicyclefatalitiesconstituteonly12%-13%ofthetotalRTIfatalitiesinthecountry.TheHsiao,M.etal.(2013)andtheauthors’estimatesforshareofpedestrianandbicyclefatalitiesis45%and39%respectively.Thisisaverylargegapbetweenthe
Table 7. Estimates of the share of different road user fatalities by MoRTH (Transport Research Wing, 2015), W.H.O. (W.H.O., 2015), Hsiao, M. et al. (2013) and the authors of the present report.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
19
officialandresearcher’sestimates.SinceHsiaoetal.haveestimatedthefatalitiesfrominterviewswithastatisticallyrepresentativesampleofhouseholdsinIndia,itislikelythattheirnumberisclosertothetruth.Theauthor’sestimateismadefromdetailedanalysisofpolicereportsfromvariouspartsofthecountry,andtherefore,maybeconsideredasbasedonofficialdata,thoughfromasmallersampleinthecountry.SincetheHsiaoandauthors’estimatesaresimilar,itisquitecertainthattheseestimatesaremorereliablethanthoseinNCRB,MoRTHandW.H.O.reports.Theerrorintheofficialreportsprobablyarisesfromwrongcodingofthevictims’statusandtheprocedureneedstoreviewedcarefullyandrevised.Theerrorintheofficialreportsprobablyarisesfromawrongcodingofthevictims’statusandtheprocedureneedstoreviewedcarefullyandrevised.
AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION
Figure8showstheRTIfatalitiesandpopulationdistributionbyageinIndiaandUSA(NationalCenterforStatisticsandAnalysis,2015,NCRB,2015,OfficeoftheRegistrarGeneral&CensusCommissioner,2015).InIndiatheproportionoffatalitiesfortheagegroup15-59isgreaterthantheirrepresentationinthepopulationandlessfortheagegroups0-14years(1:7.9ofthepopulation)and>59years(1:1.4ofthepopulation).IntheUSAchildren<15yearshaveamuchlowerrepresentationinRTIfatalitiesascomparedtotheirratiointhepopulation(1:5.1)butalltheotheragegroupshaveaslightlyhigherrepresentation.
Itisnotknownwhychildren’s(<15years)andtheelderly(>59years)involvementrateinIndiaislowerthanthatintheUSAwhenalargenumberofchildrenwalk,cycleandtravelonoverloadedvehiclestoschoolinIndia.ItispossiblethattheexposurerateoftheelderlyinIndiaislessthanforthoseintheUSAandthismayexplaintheirlowerinvolvement.However,reasonsforthesedifferencesneedfurtherstudy.AsthehealthstatusoftheIndianpopulationimprovestheagestructurewouldbecomemoresimilartothatintheUSA,andthiswouldrequirethatwefocusmoreonpoliciesforensuringsafetyforolderpersonsontheroads.
InIndiatheratiooffemale:malefatalitiesin2014was1:5.9andtheratiointheUSAin2013was1:2.4.OneofthereasonswhythefemalefatalityratioinIndiaislowerthanthatintheUSAisalower
Figure 8. RTI fatality distribution and population distribution by age in India and USA (Source: NCRB, 2015 and National Center for Statistics and Analysis,
2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
20
participationrateinformalemploymentinIndia(WorldBank,2015a).AstheparticipationrateofwomeninformalworkincreasesinIndiaitmaybenecessarytounderstandifanyspecificsafetymeasureshavetobeinstitutedtoensurewomen’ssafetyontheroad.
STATE WISE ANALYSIS
Figure9showsthetotalnumberoffatalitiesbystateandterritoryfrom1971to2014.ThestatesofNagalandandSikkimandUnionTerritoriesLakshadweep,Daman&Diu,AndamanandNicobarIslandsandDadraandNagarHavelihavenotbeenincludedinthechartastheyreportedlessthan100fatalitiesin2014.Manipur,Meghalaya,Mizoram,Nagaland,Sikkim,Tripuraaresmallhillstates,andtheunionterritoriesofAndamanandNicobarIslands,DadraandNagarHaveli,DamanandDiu,Lakshadweep,Puducherry,ChandigarhandDelhiunionterritorieswhicharegenerallysmallandthelasttwoarecities.Therefore,theseregionscanhavedifferenttrafficandfatalitypatterns.
Andhrashowsadeclineinthenumberoffatalitiesbetween2011and2014becausethestatewasdividedintwostates(AndhraandTelangana)in2014.ThetotaloffatalitiesinAndhraandTelanganain2014was1,4814ascomparedto1,518inundividedAndhrain2011.Inalmostallthelargestatesfatalitiesmorethandoubledbetween1991and2014.InMaharashtra,Orissa,Rajasthan,Tripurafatalitiesincreasedby4-6times,andinGujarat,Punjab,HaryanaandAssam8-10timesduringthesameperiod.
Figure10showsthefatalitiesper100,000populationforstatesandunionterritoriesin1996and2014.FatalityratespermillionpopulationincreasedinmostregionsexceptinthenortheasternhillstatesandthecitiesofDelhiandChandigarh(unionterritories).Theincreasewas40%-50%inMadhyaPradesh,Manipur,TamilNadu,Meghalaya,UttarPradesh;60%-100%inHimachalPradesh,WestBengal,undividedAndhraPradesh,Rajasthan,KarnatakaandOrissa;andmorethan100%inHaryana,Sikkim,AssamandPunjab.Thereasonsforthesedifferencesarenotknown.However,thesedatadoindicatethattherearestateswithhighratesandthosewithlowratesinallregionsofthecountry.
Figure11showstheassociationbetweenfatalitiesper100,000persons(2014)andpercapitaincomeofstatesandunionterritories(2013-2014).Thesedatashowthatmanystateswithhighpercapitaincomeshavesimilarfatalityratesasstateswithlowincomesandthatfatalityratesdonotseemtohaveastrongcorrelationwithincome.
Figure12showsthefatalityrateper100,000persons(2014)asafunctionofpopulationdensityinstatesandunionterritories.Theredoesnotseemtobeanystrongcorrelationoffatalityrateswithpopulationdensity.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
21
* Andhra Pradesh was divided into two states (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) in 2014, this
is why Andhra Pradesh shows a decline in fatalities in 2014.
Figure 9. Total number of RTI fatalities by state and union territory from 1971
to 2014 (Source: NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
22
Figure 10. RTI fatalities per 100,000 persons for states and union territories in 1996 and 2014 (Source NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
23
SincetheabovedatashowthatRTIfatalityratesinstatesandunionterritoriesdonotseemtobeinfluencedstronglybylocationinthecountry,stateincomeordensity,itsuggeststhatstateRTIfatalityratesmaybemoreinfluencedbyinfrastructureavailability,vehiclemodalshares,roaddesign,andenforcement.ItappearsthatiffatalityrateshavetobereducedinIndia,muchmoreattentionwillhavetobegiventostreetandhighwaydesignsandenforcementissuesthathaveinfluenceonvulnerableroadusersafetythanhasbeenthepracticeuptonow.Thiswillprobablyrequireagreatdealofresearchandinnovationasdesignsandpoliciescurrentlybeingpromoteddonotseemtobehavingthedesiredeffectinimprovingroadsafety.
SUMMARY
• Thetotalnumberofdeathsin2014was12timesgreaterthanin1970withanaverageannualcompoundgrowthrate(AACGR)of6%,andthefatalityratein2014was5.2timesgreaterthanin1970withanAACGRof3.9%.
• Ifweassumetheaveragegrowthrateof6%peryeardeclinestonilby2030,thenwecanexpectabout200,000fatalitiesin2030beforeweseeareductioninfatalities.
• TheonlywaythedeclineofRTIfatalitiescanbebroughtforwardintimeistoinstituteadditionalIndia-specificroadsafetypoliciesthatarenewandmoreeffective.
• TheNCRB,MoRTHandW.H.O.estimateofpedestrianandbicyclefatalitiescomprising13%ofthetotalRTIfatalitiesisnotcorrectandtheresearchers’estimatesthatthisnumbermaybeintherange39%-45%ismorereliable.
• Theerrorintheofficialreportsregardingtypesofroaduserskilledprobablyarisesfromawrongcodingofthevictims’statusandtheprocedureneedstoreviewedcarefullyandrevised.
• Itisnotknownwhychildren’s(<15years)andtheelderly(>59years)involvementrateinIndiaislowerthanthatintheUSAwhenalargenumberofchildrenwalk,cycleandtravelonoverloadedvehiclestoschoolinIndia.Reasonsforthesedifferencesneedfurtherstudy.
Figure 11. RTI Fatalities per 100,000 persons (2014) vs per capita income
(2013-2014)of states and union territories.
Figure 12. RTI fatalities per 100,000
persons (2014) vs population density in states and union territories.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
24
• Inalmostallthelargestatesfatalitiesmorethandoubledbetween1991and2014.InMaharashtra,Orissa,Rajasthan,andTripura,fatalitiesincreasedby4-6times,andinGujarat,Punjab,HaryanaandAssam8-10timesduringthesameperiod.
• SinceRTIfatalityratesinstatesandunionterritoriesdonotseemtobeinfluencedstronglybylocationinthecountry(culture),stateincomeordensity,itsuggeststhatstateRTIfatalityratesmaybemoreinfluencedbyinfrastructureavailability,vehiclemodalshares,roaddesign,andenforcement.
• Muchmoreattentionwillhavetobegiventostreetandhighwaydesignsandenforcementissuesthathaveinfluenceonvulnerableroadusersafetythanhasbeenthepracticeuptonow.Thiswillprobablyrequireagreatdealofresearchandinnovationasdesignsandpoliciescurrentlybeingpromoteddonotseemtobehavingthedesiredeffectinimprovingroadsafety.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
25
3. Urban safety
CITY DATA
AccordingtotheMoRTHreport(TransportResearchWing,2015)56,663(40.6%)fatalitiestookplaceinurbanareasand83,008(59.4%)inruralareas.ThesedatasuggestthattheurbanRTIfatalityshareisslightlyhigherthantheestimatedurbanpopulationshare(32%)in2014(WorldBank,2015b).However,detailsoffatalitiesandvehiclesregisteredarereportedonlyforcitieswithpopulationsgreaterthanonemillion.Thelatestreportincludesdetailsfor50millionpluscitiesrecordingatotalof16,611fatalities(29%ofurbanRTIdeaths).InthischapterweonlyusetotalfatalitydataforcitiesfromtheNCRBandMoRTHreports(otherdataarenotreliable)anddetailedanalysisbasedondatareportedinresearchstudies.
Million-plus cities
Datafor50millionpluscitiesarereportedinMoRTHandNCRBreportspublishedin2015(NCRB,2015,TransportResearchWing,2015).Figure13showstotaldeathsreportedinthesecitiesfortheyears1996,2006and2014.Dataforcitiesthatdidnothavepopulations>1millioninearlieryearsisnotavailable.Thesedatashowthatthenumberofdeathsincreasedinalmostallthecitiesbetween1996and2006andmostcitiesbetween2006and2014.Significantreductioninnumberofdeathsareseeninlargecities(>5mpopulation):Bengaluru,Chennai,Delhi,HyderabadandMumbai.Thereasonsforthesereductionsarenotknown.Itispossiblethatincreasesintrafficcongestionleadingtodecreasesinvehiclespeedsmayhavecontributedtothis.
Figure14showstheannualRTIdeathsper100,000populationinmillionpluscitiesfor1991-2011.Forsomecitiesdataforearlieryearswasnotavailableastheirpopulationwaslessthan1million.Datafor2014arenotshownaspopulationestimatesforallcitieswerenotavailable.In2011theaveragedeathrateforallcitiescombinedwas14.7per100,000.In2011thehighestratesareindicatedforThrissur,AsansolandKollam(>40deathsper100,000population)andlowestforAhmedabadandSurat(<6deathsper100,000population).ThedeathratesforAsansolandKollamareabnormallyhighat(>60)anditispossiblethatthesestatisticsmaybeinerrorandrepresentthewholedistrictandnotthecities.For36citieswherethedatacanbecomparedbetween2001and2011only12sawadecreaseinfatalityrates.Formostofthemthedecreasewaslessthan30%.Thisisquiteanalarmingsituation,asinathirdofthesecitiesthedeathrateincreasedbymorethan50%inaperiodof10years.Sinceavastmajorityofthevictimsinthesecitiesarevulnerableroadusers(seenextsection),onepossiblecausecouldbeincreasesinvehiclespeeds.Theprobabilityofpedestriandeathisestimatedatlessthan10%atimpactspeedsof30km/handgreaterthan80%at50km/h,andtherelationshipincreaseinfatalitiesandincreaseinimpactvelocitiesisgovernedbyapoweroffour(Koornstra,M.,2007,Leaf,W.A.andPreusser,D.F.,1999).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
26
Figure 13. Annual number of RTI deaths in million plus cities 1996-2011. For some cities data for earlier years not available as their population was less than 1
million (Source: NCRB). Continued on next page.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
27
Figure 13 (Continued rom previous page). Annual number of RTI deaths in million plus cities 1996-2011. For some cities data for earlier years not available as
their population was less than 1 million (Source: NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
28
Figure 14. Annual RTI deaths per 100,000 population in million plus cities 1991-2011. For some cities data for earlier years not available as their population was
less than 1 million (Source: NCRB). Continued on next page.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
29
Figure 14 (Continued rom previous page). Annual RTI deaths per 100,000 population
in million plus cities 1991-2011. For some cities data for earlier years not available as their population was less than 1 million (Source: NCRB).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
30
DETAILS FOR SELECTED CITIES
Reliabledataregardingfatalitiesmodalsharesandotherdetailsroeroadtrafficcrashesarenotavailablefromofficialreports.InthissectionwereportdatathathavebeenobtainedbyresearchersfrompolicestationsindifferentcitiesinIndia.Theseareofficialdataasmaintainedintherecordsofpolicedepartmentsandanalysedtoobtaintrendsandrelationships.
Modal share of RTI fatalities
Figure15showstheproportionofroadtrafficfatalitiesbyroadusertypeinsixIndiancities(Mohan,D.etal.,2013).Thetotalnumberofvulnerableroaduserdeathsinthesixcitiesrangebetween84%and93%,caroccupantfatalitiesbetween2%and4%,andoccupantsofthree-wheeledscootertaxis(TSTs)lessthan5%percent,exceptinVishakhapatnamwheretheproportionforthelatteris8%.Figure16showsthatthesetotalproportionsaresimilartothoseinthemegacitiesMumbaiandDelhi(DelhiTrafficPolice,2014,Mani,A.andTagat,A.,2013).Table8showsthattheseproportionsareverydifferentfromthosereportedbyNCRB(2015).ClearlytheNCRBandMoRTHestimatesforRTImodalsharessufferfromerroneouscodingandshouldnotbeused.
However,therelativeproportionsofpedestrianfatalitiesaresmallerinthesecitiesandmotorisedtwo-wheeler(MTW)fatalitiesgreaterthanthoseinthemegacities.ThismaybebecausetheproportionofMTWownershipishigherinthesesmallercitiesthanthatinthe
Figure 15. Proportion of road traffic fatalities by road user
type (vehicle occupants, bicyclists and pedestrians) in 6 Indian cities (* number in parentheses represents the official RTI
fatality rate in the city in 2011).
Table 8. Proportion of pedestrian
fatalities according to NCRB (2015)
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
31
megacities.HelmetusebyMTWridersisnotenforcedinanyofthesecitiesthoughtheuseismandatedbytheMotorVehiclesAct1988ofIndia(MinistryofRoadTransportandHighways,1988).ThehighrateofMTWfatalitiescanbereducedsignificantlyiftheexistingmandatoryhelmetlawsareenforcedinallthecitiesandlawsintroducedforcompulsorydaytimerunninglightsforMTWs(Elvik,R.,1993,Elvik,R.,1996,Peden,M.etal.,2004,RadinUmar,R.S.etal.,1996).
LudhianaandAmritsarhaveahigherproportionofbicyclistskilledthantheothercities.Anecdotalevidencesuggeststhatthesecitieshavehigherbicycleusethantheothercitiessurveyed,butwecannotconfirmthis.
Road user victim type and impacting vehicle/object
Figure17showsthedataforthedistributionofroadtrafficfatalitiesbyroadusercategoryversustherespectiveimpactingvehicles/objectsfortwoofthesixcities,AgraandBhopal.Thesetwocitiesarerepresentativeofthepatternsinallthesixcitiesandhavebeenselectedasthefatalityratesper100,000personsaredifferentwithVishakhapatnamat24andBhopalat14in2011.Inboththecitiesthelargestproportionoffatalitiesforallroadusercategories(especiallyvulnerableroadusers)areassociatedwithimpactswithbusesandtrucksandthencars.Thisistruefortheotherfourcitiesalso.ThemostinterestingfeatureemergingfromthisanalysisistheinvolvementofMTWasimpactingvehiclesforpedestrian,bicyclistandMTWfatalitiesincities.TheproportionofpedestrianfatalitiesassociatedwithMTWimpactsrangesfrom8to25percentofthetotal.ThehighestproportionwasobservedinBhopal.TheinvolvementofMTWsasimpactingvehiclesinVRUfatalitiesmaybeduetothefactthatpedestriansandbicyclistsdonothaveadequatefacilitiesonarterialroadsofthesecitiesandtheyhavetosharetheroadspace(thecurbsidelane)withMTWriders.
Figure 16. Proportion of road traffic fatalities by road user type (vehicle occupants, bicyclists and pedestrians) in Delhi
and Mumbai.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
32
Road traffic fatalities by type of road user and time of crash
Figure18showsthefatalitiesbyroadusercategoryandtimeofdayinAgraandLudhiana.Thesetwocitieshavebeenselectedastheyhavedifferentfatalityratesandtrafficcharacteristicswerestudiedingreaterdetailsinthesetwocities.Pedestrianandbicyclefatalitieshavehighratesearlierinthemorning.Thismaybebecausethisclassofroadusersstartforworkearlierthanthoseusingmotorisedtransportandvehiclespeedsmaybehigheratthistime.Thetotalfatalityrateremainssomewhatsimilarbetweenthehoursof10:00and18:00andastrongbimodaldistributionisnotobserved.Thiscouldbebecauseschoolandworkingtimingsarereasonablystaggered.Schoolsstartaround08:00inthemorningandcloseat14:00andsomeofthemhaveasecondshift.Privateofficesopenbetween
Figure 17. Fatal RTI victim road user category and impacting vehicles/objects in Vishakhapatnam and Bhopal (numbers in bars represent number of cases).
Figure 18. Fatal RTI victim road user category and impacting vehicles/objects in Vishakhapatnam and Bhopal (numbers in bars represent number of cases).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
33
08:00-09:00,governmentofficesbetween09:00-10:00andshopsaround11:00.Mostshopsstayopenupto21:00andrestaurantsupto23:00.ThedataalsoshowthatMTWandpedestriandeathsarerelativelyhighat20:00-23:00whenwewouldexpecttrafficvolumestobelow.ThedetailsofriskfactorsforhighrateofvulnerableroaduserfatalitiesatnightarenotavailableforallcitiesbutsurveysdoneinAgraandLudhianasuggestthatduetolowervolumesvehiclevelocitiescanbehigheratnight,adequatestreetlightingisnotpresent,andthereisverylimitedcheckingofdriversundertheinfluenceofalcohol(Malhan,A.,2014).ThesituationwouldbesimilarintheotherfourcitiesexceptinVadodarawherethereisprohibitionofalcoholusebylaw.
Age of victims
Inthedetailedstudydoneforsixcitiesthedatacodersmarkedoutthecaseswhere‘children’werementionedasvictimsinthetextinthepolicereports.Ingeneralthesewouldbepersonsyoungerthan4years.ForAgra,Amritsar,BhopalandVishakhapatnam(totalfatalcasesinsample:2,788)atotalof78cases(2.8%)wereidentifiedofwhich13wereMTWoccupants(0.5%)and53werepedestrians(1.9%).Thisislessthanthenationalrateof7%forpersons0-14years.Thismaybepartlybecausesomeofthosebelow14yearsmaynothavebeenclassifiedaschildren.Lowerexposureratesforchildrenmayaccountforthis,however,thisexplanationdoesnotseemtobeadequateenoughtoexplaintheseverylowrates,especiallychildrenonmotorcycles.Thisphenomenonneedsfurtherstudy.
Road user risk analysis
Riskoffatalityhasbeencalculatedusingdifferentindicestounderstandtheroleofdifferentmotorvehicles,personalriskpertripbydifferentmodesandtheriskdifferentvehiclespresenttosociety.
Occupant risk per hundred thousand vehicles Figure6showsthenumberofmotorvehicleoccupantfatalitiesper100,000vehiclesforfourcities
wherethevehicledatawererelativelyreliable.Thishasbeenobtainedbydividingthetotalnumberofoccupantfatalitiesforeachvehicletypeestimatedfor2011dividedbythenumberofvehiclesofthattypeestimatedforthecity(correctedforoverestimates).Thesedatashowthatoccupantfatalitiespervehicledecreaseinthefollowingorder–TST:MTW:Car.OccupantfatalityratesforMTWandTSToccupantsare2-3and3-5timeshigherthatforcarsrespectively.ThehighratespervehicleforTSTswouldalsobebecausetheycarryamuchlargernumberofpassengersinthedayascomparedtoMTWsandcars.TheMTWfatalityrateisnotmorethan5timesthefatalityrateforcarsinanyofthefourcities.ForEuropeandUSAthisratioisreportedtobeintherangeof10-20(Peden,M.etal.,2004).WedonothavedetaileddatatoexplainwithcertaintywhythisriskratioforMTWridersshouldbelowerinIndiancitieswherethehelmetlawisnotbeing
Figure 19. Motor vehicle occupant fatalities per 100,000 vehicles.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
34
enforced.Thepossiblereasoncouldbethatthemajorityofmotorcyclessoldareoflowpower(<150cc),theridersarenotmotorcyclingenthusiastsbutregularcommuters,andalsotheeffectofsafetyinnumbers(Bhalla,K.andMohan,D.,2015).
Personal fatality risk per 10 million trips
Thepersonalfatalityriskhasbeencalculatedbydividingthevehiclespecificoccupantfatalityratebyestimatesofaveragenumberofoccupantscarriedbyeachvehicleperday.Thenumbersassumedare(basedon3tripsperdayforMTWandcarswithoccupancyof1.3and2.3pertriprespectively):MTW–4,TST–60,Car–7(Chanchani,R.andRajkotia,F.,2012,Mohan,D.andRoy,D.,2003,WilburSmithAssociates,2008).TheresultsofthesecalculationsareshowninFigure20.Itisclearthatgiventhepresenttriplengthsforeachvehicletype,theMTWrideris3-6timesmoreatriskthanacaroccupant.TheMTWfatalityratespertripinAgraandVishakhapatnamaremuchhigherthantheotherthreecities.Thereasonsforthisarenotknownatpresent.Atapersonallevel,riskpertripseemstobelowestforTSToccupantsinallthecitiesfortheassumedoccupancyratesandnumberoftripsperday.
Fatalities associated with each vehicle type accounting for exposure Figure21showsallthefatalitiesthateachvehicletypeisassociatedwithper100,000-vehiclekm
perday.Thefollowingvalueshavebeenassumedfordistancestravelledperday.
• Car:50km• TST:150km• MTW:25km
Thisincludesoccupantfatalitiesandthoseofroadusersotherthanthevehicleoccupant.Forexample,ifamotorcyclehitsapedestrianandthepedestriandies,thenthepedestriandeathwillalsobeassociatedwiththemotorcycle.Thisindexgivesaroughideaofthetotalnumberoffatalitiesthatisexpectedforeachvehicletypegiventhepresenttrafficconditionsandmodeshares.ThesefiguresindicatethattherelativelowrateforTSTsascomparedtocarsisduetothehigherexposureofTSTsperday.TheseindicesappeartoindicatethatperkmoftravelTSTs,MTWsandcarsareveryroughlyequallyharmfulforsocietyunder
Figure 20.Occupant fatality rates per 10
million trips.
Figure 21.All fatalities associated with each vehicle category per 100,000 vehicle
km (estimated).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
35
presentconditions.Outofthesethreevehiclesmotorcycleridersbearthehighestriskanditisveryimportanttofocusontheirsafety(helmetuseanddaytimerunninglights).TSTsneedimprovementforsafetyofoccupantsaswellastheVRUsitimpacts.
Conclusions from detailed city studies
Thetotalnumberofvulnerableroaduserdeathsinthesixcitiesrangebetween84%and93%,caroccupantfatalitiesbetween2%and4%,andTSToccupantslessthan5%,exceptinVishakhapatnamwheretheproportionforthelatteris8%.ThesetotalproportionsaresimilartothoseinthemegacitiesMumbaiandDelhi.HelmetusebyMTWridersisnotenforcedinanyofthesecitiesthoughtheuseismandatedbytheMotorVehiclesAct1988ofIndia.ThehighrateofMTWfatalitiescanbereducedsignificantlyiftheexistingmandatoryhelmetlawsareenforcedinallthecitiesandlawsintroducedforcompulsorydaytimerunninglightsforMTW.
Thelargestproportionoffatalitiesforallroadusercategories(especiallyvulnerableroadusers)areassociatedwithimpactswithbusesandtrucksandthencarsinVishakhapatnamandBhopal.Thisistruefortheotherfourcitiesalso.ThemostinterestingfeatureemergingfromthisanalysisistheinvolvementofMTWasimpactingvehiclesforpedestrian,bicyclist,andMTWfatalitiesinallthesixcities.TheproportionofpedestrianfatalitiesassociatedwithMTWimpactsrangesfrom8to25percentofthetotal.TheinvolvementofMTWsasimpactingvehiclesinVRUfatalitiesmaybeduetothefactthatpedestriansandbicyclistsdonothaveadequatefacilitiesonarterialroadsofthesecitiesandtheyhavetosharetheroadspace(thecurbsidelane)withMTWriders.ProvisionofseparateandadequatepedestrianandbicyclelanesinallcitiesisaprerequisiteforRTIcontrol.
MTWandpedestriandeathsarerelativelyhighat20:00-23:00whenwewouldexpecttrafficvolumestobelow.SurveysdoneinAgraandLudhianasuggestthatduetolowervolumesvehiclevelocitiescanbehigheratnight,adequatestreetlightingisnotpresent,andthereisverylimitedcheckingofdriversundertheinfluenceofalcohol.Thissuggeststhattrafficcalmingmethods,betterstreetlightingandalcoholcontrolwouldbenecessarytocontrolRTIduringnighttime.
Involvementofyoungchildreninfatalcrashesappearstobelowandthereasonsforthisarenotclearneedtobestudied.RelativeriskofoccupantsofMTWisthehighestbutnotashighinthehigh-incomecountries.However,theestimatedrisktosocietyposedbycarsasestimatedfromtotalinvolvementinfatalcrashesseemstobegreaterthanthatposedbymotorcyclesandthee-wheeledscootertaxis.Furtherresearchisnecessarytodeterminetheveracityofthesefindings.
SUMMARY
• Datashowthatthenumberofdeathsincreasedinalmostallthecitiesbetween1996and2006andmostcitiesbetween2006and2014.
• Significantreductioninnumberofdeathswereseeninlargecities(>5mpopulation):Bengaluru,Chennai,Delhi,HyderabadandMumbai.Thereasonsforthesereductionsarenotknown.Itispossiblethatincreasesintrafficcongestionleadingtodecreasesinvehiclespeedsmayhavecontributedtothis.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
36
• In2011theaverageannualdeathrateforallcitiescombinedwas14.7per100,000persons.• For36citieswherethedatacanbecomparedbetween2001and2011only12sawadecreasein
fatalityrates.Formostofthemthedecreasewaslessthan30%.Thisisquiteanalarmingsituation,asinathirdofthesecitiesthedeathrateincreasedbymorethan50%inaperiodof10years.
• Thetotalnumberofvulnerableroaduserdeathsinalleightcitiesstudiesrangebetween84%and93%,caroccupantfatalitiesbetween2%and4%.TheseproportionsareverydifferentfromthosereportedbyNCRB(2015).TheNCRBandMoRTHestimatesforRTImodalsharesappeartosufferfromerroneouscodingandshouldnotbeused.
• Inallthecitiesstudiedthelargestproportionoffatalitiesforallroadusercategories(especiallyvulnerableroadusers)areassociatedwithimpactswithbusesandtrucksandthencars.TheproportionofpedestrianfatalitiesassociatedwithMTWimpactsrangesfrom8to25percentofthetotal.
• MTWandpedestriandeathsarerelativelyhighat20:00-23:00whenwewouldexpecttrafficvolumestobelow.SurveysdoneinAgraandLudhianasuggestthatduetolowervolumesvehiclevelocitiescanbehigheratnight,adequatestreetlightingisnotpresent,andthereisverylimitedcheckingofdriversundertheinfluenceofalcohol.
• Occupantfatalitiespervehicledecreaseinthefollowingorder–TST:MTW:Car.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
37
4. Intercity highways
INTRODUCTION
GovernmentofIndiahaslaunchedamajorprogrammetoexpandandimprovehighwaysinIndiasince2000.SeventythousandkilometresofNationalHighways(NH)aremaintainedbytheNationalHighwayAuthority(NHAI).ThroughtheNationalHighwayDevelopmentProgramme(NHDP),NHAIisupgradingnearly49,000kmofNH.Twentyfourthousandkmofhighwayshavebeenupgraded.Upgradationincludesincreasingthenumberoflanes(e.g.fromfourtosix),convertingundividedroadstodividedhighways,andaddingpavedshouldersto2laneroads.Themajormotivationbehindhighwayupgradationhasbeenimprovinginter-cityandinterstateconnectivitythroughcapacityenhancementaswellasimprovinghighwaysafety.
TRAFFIC CRASHES ON INDIAN HIGHWAYS
Highwaysafetyremainsamajorconcernafternearly50%ofcompletionofNHDPprojects.Figure22showstheproportionofRTIfatalitiesondifferentcategoriesofroadsandtheproportionofroadlengthforeachcategory(MoRTH,2015,TransportResearchWing,2015).NHcompriseonly15%ofthetotallengthofroadsinIndiabutaccountfor33%ofthefatalities.Fatalityrateperkmofroadisthehighestonexpressways(1.8deathsperkmperyear)andNHcomenextwith0.58deathsperkmannually(Figure23).TherelativelyhighdeathrateonNHcouldbebecausetheycarryasignificantproportionofpassengerandfreighttraffic(MoRTH,2015,TransportResearchWing,2014).However,sincedetailsofvehiclekmtravelledonvariouscategoriesofhighwaysarenotavailable,itisnotpossibletomakeacomparisonbasedonexposurerates.Expresswayshadalengthofonly1,000kminthecountryin2014butahighdeathrateof1.8perkmperyear.Thisshouldbeacauseforconcern.
Recentresearchstudieshavereportedfatalcrashrates(fatalitiesperkm)forthreeNH(NH-1,NH-8andNH2)as3.08crashes/km/yearonsix-laneNH-1,followedby2.54crashes/km/yearonfour-laneNH-
Figure 22. Proportion of RTI fatalities in 2014 on different categories of roads and the proportion of road length for each category (Source: MoRTH, 2015,
Transport Research Wing, 2015).
Figure 23. RTI fatality rate per km of road per year for different category of roads (Source: MoRTH, 2015, Transport
Research Wing, 2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
38
24bypass,and0.72crashes/km/yearontwo-laneNH-8(Naqvi,H.M.andTiwari,G.,2015).
CRASH PATTERNS
Adetailedstudyof35selectedlocationsonhighwaysreportedtrafficcrashpatternsusingtwodifferentmethodstocollectroadcrashdata(Tiwari,G.etal.,2000):
1. AnalysisofroadaccidentFirstInformationReports(FIRs)foraperiodofoneyearfromthepolicestationsinthearea.
2. Analysisofdatacollectedbyspeciallytrainedinformersforaperiodofthreemonthsfora50-kmsectionofthehighwayateachlocation.Theinformerswereinstructedtotraveloverthesectioneverydayandcollectinformationonaccidentsoccurringonthatstretch.
Thetwomethodsofdatacollectiongavethefollowinginsights:
1. Thedataavailablefromthepolicerecordsmissesoutmanyminorinjuryandsinglevehicleaccidents.
2. Thedatacollectedbytheinformersmissedmanyfatalaccidentsinvolvingpedestriansandbicyclists.Thisisprobablybecausethevehiclesinvolvedinthesecasesareoftenabletodriveawaybecausetheydonotsuffermuchdamage.Assuchthereisnoevidenceleftatthecrashsceneandtheinformermaymissthecasewhenhetravelsonthestretchofthehighwayafteraday.
Amorerecentstudyinvestigatedpolicereportsoffatalcrashesonselectedlocationson2laneNH8,4laneNH24,and6laneNH1(Tiwari,G.,2015).TheresultsformodalsharesofthosekilledontheselocationsaregiveninTable9.Inthe1998studyofhighwaystheproportionsofmotorvehicleoccupantsandvulnerableroaduserswere32and68percentrespectively,whereasthenumbersforurbanareaswere5%-10%vehicleoccupantsandtherestwerevulnerableroadusers(Table9).Thoughthemotorvehiclefatalitiesarehigheronhighwaysthaninurbanareas,aswouldbeexpected,thedifferencesarenotashighasinwesterncountries.Avastmajority(68%)ofthosegettingkilledonhighwaysinIndiacomprisevulnerableroadusersandthisfactshouldbetheguidingfactorinfuturedesignconsiderations.Datafromthreehighwaysegmentsfrom2009-2013showasimilarpattern.PedestrianandMTWproportionsareveryhighexceptonthesix-lanehighwaywheretheproportionoftruck
Table 9. Modal share of road traffic fatalities in Mumbai, Delhi and four rural highway locations in India.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
39
victimsismuchhigher.
Table10showstheimpactingvehicleinfatalcrashesonhighways.Thisshowsthatasfarasvehicleinvolvementisconcernedthepatternsareverysimilarinbothcases.Trucksandbusesareinvolvedinabout70%offatalcrashesinbothruralandurbanareas.Thisisagainverydifferentfromwesterncountrieswheretherearesignificantdifferencesinruralandurbancrashpatterns.
Theaboveaggregatedataindicatethatcrashpatternsonruralandurbanroadsaremoresimilarthanwouldbeexpectedbasedonwesternexperience.Thisisprobablybecauseofthesettlementpatternsinourcountrysidewherethereishigh-densityhabitationalongthehighways,whichresultsintheuseofmanysectionsofthehighwayasurbanarterialroads.Therefore,safetywouldbeenhancedmainlybyseparatinglocalandthroughtrafficondifferentroads,orbyseparatingslowandfasttrafficonthesameroad,andbyprovidingconvenientandsaferoadcrossingfacilitiestovulnerableroadusers.
Table11showsthedistributionofcrashtypesbytypeofhighwayandtypeofcrash(Tiwari,G.etal.,2000).Thestatisticsforsinglelanemaynotberepresentativebecauseofthesmallsamplesize.Itisinterestingtonotethattherearenomajordifferencesintheproportionofoverturnaccidentsin2-laneand4-laneroads.Similarlytherearenomajordifferencesintheproportionofhead-oncollisionsondifferenttypesof2-laneroads.However,itisverysurprisingthaton4-lanedividedroadshead-oncollisionscomprise19%ofthecrashes.Divided4-laneroadsarejustifiedonthebasisthatthesewouldeliminatetheoccurrenceofhead-oncollisions.Thefactthathead-oncollisionsarecommonondividedroadsmeansthatmanyvehiclesaregoingthewrongwayondividedhighways.Thisisprobablybecausetractorandothervehiclestravelthewrongwaywhentheyexitfromroadsidebusinessesandthecutinthemedianistoofaraway.Thisissueneedstobeconsideredseriouslyandguidelinesneedtobe
Table 10. Proportion of impacting vehicle type in fatal crashes on selected highway locations
.
Table 11. Crash types by type of highways, 1997-2000(Tiwari, G. et al., 2000).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
40
developedfortheplacementofcutsinthemedianorforprovidingunder/overpassesforvehiclesatconvenientlocations.
Table11and12describethetypesofcrashesthatoccuredondifferenttypesofhighwaysin1997-2000andinthelastfiveyears(2010-2014).Thetypesofcrashesthatoccuronhillroads,whererun-offcrashesdominate,areclearlydifferentfromthosethatoccuronothertypesofhighways.
Rear-endcollisions(includingcollisionswithparkedvehicles)arehighonalltypesofhighwaysincluding4-lanehighways.Thisshowsthateventhoughmorespaceisavailableonwiderroadsrear-endcrashesdonotreduce.Thisisprobablyduetopoorvisibilityofvehiclesratherthanroaddesignitself.Countermeasureswouldincludemakingvehiclesmorevisiblewiththeprovisionofreflectorsandroadsidelightingwhereverpossible.
Impactswithpedestriansandbicycleshaveahighrateonallroadsincluding4-laneandsix-lanedividedhighways.Theproportionisloweron2-lanehighwayswithwider(2.5m)pavedshoulders(seeTable10).Forthesetypeofcrashestobereducedthefollowingcountermeasuresneedtobeexperimentedwith:physicalsegregationofslowandfasttraffic,provisionof2.5mpavedshoulderswithphysicalseparationdeviceslikecatseyes,provisionoffrequentandconvenientunder-passes(atthesamelevelassurroundingland)forpedestrians,bicyclesandothernon-motorisedtransport,andtrafficcalminginsemi-urbanandhabitedareas.
Collisionswithfixedobjectsarelowonlyon4-lanedividedhighways.Provisionofadequaterun-offareawithoutimpedimentsanddesignofappropriatemediansareobviouslyveryimportantonhighways.
OTHER STUDIES
Saija,K.K.andPatel,C.D.(2002)andShrinivas,P.L.L.(2004)analysedroadtrafficcrashdataobtainedfromthepolicerecordsforthestateofGujaratandTamilNadurespectivelyatamacrolevelbutconsiderednationalhighwaydataincombinationwithotherroads.Kumar,R.P.etal.(2004)havedoneastudyofcrashesonDindigul-PalanisectionofNH209andreportthatabout50%ofthecrashesinvolvedbusesand25%ofthevictimswerepedestriansandthattwostretchesofthehighwayhadahighernumberofcrashesthanothersections.AstudyofcrashesonNH-8passingthroughValsadDistrictfoundthatcrasheswereincreasingatarateof3.9%annually,rearendcrashescomprised40%andthatheavyvehicleswereinvolvedinthelargestnumberofcases(Saija,K.K.andPatel,C.D.,2002).
Table 12. Crash types by type of highways 2010-2014 (Tiwari, G., 2015).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
41
Thesestudiesinformusthathighwayshavesomestretchesthatcanbeidentifiedasbeingassociatedwithahighernumberofcrashesthanotherlocations;heavyvehiclesareinvolvedinalargernumberofcrashesthanlightervehicles;andvulnerableroaduserscompriseasignificantproportionofthosekilledonnationalhighways.However,noneofthesestudiesprovideinformationonspeeds,modalsharesandhighwaydesignandtheirassociationwithroadtrafficfatalities.
Shaheem,S.etal.(2006)havepublishedtwodetailedstudiesonroadtrafficcrashesontheAluva-CherthalaandPallichal-KaliyikkavilasectionsNH-47inKerala.ForthePallichal-Kaliyikkavilasectiontheauthorsevaluatetheimpactoffour-laningof38.5kmofthehighwayonroadtrafficcrashes.Theyalsoreportthatheavyvehicleshadahighinvolvementandpedestriansandcyclistswere28%ofthevictims.Themostimportantfindingofthisstudyisthatthefatalityratebasedonthevolumecapacityratioismorethanthreetimeshigheronthefour-lanesectioncomparedtotwolanesections.Thefatalityratebasedonpopulationdensityoftheassociatedregionswashigheronthefour-lanesectioncomparedtotwolanesectionsandconversionoftwo-lanetofour-laneresultedinincreaseinthefatalityratefrom41-51%onthehighcrashratesections.
Insummary,itisclearthatcrashratesonintercityroadsarehighandnotreducing.Theconstructionof4lanedividedhighways(withoutaccesscontrol)doesnotseemtohavereducedfatalityratesandvulnerableroadusersstillaccountforanumberofcrashes.Themixofslowandfastmovingvehcilesonhighwayscreatesseriousproblemsasspeeddifferentialscanaccountforsignificantincreasesincrashrates.Highincidenceoffatalrear-endcrashesindicatesaproblemoflackofvisibilityandconspicuityofparkedvehicles.Thereisclearlyastrongcaseforredesignofintercityroadswithseparationofslowandfastmodes.Theneedsofroadusersonlocalshortdistancetripswillhavetobeaccountedfortoreducetheprobabilityofhead-oncrashesduetothemgoingthewrongwayondividedhighwaysbyprovisionofsaferoadcrossingsatconvenientdistance.Solutionsformanyoftheseissuesarenotreadilyavailableandresearchstudiesnecessaryforevolutionofnewdesigns.
SUMMARY
• NationalHighwayscompriseonly15%ofthetotallengthofroadsinIndiabutaccountfor33%ofthefatalities.Fatalityrateperkmoftheroadisthehighestonexpressways(1.8deathsperkmperyear)andNHcomenextwith0.58deathsperkmannually
• Expresswayshadalengthofonly1,000kminthecountryin2014butahighdeathrateof1.8perkmperyear.Thisshouldbeacauseforconcern.
• Avastmajority(68%)ofthosegettingkilledonhighwaysinIndiacomprisevulnerableroadusersandthisfactshouldbetheguidingfactorinfuturedesignconsiderations.
• Datafromthreehighwaysegmentsfrom2009-2013showasimilarpattern.PedestrianandMTWproportionsareveryhighexceptonsix-lanehighwaywheretheproportionoftruckvictimsismuchhigher.
• Trucksandbusesareinvolvedinabout70percentoffatalcrashesinbothruralandurbanareas.Thisisagainverydifferentfromwesterncountrieswheretherearesignificantdifferencesinruralandurbancrashpatterns.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
42
• On4-lanedividedroadshead-oncollisionscomprise19%ofthecrashes.Divided4-laneroadsarejustifiedonthebasisthatthesewouldeliminatetheoccurrenceofhead-oncollisions.Thefactthisisnotoccurringmeansthatmanyvehiclesaregoingthewrongwayondividedhighways.Thisisprobablybecausetractorandothervehiclesgothewrongwaywhentheyexitfromroadsidebusinessesandthecutinthemedianistoofaraway.
• Rearendcollisions(includingcollisionswithparkedvehicles)arehighonalltypesofhighwaysincluding4-lanehighways.Thisshowsthateventhoughmorespaceisavailableonwiderroadsrear-endcrashesdonotreduce.Thisisprobablyduetopoorvisibilityofvehiclesratherthanroaddesignitself.Countermeasureswouldincludemakingvehiclesmorevisiblewiththeprovisionofreflectorsandroadsidelightingwhereverpossible.
• Followingcountermeasuresneedtobeexperimentedwith:physicalsegregationofslowandfasttraffic,provisionof2.5mpavedshoulderswithphysicalseparationdeviceslikecatseyes,provisionoffrequentandconvenientunder-passes(atthesamelevelassurroundingland)forpedestrians,bicyclesandothernon-motorisedtransport,andtrafficcalminginsemi-urbanandhabitedareas.
• Safetywouldbeenhancedmainlybyseparatinglocalandthroughtrafficondifferentroads,orbyseparatingslowandfasttrafficonthesameroad,andbyprovidingconvenientandsaferoadcrossingfacilitiestovulnerableroadusers.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
43
5. Status of research in road safety
INTRODUCTION
Onewaytounderstandthestatusofknowledgeproductionindifferentcountriesistoexaminethenumberofscholarlyarticlesondifferentsubjectsoriginatingfromthosecountries.Fivekeyareasinthefieldoftransportationresearchare
1. RoadSafety
2. CivilEngineeringprojectsrelatedtodevelopmentintransportfacilities
3. Emissions,coveringairandnoisepollution
4. Railways
5. Transportationplanning,orientedtowardsdevelopingthetransportfacilities
ForeachoftheareasuniquekeywordswereusedandasearchdoneontheonlinesearchengineScopus™.TheresultsofthesearchforthecountriesIndia,ChinaandBrazilareshowninTable13andtheoutputnormalisedforpopulation(2011)showninTable14.ThesetablesshowthatnotonlydoesIndiafarepoorlyintermsoftotaloutput,whennormalisedforpopulationlevelsin2011,India’soutputappearspoorincomparisonwithbothBrazilandChina.EvenmoreworrisomeisthefactthatthegapbetweenIndiaandChinahaswidenedconsiderablyinthepastdecade(Table15)especiallyontopicsdealingwithrailwaytechnology.
Ifweassumethatresearchoutputmayhavesomerelationshipwithpercapitaincomeandnumberofpeopleineachsociety,eventhentheseresultsshowIndiaisdoingmuchworsethanChinaandnotevenaswellasBrazil.
Table 13. Number of academic articles published originating in India, China, and Brazil in the period 2006-2010. (Source:
Scopus™).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
44
ItispossiblethatthesedatadonotcontainstudiespublishedfromIndiawhicharenotincludedinindexedjournals,andthatthequalityofstudiesfromIndiamaybebetterthanmanyoriginatingfromChina.However,thegapsaresolargethatweneedtotakecorrectivemeasuresonanurgentbasis.ThenumberofpapersfromChinaper-personperUS$per-capitaincomearemorethanthreetimesgreaterthanthatfromIndiainallareas.ThismeansthatifwewanttocatchupwithChinaintenyearswiththeirpresentlevelsofproductivity,wewillhavetogrowatmorethan10percentperyear.However,thiswouldnotbeadequateenoughforthekindofgrowthweneedinknowledgegenerationandinnovationtoputinplacesystemsinthenexttenyearsthatserveuswellforthenextthirtyyears.Itwouldbesafetoassumethatweneedtoplanforadramaticincreaseinhumanresourcedevelopment,researchoutputandcreationofjobsforhighlytrainedprofessionals.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF INDIAN RESEARCH REPORTS
Asystematicsearchwasdoneusingdefinitiveroadtrafficaccidentkeywords(roadsafetyIndia,accidentinIndia,andaccidentduetospeedinginIndia,roadaccidentsduetoroadgeometryinIndianhighways,vehiculargrowthandroadsafetyinIndia)onScienceDirectandGoogleScholar.Thepaperswerethenclassifiedinto4broadthemes-Urbanareas,Highways,NationalTrendsandPublictransportation.Thesearchfoundeighty-onestudiesthatwerepublishedinpeerreviewedjournals,conferenceorinstitutionalreports.Since2000thenumberofpublicationshasshownanincreasingtrendandaccordingtoareport,Indiacontributedonly0.7percentpapersonroadtrafficinjuries.
ThisreviewwasundertakentosynthesizetheavailablepublishedstudiesonroadsafetydoneinIndiaintheperiod1970-2015andcategorizethemaccordingtofourthemes-urban,highways,nationaltrends,publictransport.ThissectionincludesasystematicreviewofthepublishedpapersaccordingtotheguidelinesofthePreferredReportingItemsforSystematicReviewsandMeta-Analyses(PRISMA)statement(Moher,D.etal.,2009).TheelectronicdatabasesearchesincludedGoogleScholarandElsevier.Ahandsearchenabledalookthroughthebibliographiesoftheretrievedarticles.Thesearchscreenedpublishedandunpublishedarticles,workingpapers,dissertations,reportsdocumentedorpublishedbetween1970and2015.Onlypeerreviewedpaperswereselected.Thesearchkeywordswereenteredinallsearchable,subjects’specificfields(title,keyword,andabstract),medicalsubjectheading(MeSH)andfree-textterms,differentforvarioussearchengines.Thekeywordsthatwereusedare:road
Table 14. Number of publications in the period 2006-2010 per 100 million
population.
Table 14. Ratio of journal papers published by China and India in the periods 1961 -2005 and 2006-2010.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
45
safetyIndia,accidentinIndia,accidentduetospeedinginIndia,roadaccidentsduetoroadgeometryinIndianhighways,vehiculargrowthandroadsafetyinIndia.
Thereferenceswereincludedinthefinalreviewthroughdiscussions.DatawerereviewedforduplicationaftertheextractionwascompletedandenteredinMicrosoftExcel.Theinferenceofdatainastatisticalmannercouldnotbeperformedasthedatasetobtainedwereheterogeneousinnatureandhencequalitativeanalysisoftheextracteddatasetwasinsteadundertakeninthestudy.
Results
Followingoutcomemeasureswerenoted:
• Prevalenceofdifferentmodes/factorsonaccidentratesindifferentenvironment.• ExposureofRTA’sondifferentroadusers.• ImpactofRTCsandtheirrelatedburden(i.e.,numberofaccidents,fatalities,injuries,socioeconomic
burden,etc.).Indiadespitehavingthedistinctionofbeingthesecondmostpopulouscountrycontributedonly
0.7%articlesonroadtrafficinjuries.Ithadlessthanonearticleonroadtrafficinjuriesper1,000roadtraffic-relateddeaths(Borse,N.andHyder,A.A.,2009).
Sixtyonepapersthatmettheabovecriteriawereincludedforanalysis.Table15showsthenumberofpapersbypublicationtypeandTable16byyearofpublication.Thereviewedpapershadthefollowingcharacteristics
• Inurbantheme31%ofthestudieshadstatisticalanalysisinvolvingmodelling.
• Inhighwaythemeonly36%studieshadstatisticalanalysisinvolvingmodelling.
• Inpublictransportationtheme25%studieshadstatisticalanalysisinvolvingmodelling.
• InNationaltrends25%studieshadstatisticalanalysisinvolvingmodelling.
AsummaryofthepapersisincludedinAppendix1.
SUMMARY
• Indiadespitehavingthedistinctionofbeingthesecondmostpopulouscountrycontributedonly0.7%articlesonroadtrafficinjuries.
• Whennormalisedforpopulationlevelsin2011,India’soutputappearspoorincomparisonwithbothBrazilandChina.ThegapbetweenIndiaandChinahaswidenedconsiderablyinthepastdecade.
Table 15. Number of papers on road safety published in
India 1970-2015.
Table 16. Number of papers on road safety published in
India 1970-2015.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
46
• ThenumberofpapersfromChinaper-personperUS$per-capitaincomearemorethanthreetimesgreaterthanthatfromIndiainallareas.ThismeansthatifwewanttocatchupwithChinaintenyearswiththeirpresentlevelsofproductivity,wewillhavetogrowatmorethan10percentperyear.
• AreviewofpeerreviewedpapersonroadsafetypublishedfromIndiaindicatedthatonlyaboutonethirdofthemincludedstatisticalanalysisandmodelling.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
47
APPENDIX1HighwayTheme SNTitle/year/author/j
ournal(conf/report)
Objective Recommendations/Results StatisticalAnalysis
1 EffectofroadcharacteristicsonaccidentratesonRuralhighwaysinIndia(Kadiyali,L.etal.,1983)
AninvestigationonalimitedscalewasundertakentoestablishrelationshipsbetweenAccidentrateandsomeroadwayAndtrafficvolumeFactors.ThestudywastakenupintensivelyontheBombay-Puneroad,whichhasaMixtureofroadGeometryalongitslength.
SomeofthefactorsresponsibleforRoadAccidentsonruralhighwaysinIndiaareRoadgeometry,pavementwidth,TrafficvolumeandnumberofIntersectionsperunitlengthofroad
Yes
2 AnalysisofroadaccidentsonnationalhighwaysinNasikdistrict(Baviskar,S.,1998)
ThispaperdiscussesthehighaccidentratesonNationalHighway(NH)sectionsintheNashikDistrictofIndia;Thepaperdiscusses:(1)thespatialtrendsofaccidentsonNH3andNH50,bothofwhichpassthroughNashik;(2)theresultsofatrafficcensusonimportantroadsinNashikfor1981-90;(3)observationsontheNH50;(4)thetimedistributionofaccidentsontheNationalHighways;(5)theseasonaltrendoffatal,serious,andminoraccidentsontheNationalHighways;(6)analysisofaccidentsfordifferentCategoriesofroads;(7)observationsofthephysicalfeaturesAndroadconditionsofdifferentsectionsofNH3andNH50;And(8)theaccidentenvironmentsontheNH3andNH50.
TheresultsofthestudyemphasizethatthemainsafetyinitiativesonIndianNationalHighwaysshouldbespecificverylocalimprovementsofaccidentblackspots,correctionofshortgeometriccurves,provisionofpavedshoulders,increaseofsightDistance,removalofroadsideHazards,flatteningsidesandslopes,Andplacingguardrailsonhighembankmentandbridgeapproaches.
Yes
3 Roadsafetyconsiderationsfornationalhighways(Sharma,A.andDua,L.,2000)
ThispaperaimstostudythecausesofroadaccidentonNationalhighwaysinIndiaandproviderecommendations.
Specificcausesofaccidentsinclude:(1)mediankerbstonesindualcarriagewaysandpoorvisibilityofkerbstones;(2)stagedroadconstruction;(3)lackofmaintenanceofroadsigns;(4)drivererrors;(5)plantationoftreesinrightsofway;(6)depressedsideshoulders;(7)contractorerrors;(8)bridgerailings;(9)poordrainage;and(10)haphazardcrossingofroadsbypedestriansandcattle.Thisarticlemakes20recommendationsforimprovingroadsafety,includingthreetypesofroaddesignimprovements,blackspotidentificationandimprovement,trafficbarriers,roadsafetyaudit,advancedwarningsystems,roadpatrolling,traininginfirstaid,uniformgeometricdesign,androadsideamenities.
No
4 CharacteristicsofroadaccidentsonlowercategoryofroadsinIndia(Mittal,N.andSarin,S.,2001)
TheobjectiveCharacteristicsofroadaccidentsonlowercategoryofroadsinindiaAccidentsonruralroadsinIndiaarenotwelldocumented.
From1983-1989,lowercategoryroadshadthehighestproportionofroadaccidents.StudiesintherelativelyprosperousstateofHaryanain1992aredescribed.Accidentsinvolvingvulnerableroaduserswerehigheronlowercategoryroadsthanonstatehighways.Althoughspeedswereloweron
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
48
lowercategoryroads,theproportionofvulnerableroaduserwashigherandinjuriesinthisgroupwerelikelytobesevere.HitandruncasesweremorefrequentonlowercategoryroadsRecommendationsincludebetteraccidentreporting,strengtheningroadshoulders,pavementrepair,makingcyclistsmoreconspicuous,andeducatingroadusers.By-passesandbetteremergencyserviceswerealsosuggested.
5 Accidentstudyonnationalhighway-5betweenanakapallitoVisakhapatnam(Rao,B.S.etal.,2005)
TheInstitutehasundertakenastudyonNH-5betweenAnakapallitoVisakhapatnamduringtheyear2003anditrunsthroughurban,semiurbanandruralareas.Theaccidentdataforthelastfiveyearswascollectedfromtheconcernedpolicestationandanalyzedthereafter.Theaimofthispaperhasbeentoanalyzethecauseofaccidentandproviderecommendations.
Themostfrequentaccidentinvolvedtwowheelers(35%)followedbygoodsvehicles(23%),cars(17%),autos(15%),Buses(9%)andunknownvehicles(1%).Thereasonsfortheaccidentscanbeattributedtothelackofsignage,raisedmediancoverwithtrees/bushes,makingpedestriansnotvisibletodriver,improperdesignofpedestriancrossing,frequentmedianopenings,andlackofenforcementtocontrolwrongsidemovements.Poorlydesignedaccessroadsfromtheadjacentareasofthehighwayarealsoleadingtofrequentconflictsbetweenlocaltraffic(mostlytwowheelers)andthroughtraffic(goodsvehicles).PropersignboardssuchasInformatory,warningandcautionsignshouldbeplacedasperIRCspecificationstoguidetheroadusertoperceivethesituation.Theseincludecurveahead,accessroadsignsalongwithdelineatorsandretro-reflectivemarkersalongthecurve.Furtheritissuggestedtoprovideaccelerationanddecelerationlanes.ItwassuggestedtotheNationalHighwayAuthorityofIndia(NHAI)tocloseboththemedianopeningstominimizetheaccident,asthefuelfillingfacilityisavailableonbothsides.Further,itissuggestedtoremoveencroachmentonNationalHighwayandprovideimprovedjunctiongeometricsandhighmasttoimproveilluminationduringnight.
No
6 Minorimprovementsofhighwaysforbetterroadsafety(Sarin,S.etal.,2005)
ThispaperdiscussestheProjecttypesundertakenunderminorenhancementobjectivesaredescribedwithreferencetothesituationintheUKandUSA.Criteriaforminorimprovementsarelisted.Therelationshipsbetweensafetyandkeyroadfeaturesareconsidered.Theplanninganddesigningprocessforaminorimprovementprojectisoutlined.
Commonroadsafetyissuesrequiringminorimprovementsaredescribed:roadwayimprovements(horizontalalignment,verticalalignment,sightdistance,cross-sectionalelements,channelisers,mediansandserviceroads,intersections,surfacepavement),roadsideimprovements(crashbarriers,fixedobjects,bridgesandculverts,relocationofaccess,drainage)andoperationalroadimprovements.Experiencehasshownthatthefollowinglow-costminorimprovementscouldbehighlyeffective:improvementsintrafficcontroldevices(signs,markings,delineators),minorphysicalalterationstotheintersectionlayout,drainageimprovements,provisionofcrashbarriersandrailings,improvedaccesscontrol,andimprovementstomedianopenings.
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
49
7 AnalysisofRoadTrafficAccidentsonNH45,KanchipuramDistrict(TamilNadu,India)(Rajaraman,R.,2009)
TheprimaryobjectivewastocollectandanalyzeIndia-basedtrafficcrashdatatobegintocreateasoundbasisfordecisionmakingforimprovingsafetyonIndia’sroadways.Asecondaryobjectivewastoestablishastandardizedmethodologyforcollectingandanalyzingcrashdata,specifictoIndianroads.
Findingsshowthatfront-to-rearcollisions,mainlyinvolvingheavytrucksandbuses,causedduetoslowingdown,stopping,breakingdownorovertakingaccountfor59%oftheaccidents.Front-RearCollisions,whichformasignificantnumberofaccidents,occurredmainlyatU-turnsandonGeneralRoads.U-turnsandsectionsofhighwaysclosetofacilities/amenitiesareblackspotsforheavytruckaccidents,astruckstendtoslowdownorstopintheseareas.ProperdesignofU-turnsandimplementationofaccelerationanddecelerationlanes,asperspecificationsandstandardslaiddown,canhelpmitigateaccidentsandinjuries.Providingsufficientshoulderwidths,asperspecifications,forheavytruckstoparksafelywillhelpreducefront-rearcollisionsduetostoppedorparkedtrucks.Effectivedrivercommunication,throughclearandwellplacedsignboards,warningsignsandinformationsigns,canhelpdriversmakedecisionswellinadvanceandgiveproperindicationstoothervehiclesaroundthem.
No
8 AnalysisofIn-DepthCrashDataonIndianNationalHighwaysandImpactofRoadDesignonCrashesandInjurySeverity(Padmanaban,J.etal.,2010)
AnalysisofIn-DepthCrashDataonIndianNationalHighwaysandImpactofRoadDesignonCrashesandInjurySeverityResearcherscarriedouton-sitecrashinvestigationsandin-depthcrashdatacollectionforaperiodof45to60daysonfour2-laneundividedhighways(NH47,NH209,NH47Bypass,NH67)anda4-lanedividedhighway(NH45).
Basedon76crashesexamined,researchersfoundashiftofcrashpatternfromhead-oncollisionsonundivided2-lanehighwaystofront-rearcollisionsondivided4-lanehighways.Thetopthreevehicletypesinvolvedinthecrashesare:trucks(44),passengercars(27)andmotorizedtwo-wheelers(24).M2Ws(22)arethehighestvehicletypeinvolvedincrashesinwhichatleastoneriderwasfatallyinjuredorhospitalized.ThisindicatesthatM2Wriders,pedestriansandbicyclistsarethetopthreevulnerableroadusers.Thesecrashesusuallyoccurredatjunctionswithbusstops(58%)ornearplacesofinterest(38%)suchastemples,shops,etc.Crossingwasthepedestrianactivityin69%ofthecrashes.Thefactorsinfluencingtheseimpactsarespeedingvehicles,lackofspeedcontroldevicesandmarkingsatpedestriancrossings,andlackofinfrastructuretoseparatepedestriansandbicyclistsfrommotorizedvehicles.Apartfrompassengercars(39%),minibuses/minitrucks(23%)andtrucks(15%),pedestrianimpactsalsoinvolvedM2Ws(23%).Roaddesignatjunctions/gapsinmedian,entryandexitsofhighwayamenities,andtheavailabilityofclearsignageandadvancewarningtodriversneedstobelookedinto.Thepresenceofpavedshouldersseemstoreducetheoccurrenceofhead-oncollisions,astheextraspaceallowsvehiclestomoveoutofthewayofovertakingvehicles.Nohead-oncollisionswereobservedondivided4-lanehighwaysduetothepresenceofawidemedian,
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
50
indicatingtheeffectivenessofmedians/dividedroadsinpreventinghead-oncollisions.Whenthefront-sidecollisionswereanalyzedforcommonproblems,roadalignmentanddesigncameouttobethemostpredominantfactorinvolved.
9 Randomparametermodelsforaccidentpredictionontwo-laneundividedhighwaysinIndia(Dinu,R.andVeeraragavan,A.,2011)
Thepresentstudyisanattempttoemployrandomparametermodelingforaccidentpredictionontwo-laneundividedruralhighwaysinIndia.Threeyearsofaccidenthistory,fromnearly200kmofhighwaysegments,isusedtocalibrateandvalidatethemodels.
Hourlytrafficvolume,lengthofhighwaysegment,proportionofcarsandmotorizedtwo-wheelersintraffic,drivewaydensity,widthofshoulder,andhorizontalandverticalcurvatureswerefoundtobesignificantlyinfluencingday-timeaccidentfrequencies.Whileincreaseinproportionofcarsandwidthofshoulderwerefoundtodecreasetheaccidentfrequencies,increaseintheothervariablesresultedinanincreaseinaccidents.Incaseofnight-timeaccidents,hourlytrafficvolume,lengthofhighwaysegment,proportionofbuses,cars,andtrucks,drivewaydensity,andverticalcurvaturewerefoundtobesignificant.Heretheproportionofcarsandtrucksintrafficwerefoundtocauseadecreaseinaccidents,whileallothervariableshadapositivecoefficient,showinganincreaseinaccidentfrequencies.
Yes
10 Roadsafetyauditforfourlanenationalhighways(Jain,S.etal.,2011)
ObjectivesofstudyI.TodevelopamethodologyforRoadSafetyAuditforfourlaneNationalHighways.Ii.TodevelopamodelforidentificationofsafetyinfluencingparametersinminimizinglikelihoodaccidentrateonselectedsectionoffourlaneNationalHighwaysnetwork.Iii.ToexaminesafetyfeaturesadoptedintheselectedsectionoffourlaneNationalHighway-58andfindoutdeficienciesintheroadnetworkwhichledtoaccidentandsafetyhazardstoroadusers.Iv.Toidentifythespeedlimitsmatchingwiththevehiclesspeedonexistingroadprofileofthehighwaysection.ThestretchfromKm75.00toKm130.00ofNationalHighway58hadbeenselectedforcandidateanalysis.
Fromdatasimulation,itfoundthatRoadMarkings,ConditionofShoulder,TrafficVolume,SpotSpeed,MedianOpeningandCarriagewayconditionweremainparametersforcausingaccidents.ItwasalsoseenthatslowmovingtrafficswerecreatingtraffichazardsforfastmovingtrafficasitalwaysoccupiedtheinnermostlaneofhighwayServiceroadsshouldbeprovidedfortheentirelengthoffourlaneroadsinordertoseparateslowmovingtrafficfromfastmovingtraffic.Allunauthorizedmedianopeningsshouldclosedandadequateprovisionsforcrossinglocalpeoplebemadeonpriority.Allundevelopedmajorandminorintersectionsmustbedevelopedwithadequatelightingprovisionsasquicklyaspossiblesincemaximumaccidentswereobservedontheselocations.Pedestrianguardrailshouldbeprovidedallalongthefootpathofserviceroadandatbusstops.
Yes
11 IRAPIndiaFourStatesRoadSafetyReport(Rogers,L.,2012)
TheprojectwasdesignedtoassistthegovernmentsoffourIndianstates:AndhraPradesh,Assam,GujaratandKarnatakatoassessroadinfrastructure-relatedriskon3,000kmofhigh-riskroadsandidentifyeconomicallyviableroadsafetycountermeasuresforimplementationundertheWorldBankfinancedupgrades.
Theroadattributedatashowsthatthemajorityofthesurveywasconductedalongatwo-lane,singlecarriagewayruralnetwork,withverylittlephysicalseparationbetweenopposingflows.Roadsidehazardsarenumerous,withmostofthesurveylengthhavinghazardousobjectswithin5moftherunninglaneandlimitedroadsideprotection.Provisionforvulnerableroadusersispoorwithnomotorcycleorbicyclefacilitiespresentandinsufficientfootpathprovisionandcrossingfacilitieswherepedestriannumbersarehigh.
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
51
Therecommendationsprimarilyseektoimprovefacilitiesforvulnerableroadusersandtoreducetheriskofhead-on,run-offandintersectioncrashesformotorisedusers.Alongwithroadsidesafetyimprovementsandthesegregationofopposingflows,intersectionupgradesalsofeaturedprominentlyinallSaferRoadsInvestmentPlans(srips)withroundabouts,signalisation,turnlanesandimproveddelineationprovidinggoodreturnsoninvestment.Roadsurfaceupgrades,pavedshoulderwidening,lanewideningandimproveddelineation,allofwhichhadbeenindependentlyidentifiedbythedesignteamforinclusionintherehabilitationworksusingIRC(IndianRoadsCongress)standards.Thismeantthattheroadsafetycomponentcouldbeusedtoincludeimprovementssuchasspeedreducingfeaturesinurbanareas,footpathsandpedestriancrossings,dedicatedmotorcyclelanesandturninglanesatintersections.Theanalysisfoundthatacombinedinvestmentforthefourstatesof27billionrupeeswouldpreventalmost125,000deathsandseriousinjuriesandsavecloseto120billionrupeesincrashcostsavoided.Thisrepresentsa40%reductionindeathsandseriousinjuriesbasedoncurrentestimates.
12 PedestrianAccidentPredictionModelforRuralRoad(Sharma,A.andLandge,V.,2012)
Thespecificobjectivesofstudiesare:•DevelopmentofCorrelationbetweenroadaccidentsandgeometricdesignparametersofhighwayalongwithtrafficoperatingcharacteristicsforpedestrianaccident•Evolvingengineeringremedialmeasuresforimprovingsafetyontheselectedstretch.•Practicalrecommendationsforimprovingtrafficsafetyonthesaidhighway.Roadgeometryandtrafficdatawascollectedthroughfieldstudiesandtrafficcountsurveyforaroadlengthof100kmbetweenAmravatiCityandNagpurCityofMaharashtraStateinIndia.
NationalHighwayNo6experiencesthecrashrateashighas1.62accidentsperyearperkm.Ithasaveryhighrateoffatality0.38death/km/year.Thehighwayshareheavyvehicles,passengercars,twowheelers,animaldrawncarts,cattle,andpedestrians.Heavyvehiclesareinvolvedin78%oftheaccidents,passengercarsareinvolvedin48%ofaccidents,twowheelersareinvolvedin62%ofaccidentsandpedestriansareinvolvedin21%ofaccidentsPedestriansafetyisgreatlyinfluencedbynumberofaccesspointsperunitlengthoftheroad.Eachadditionalaccesspointperkilometerofroadlengthmayincreaseaccidentratebymorethan100%.Ii.Shoulderwidthisalsoahighlyinfluentialfactoraffectingpedestriansafety.Additional1mwidthofshoulderwillreducetheaccidentby50%.Iii.Additionallanewidthof1mmayreducetheaccidentby50%.SomeremediesareAccesstomainhighwaysshouldbeproperlydesigned.Ii.Sufficientshoulderwidthorprovisionofsafewalkingplacesalongthehighwaysshouldbeprovided.Iii.Elevatedandvisibledesignatedareasforcrossingofroadsinallpossibleplaces.Iv.Separationofpedestrianmovementfromheavymovingtrafficinallpossibleplaces.V.Speedcontrolbyroaddesign,trafficcalmingandenforcementonhighways,neartrafficgenerators
Yes
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
52
likeeducationalinstitutions,businessplacesandhospitals.
13 CharacteristicsofFatalRoadTrafficAccidentsonIndianHighways(Narayan,S.etal.)
CharacteristicsofFatalRoadTrafficAccidentsonIndianHighways.Atotalof167accidentinvestigationshavebeencarriedoutintheCoimbatoreDistrictofthestateofTamilNaduoveraperiodofoneyear.Datafromcrashinvestigationsof71fatalaccidentsinvolving80fatalities(66vehicleoccupantsand14pedestrians)isanalyzedinthispaper.
Fatalaccidentsaccountfor43%ofallaccidentsinvestigated.Motorizedtwo-wheelers(M2Ws)constitute60%ofvehicleswithfatalcasualtieswhilepassengercarsconstitute30%.Majorityoftheimpactswerehead-onfrontals(35%)followedbypedestrianimpacts(18%).M2Wcollisionswithtrucksandcarsconstitute35%offatalaccidents.Mostofthefatalcasualtieswereunder40yearsofage.Theinjuryseverity(MAIS)rangedfromMAIS=3(21%)toMAIS=6(10%)while46%ofthecasualtiessufferedfatalinjuriesatMAIS=4
No
14 CrashPredictionforMultilaneHighwayStretchinIndia(Chikkakrishna,N.K.etal.,2013)
ThispaperdocumentstheapplicationofBayesianmodelingtechniquesforroadtrafficcrashanalysisonasampleofIndianNationalHighways.Poisson-GammaHierarchicalBayesandPoisson-WeibullBayesianmodelswereappliedtothecollectedcrashdata.ThestretchfromKm76.00toKm130.00ofNationalHighway58hasbeenselectedforcandidateanalysis.Theselectedhighwaystretchhasbeennewlyreconstructedandupgradedtofourlanes.ThetwoimportantobligatorypointsonthestudyareaareMeerutandMuzaffarnagarofthehighwayinthestateofUttar-Pradesh,India
Thefollowinggeneralconclusionsaredrawn.1.Medianopeninghasmajorinfluenceontheoccurrenceofcrashes.2.Thetrafficflowisalsoshowingdirectimpactonoccurrenceofcrashesasjustifiedpractically.3.Fromtheanalysis,ithasbeenobservedthatasaccessroadstothemainhighwayincreasesthechancesofcrashesonhighwayswillbemorewhichisasperrealisticexperience.4.Roadsidedevelopmentsalsoincreasethemovementandhinderthesmoothtrafficmovementwhichisalsojustified.Whereasthecommercialactivitiesisshowingnegativeimpactasthereisenoughlateralclearancefromthehighwayshoulderforingressandegressofthevehicles.
Yes
15 AccidentStudyonIdentifiedRoadsofKurukshetra(Chaurasia,V.K.andSachdev,S.)
AstudyhasbeentakenuponaselectedstretchofSH-6,theSaharanpur-Kurukshetraroad,betweenPiplito3rdGateofKurukshetraUniversityinHaryanatofindoutaccidentseverityindex,weightedaccidentseverityindex,accidentproneareas,peakhourtimeofaccident,totalnumberofaccidentperyearandinvolvementofdifferenttypeofvehiclesandpedestrians.
Thepedestriansandthetwowheelersseemtobethemostaffectedsectionsharingapercentageof39and43respectivelyofthevictimsoftotalaccidents.Thebi-cyclesandcarsareequallyaffectedbytheaccidentsandtheirshareinvictimsis5%each.Thepercentageshareofthreewheelersis4%.The2-wheelersandcarshavemaximuminvolvementinaccidentshavingapercentageof32%and28%respectively,whichismoreincomparisontoothertypeofvehicles.Thepercentageofaccidentsbybusandtrucksare10%and11%.Theminimuminvolvementisby3-wheelersandtractorshavingashareof4%and5%Basedonthestudy,mainreasonsforthislargenumberofaccidentsarelackoftrafficsignals,parkingareas,markingsandgeometricdesignsofroad.Toovercomethesereasons,somesuggestionsareprovidedwithconclusiontoreducethenumberofaccidentsandsavethelivesofhumanovertheselectedstree•Roaddesignandgeometricimprovementstocompensateforinadequaciesofroaduserssuchas:ODesigningofroadprofilenetwork
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
53
OStoppingsightdistanceOOvertakingsightdistanceOPavementwidthOFootpath&ShoulderOHumpnearthecollegeandotherplaceandusingreflectorsondangerouszoneAccidentblackspotinvestigationandrectificationthroughroaddesign.ByprovidingTrafficsignalforcontrollingthetrafficmovementasperrequirementatblackspotpointandcontroltheroadaccidentinKurukshetra.•Trafficpoliceforcontrollingthetraffic•Designofroadjunctions,•Trafficguidance,roadsigns,speedlimitposts,andothertrafficcontroldevicesandwarningsignsforroadusers•Roadpavementmarkings,constructionoffootpaths/cycletracks,busbays,truckparkingcomplexes,andotherwaysideamenities,etc
16 AnIn-DepthStudyofMotorizedTwo-WheelerAccidentsinIndia(Arjun,P.etal.,2014)
AnIn-DepthStudyofMotorizedTwo-WheelerAccidentsinIndia
Ofthese670crashes,182wereM2Wcrashesforwhichinjuryrecordswereavailable.72%(134)oftheseM2Wsweremotorcyclesand28%(48)werescootersandmopeds.Themajorityofthecollisionpartnersformotorcycleaccidentswerecars(36%)andheavyvehicles(36%),22%oftheriderswereyoung(18-23yearsold),and83%ofthemotorcycleriderswerenothelmeted.Itisexpectedthatincreasedlawenforcement,infrastructuredevelopment,properhelmetusetraininganddesign/safetystandardsforhelmetswouldmitigateinjuriestoM2WridersinIndia
No
17 Burden,patternandoutcomesofroadtrafficinjuriesinaruraldistrictofIndia(Gururaj,G.etal.,2014)
Theobjectiveofthepresentreportistodescribetheburden,patternandoutcomesofroadcrashesandcurrentstatusoftraumacareforrtisinTumkuraruraldistrictofSouthIndia.
Theratiooffataltononfatalrtisregisteredintheentiredistrictwas1:5fortheyearasperpolicereports.Motorcyclists(driversandpillions)comprisedthemajorcategoryofroadusersinjuredandkilledinroadcrashesconstituting45%and34%offatalandnon-fatalcrashes,respectively.Thiswascloselyfollowedbypedestrianstotheextentof20%and29%offatalandnon-fatalcrashes,respectivelyPassengersanddriversofheavyvehicles(likelorry,busesandtrucks)constituted11%offataland10%ofnon-fatalinjuries.Amongfatalcrashes,nearly10%weredriversandoccupantsofthree-wheeledvehicles.Pedestrianswerecommonlyhitbyheavyvehicleslikebuses,lorriesandtrucks(61%),followedbymotorcars(16%)andtwowheelers(14%)infatalcrashes.Theabsenceoftrafficseparatorsespeciallyonthehighwaysisanoticeablefeatureinthedistrictparticularlyinselectstretches.
No
18 Effectsofhighwaygeometricelementsonaccidentmodeling/2014(Garnaik,M.M.,2014)
ObjectivewastostudyEffectsofhighwaygeometricelementsonaccidentmodeling.Thestudywasconductedontworoadsegments(Nationalhighway23,22,87
Statisticalanalysisindicatedthat,severalhighwaygeometricparametersareverysignificanttocauseaccidentinthehighway.Highwayalignmentgeometricelementssuchasradius,superelevation,k-value,verticalgradientandsightdistance/visibilityareverysignificantincausing
Yes
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
54
&200)fromplain&rollingterrainhighwayandtworoadsegmentsfrommountainous&steepterrainhighwaywithintheruralareaoftheIndianTerritory.TwoHighwayAccidentRatePredictionModels(HARPMPRTandHARPMMST)weredevelopedduetothecomplexityofgeometricelementsofruralhighwayondifferentterrainconditionswhichtakehorizontalradius,superelevation,K-value,verticalgradientandvisibilityasinputvariablesandAccidentRate(AR)asoutputvariables.
accidentbothinplain&rollingandmountainous&steepterrainhighway.However,deflectionangle,horizontalarclength,rateofchangeofsuperelevationandverticalcurvelengthareinsignificanttocauseaccidentinbothplain&rollingandmountainous&steepterrainhighway.
19 CoimbatoreRuralRoadAccidentStudy(2015)
Thereportnotonlyidentifiesthese“contributingfactors”butalsoranksthembasedonthenumberofaccidentsthesefactorshaveinfluencedinCoimbatore.Thisrankingistohelppolicymakers,decisionmakersandroadsafetystakeholdersinplanningcosteffectiveroadsafetyinvestmentsusingdata-drivenroadsafetystrategies.
Findingsshowthatthetypeofvehicles/roadusersmostofteninvolvedinaccidentsonthehighwaysweremotorizedtwo-wheelers,or“M2Ws”(32%),followedbycars(27%)andtrucks(22%).Themostvulnerableroadusers,pedestriansandmotorcyclists,wereinvolvedinabout40%ofalleventsrecorded,andM2Wsimpactedorwereimpactedbyatruckorbusinabout18%ofthese.Studyfindingsshowsthathumanandinfrastructurefactorsincombination(66%)hadthehighestinfluenceontheoccurrenceofaccidents,followedbyhumanfactorsalone(23%).ConvertundividedroadstretchesonNationalHighwaystodividedroads;Implementaspeedmanagementprogram;Clearlymarktrafficdirections/instructionsbeforeandatintersections;rovidecrashbarrierstomakerigidobjectsonroadsideandmedianmorecrashfriendlyandforgivingwhenimpacted.
No
NATIONALTRENDS
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
55
1 RoadaccidentprobleminIndia(Hingorani,D.andSarna,A.,1978)
Thearticlegivesthenumbersofanddescribestrendsinroadaccidentsinindiabetween1960and1969.
Itshowsthatalthoughthetotalnumberislowtheannualrateofincreaseisveryhigh,comparedwithothercountries.Thefatalityrateper1000vehicles(8)wasveryhighalthoughtherateper100,000population(1)waslow.UrbanaccidentratesweremuchhigherthaninothercountriesThereportstressestheneedforcountermeasuressuchasroadandtrafficengineeringandpropaganda,educationandenforcementforroadusers.
2 Areviewofroadaccidentsinindia-theircausativefactorsandpreventivemeasures(Hingorani,D.andSarna,A.,1978)
Trendsinfatalities,totalaccidentsandmotorvehiclesinIndiafortheperiod1960-1974arediscussed.
Overthisperiodthenumberofmotorvehiclesincreasedfrom604902to2411545,thenumberofroadaccidentsincreasedfrom55478to109657,andfatalitiesincreasedattherateofabout12.4percentperannum.Trafficengineering,regulations,enforcement,educationandvehiclesafetyaspreventivemeasuresarediscussed.Recommendationsarepresentedonpedestriansafety,cyclists,vehiclesafety,drivercontrolandtheeducationofchildrenassuggestedpreventivemeasures
No
3 AccidentaldeathanddisabilityinIndia:Astocktaking(Mohan,D.,1984)
InthispaperdatafromofficialsourcesandspotstudiesofsmallpopulationsinIndiahavebeenusedtoextrapolateforthewholecountrytogetanestimateofthemagnitudeoftheproblem.
Itisestimatedthatin1978Indiahadadeathrateof57per10,000vehicles.TheIndiandatashowthatpedestrians,bicyclists,andmotorcyclistsarethemajorroadaccidentvictims.Compulsoryhelmetlawsormandatoryheadlight-onlawsformotorcyclesarelikelytobemoreeffectivethanseatbeltuselawsforcarpassengerssotheyshouldbeimplemented
No
4 Accidentcausativefactors(Chand,M.,1995)
ThispaperanalysesselectedimportantcausesofIndianroadaccidents.
Itwasfoundthatthemajorcausesoftheaccidentsin1985were:(1)drivererrors(57%);(2)pedestrians(5%);(3)vehicledefects(5%);(4)passengers(3%);and(5)badroads(2%).Theauthorconsiders:(1)theroadfactor;(2)thevehiclefactor;(3)themonth,day,andtimeofdayfactor;(4)contributoryfactors;and(5)thedriverfactor.
No
5 Roadsafetyforvulnerableroadusers:someissuesandsuggestions(Kumar,P.,2000)
ThispapercoversissuesandsuggestionsrelatingtoengineeringmeasurestomakeIndianroadssaferforpedestriansandcyclists.
Educationandenforcementareseenasplayingakeyroleintheenhancementofsafety.Pedestriansafetyconcernsfootpathobstructions;droppedkerbsatcrossings;segregatedfootpathsinruralareas;pedestriancrossingaidsincludingrefugesandrailings;andfootbridgesorsubways.Facilitiesforcyclistsandrickshawsshouldincludesegregatedroadchannelsandsignaling.Manyaccidentscould
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
56
beavoidedbyadoptingthesemeasures6 Spectrumanalysisof
roadaccidents-acasestudy(Saija,K.etal.,2000)
ThispaperpresentsadetailedanalysisofthespectrumofroadaccidentsintheIndianstateofGujarat,whichisarapidlydevelopingpartofIndiawithahigherthanusualroadaccidentgrowthrate;itcontainsextensivetables.
TheGujaratStatetrafficbranchhascollectedroadaccidentinformationsince1975andinA-4formsince1986;thedatawerecollectedandanalysedinfivebroadclassifications,thetime,district,vehicle,roaduser,androadandenvironmentspectra.Thespectrainthelattercategoryincluderoadclassification,roadsurfaceandwidth,typeofcrossingandtrafficcontrol,locationpattern,collisions,trafficmovement,andclimate.TheGujaratStatetrafficbranchhascollectedroadaccidentinformationsince1975andinA-4formsince1986;thedatawerecollectedandanalysedinfivebroadclassifications,thetime,district,vehicle,roaduser,androadandenvironmentspectra.Thespectrainthelattercategoryincluderoadclassification,roadsurfaceandwidth,typeofcrossingandtrafficcontrol,locationpattern,collisions,trafficmovement,andclimate.Roadsafetymeasuresrangefromshort-termlow-costtolong-termhigh-costsolutions,andincludephasedprogrammesconductedaccordingtoavailableresources.
yes
7 Trafficsafetyandhealthinindiancities(Mohan,D.,2002)
Thispaperdiscussessomeoftheissuesconcerningpublictransport,safetyandtheenvironment.
Around15%ofthetotalroadtrafficfatalitiesinIndiaoccurin23metros.Inthemetros,MTWcompriseapproximately70%ofallvehiclesandconstitute20-30%offatalities.Heavyvehiclesliketrucksandbusesareassociatedwith50-70%offatalroadcrashesbothinurbanandruralareas.Thenon-motorisedtransportroadusersconsistingofpedestrians,cyclistsandotherslowmovingvehiclesarethemostvulnerablegroupandaccountfor60-80%ofthe)fatalities.Between8:00pmatnightand4:00aminthemorning,crashratesarehighcomparedtothedensityoftraffic.Thismaybeduetoprevalenceofhighervehiclespeeds,lowvisibility,lowconspicuityofvehiclesandalcohol.Safetywouldbeenhancedmainlybyseparatinglocalandthroughtrafficondifferentroads,orbyseparatingslowandfasttrafficonthesameroad,andbyprovidingconvenientandsaferoadcrossingfacilitiesatfrequentintervalstovulnerableroadusersandbymakingsurethatthedesignguidelinesregardingissueslikesuperelevation,etc.Areobservedstrictly.Findingssuggestthatwidershouldersreduceconflictsbetweenslowmovingtrafficandmotorvehiclesbutdonoteliminatethem.Forthesetypeofcrashestobereducedthefollowingcountermeasuresneedtobeexperimentedwith:(a)Physicalsegregationofslowandfasttraffic(b)Provisionof2.5mpavedshoulderswithdelineationdeviceslikecatseyes,studs,rumblestrips(300mm
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
57
inwidth)betweenthemaincarriagewayandtheshoulder(c)Provisionoffrequentandconvenientunder-passes(atthesamelevelassurroundinglandwithhighwayraisedtoprovideclearance)fortractors,pedestrians,bicyclesandNMT(d)Trafficcalminginsemi-urbanandareasandvillages.Collisionswithfixedobjectsarelowonlyon4-lanedividedhighways.Provisionofadequaterun-offareawithoutimpedimentsisveryimportantonhighwaysandbetterroadmarkingstoindicatethealignmentoftheroadwouldhelpalso.Weneedtodevelopstandardsforprovisionofconvenienttunnelsandothercrossingfacilitiesintermsofdesignsandfrequencies.Inaddition,therewouldalsobeaneedforprovisionof“serviceroads”alongthehighwaysforshortdistancetripsforlocaltraffic
8 TheRoadAhead:TrafficInjuriesandFatalitiesinIndia(Mohan,D.,2004)
OverviewofTrafficinjuriesandfatalitiesinIndia
DatashowthatthecarpopulationasaproportionoftotalmotorvehiclesismuchlessinIndiathaninthehmcs(13%vs56-80%)andthattheproportionofmotorisedtwo-wheelers(MTW)muchhigher(70%vs5-18%).Pedestrians,bicyclistsandMTWridersconstitutealargerproportionofroadcrashvictimsinIndiathaninhmcs.MeasurearediscussedforPedestrianandbicyclistsafety,Motorcyclistsafety,Motorvehicleoccupants,Roadmeasures–initiationofgoodpractices;Pre-hospitalcare,treatmentandrehabilitation(Shortterm)AndinlongtermTrafficcalmingandspeedcontrol;Segregatedlanesforvulnerableroadusersandbusesinurbanareas;Saferdesignof4/6lanehighways;Vehiclesafety;Drinkingundertheinfluenceofalcoholandotherdrugs;Roaduserbasedstrategies;Prehospitalcare,treatmentandrehabilitation.
No
9 RoadaccidentmodelsforlargemetropolitancitiesofIndia(Valli,P.P.,2005)
TheaimofthepresentpaperistodevelopmodelsbyanalyzingtheroadaccidentdataatanallIndialevelaswellasformajormetropolitancities.Thedataforthe25yearperiodfrom1977to2001wereanalyzedtobuildmodelstounderstandthenatureandextentofthecausesofaccidentsusingtheconceptofSmeed'sformulaandAndressen'sequations.
Ascomparedtoanallindialevel,thetotalroadaccidentsinthesevenmetropolitancitiesnamelyahemedabad,bangalore,mumbai,kolkata,delhi,hyderabadandchennaiwereabout21.5%ofthetotalaccidentsduring1977,whichmarginallycamedownby5%to16.9%in2001.Thefatalitiesandinjuriesduringthisperiodexhibitadecliningtrendsignificantlyfrom10.52%to6%andfrom23.28%to8.96%respectively.
Yes
10 Exploringtherelationshipbetweendevelopmentandroadtrafficinjuries:acasestudyfromIndia.(Garg,N.and
Aimtostudythetrendsininjuryanddeathratesinadevelopingcountry,India,definesub-nationalvariations,andanalysethesetrendsinrelationtoeconomicandpopulationgrowth.Public
Therehasbeenasteadydeclineinvehicle-baseddeathandinjuryratesinIndia,butagrowingtrendinthepopulationbasedratesofinjuriesanddeaths.Thisseeminglydivergenttrendcanbeexplainedsincevehicle-basedratesaredecreasingduetoadisproportionateinfluxofvehiclesonIndianroads,whilepopulation-basedratesareincreasingbecause
Yes
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
58
Hyder,A.A.,2006)
sectordatafromIndiawereusedtodevelopastandardizeddatabaseontrafficinjuriesandindicatorofeconomicdevelopment.
ofanabsoluteincreaseinthenumberofcrashesrelativetotherateofpopulationgrowth.DevelopingnationssuchasIndiadonotneedtowaitforrisingfatalityratesbeforeadoptingroadsafetymeasures.Themoreeconomicallydevelopedstatesshouldconsiderimmediateinvestmentinroadsafetymeasurestohalttherisingmortalityfromroadcrashes.Measuressuchastrafficlawformulation,implementation,andtrafficsegregation,assuggestedbyWHO,2shouldbeundertaken.Statesinearlierstagesofdevelopmentneedtorecognizethepotentiallossofhealththatwilloccur,andshouldphaseininterventionstopreventtrafficinjuries.Atthesametime,studiestounderstandthestate-specificdeterminantstoguideeffectivemeasuresshouldbeconducted.
11 RoadSafetyinIndia:ChallengesandOpportunities(Mohan,D.etal.,2009)
ThepresentreportwasdesignedtoanalyzethetrafficsafetysituationinIndia,andtoidentifycountermeasuresforareasinwhichthetotalharmcausedbycrashescanbesubstantiallyandreadilyreduced.
Itispointedoutinthisanalysisthatfatalityrateshaveincreasedbothonhighwaysandinurbanareasduringthepastfewyears.TheoreticalmodelssuggestthatthenumberoffatalitiesinIndiaisnotlikelytostarttodeclineformanyyearstocomeunlessnewpoliciesareimplemented.Basedonthepresentanalysis,thefollowingsixareasareidentifiedashavingpotentialforsubstantiallyreducingfatalitiesinIndia:(1)pedestriansandothernon-motoristsinurbanareas,(2)pedestrians,othernon-motorists,andslowvehiclesonhighways,(3)motorcyclesandsmallcarsinurbanareas,(4)over-involvementoftrucksandbuses,(5)nighttimedriving,and(6)wrong-waydriversondividedhighways.Separationofmotorizedandnonmotorizedtrafficonarterialroads;Specialfacilitiesforslowandlocaltrafficallalonghighways(PedestriandetectiontechnologyForwardcollisionwarningsystems);HighwaydesignsincorporatinglocalneedsEnforcementareproposed
No
12 RoadaccidentsinIndia(Mohan,D.,2009)
ThispaperdiscussestheaccidentrateandfatalitiesandthecausesinIndia.
Thetotalnumberoffatalitiesfrom1997to2007increasedatanaveragerateofabout4%peryearintheperiod1997-2003andtheratehasincreasedto8%peryearsincethen.Thenumberoffatalitiespermillionpopulationremainedaround79-83intheperiod1997-2003andhassinceincreasedto101.Datashowthatcaroccupantswereasmallproportionofthetotalfatalities,3%indelhiand15%onruralhighways.Vulnerableroadusers(pedestrians,bicyclists,andmotorizedtwo-wheelerriders)accountedfor84%ofdeathsindelhiand67%onhighways.Thestudyreportedthattruckswerethestrikingpartyin65%offatalcrashes.Otherstudiesdoneonnationalandstatehighwaysin1990’sreportthat
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
59
majorityofthecrashesinvolvedbuses,25%ofthevictimswerepedestrians,rear-endcrashescomprised40%oftotalcrashesandthatcrasheswereincreasingatarateof3.9%peryear.RoadsafetypoliciesinIndiamustfocusonthefollowingissuestoreducetheincidenceofroadtrafficinjuries:pedestriansandothernon-motoristinurbanareas;pedestrians,othernon-motorists,andslowvehiclesonhighways;motorcyclesandsmallcarsinurbanareas;over-involvementoftrucksandbuses;night-timedriving;andwrong-waydriversondividedhighways.Thereisanurgentneedtorevamppolicedatacollectingproceduressothatnecessaryinformationisavailableforscientificanalysis.Indiaspecificcountermeasureswillbepossiblethroughcontinuousmonitoringandresearch,whichwillrequiretheestablishmentofroadsafetyresearchcentersinacademicinstitutionsandaNationalRoadSafetyBoardthatcouldhelpmovetowardasaferfutureasoutlinedabove.
13 Evidence-basedroadsafetypracticeinIndia:assessmentoftheadequacyofpubliclyavailabledatainmeetingrequirementsforcomprehensiveroadsafetydatasystems.(Barffour,M.etal.,2012)
ToassesstheavailabilityandcoverageofpubliclyavailableroadsafetydataatthenationalandstatelevelsinIndia.
2publiclyaccessibledatasourcesinIndiaWerereviewedthefortheavailabilityofdatarelatedtotrafficinjuriesanddeaths:(1)theNationalCrimeRecordsBureau(NCRB)and(2)theMinistryofRoadTransportandHighways(MORTH).UsingtheWorldHealthOrganization(WHO)manualforthecomprehensiveassessmentofroadsafetydata,wedevelopedachecklistofindicatorsrequiredforcomprehensiveroadsafetyassessment.TheseindicatorswerethenusedtoassesstheavailabilityofroadsafetydatainIndiausingtheNCRBandMORTHdata.Weassessedtheavailabilityofdataonoutcomesandexposuresindicators(i.e.,numberofcrashes,injuries,deaths,timingofdeaths,genderandagedistributionofinjuriesanddeaths),safetyperformanceindicators(i.e.,withreferencetoselectriskfactorsofspeeding,alcohol,andhelmetuse),andcostindicators(i.e.,medicalcosts,materialcosts,interventioncosts,productivitycosts,timecosts,andlossestoqualityoflife).ThereisanurgentneedtoimprovethepubliclyavailableroadsafetydatainIndia.Thiswillenhancemonitoringoftheburdenoftrafficinjuriesanddeaths,enablesoundinterpretationofnationalroadsafetydata,andallowtheformulationeffectiveroadsafetypolicies.
No
14 RoadtrafficcrashesandriskgroupsinIndia:Analysis,interpretations,andpreventionstrategies(Ponnaluri,R.V.,2012)
Theobjectivesofthisworkwereto(a)presentthenationalRTCframeworkandacasestudyofAndhraPradesh(AP);(b)analyzeandidentifyrisktypes;(c)discusstrendsanddatadeficiencies;and(d)recommendpreventionstrategies.
Duringtheperiod1970–2009,thenation'sroadlengthincreasedatacompoundedannualgrowthrate(cagr)of3.2%,whereasthenumberofregisteredvehicles,rtcs,andfatalitiesgrewat12%,3.8%,and5.7%cagrrespectively.Exposureriskdroppedfrom103to11fatalitiesper10000vehiclesbutincreasedfrom2.7to10.8fatalitiesper100000people.In2009,22%offatalcrashesinandhrapradeshwereduetoheavyvehicles,whilemotorizedtwo-wheelerfatalitiesmorethantripledduringthe
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
60
PublicTransportationS.N. Title/year/author/j Objective Recommendations Statis
2001–2009period.42%ofrtcsoccurredat‘uncontrolled’intersections,whilethecrashriskatpolice-regulatedlocationswas40%lessthanattrafficsignals.Recommendedpreventionstrategiesinclude:developingaroadaccidentrecordingsystemandanaccessmanagementpolicy;integratingsafetyintocorridordesignandroadconstruction;undertakingcapacity-buildingefforts;andexpandingemergencyresponseservices.
15 DeterminantsofroadtrafficcrashfatalitiesacrossIndianStates.(Grimm,M.andTreibich,C.,2013)
ThisarticleexploresthedeterminantsofroadtrafficcrashfatalitiesinIndia.Inadditiontoincome,theanalysisconsidersthesociodemographicpopulationstructure,motorizationlevels,roadandhealthinfrastructureandroadruleenforcementaspotentialfactors.Anoriginalpaneldatasetcovering25Indianstatesisanalyzedusingmultivariateregressionanalysis
Therisingmotorization,urbanizationandaccompanyingincreaseintheshareofvulnerableroadusers,thatis,pedestriansandtwo-wheelers,arethemajordriversofroadtrafficcrashfatalitiesinIndia.Amongvulnerableroadusers,womenformaparticularlyhigh-riskgroup.Higherexpenditureperpoliceofficerisassociatedwithalowerfatalityrate.ResultssuggestthatIndiashouldfocus,inparticular,onroadinfrastructureinvestmentsthatallowtheseparationofvulnerablefromotherroadusersonimprovedroadruleenforcementandshouldpayspecialattentiontovulnerablefemaleroadusers.
yes
RoadtrafficinjurymortalityanditsmechanismsinIndia:nationallyrepresentativemortalitysurveyof1.1millionhomes(Hsiao,M.etal.,2013)
Toquantifyanddescribethemechanismofroadtrafficinjury(RTI)deathsinIndia
Anationallyrepresentativemortalitysurveywasconductedwhereatleasttwophysicianscodedeachnon-medicalfieldstaff'sverbalautopsyreports.RTImechanismdatawereextractedfromthenarrativesectionofthesereports.Pedestrians(68000),motorcyclists(36000)andothervulnerableroadusers(20000)constituted68%ofrtideaths(124000)nationally.Amongthestudysample,themajorityofallrtideathsoccurredatthesceneofcollision(1005/1733,58%),withinminutesofcollision(883/1596,55%),and/orinvolvedaheadinjury(691/1124,62%).Comparedtonon-pedestrianrtideaths,about55000(81%)ofpedestriandeathswereassociatedwithlesseducationandlivinginpoorerneighbourhoods.
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
61
ournal(conf/report)
ticalanalysis
1 Factorsaffectingbus-relatedaccidents-casestudyoffivecorporationsintamilnadu(Victor,D.andVasudevan,J.,1989)
Thispaperattemptstoanalyse1987accidentdata,relatingtofivebustransportcorporationsinTamilNadu,India,inordertoreachreasonableinferencesandpracticalrecommendations.
Conclusionsfromtheanalysisof1286bus-relatedaccidentsinclude:(1)37%ofbusesand16%ofdriverswereinvolvedinaccidents,andthisisaserioussituationrequiringdetailedexaminationofpossiblecounter-measures;(2)driverfaultswereconsideredtobetheprimarycauseofnearly37%oftheaccidents,sothatadditionaltrainingandrefreshercoursesfordriversareindicated;(3)driverstendtobecomeinvolvedinfeweraccidentsastheirageandexperienceincreases;(4)about54%oftheaccidentswereinbuilt-upareasandbusstands;(5)theproportionsofaccidentsonstraightroadstretches,curvesandintersectionswere81%,11%and5%,respectively;(6)over90%oftheaccidentswereattributedtobadroaduserbehaviour,Remediessuggestedareroadsafetyeducationandeffectivedrivertraining.
no
2 Ananalyticalstudyofbus-relatedaccidentsinIndia(Chand,M.,1999)
Thispaperexaminesthefrequenciesandtrendsofbus-relatedaccidentswithspecialreferencetopublicroadtransportundertakings(PRTUs)inIndia.Italsoattemptstoobtainstatisticalrelationshipsbetweenselectedaccident-relatedfactorsbyusingPRTUdata.(Nothingelsecouldbefound.)
Busesareinvolvedinabout10%to35%ofroadaccidentsindifferentStatesofIndia.
yes
3 AnalysisofFatalCrashesofChennaiCity’sMetropolitanTransportCorporation(MTC)Buses(JeyaPadmanaban,R.R.,SwastikNarayan,BharatRamesh,2010)
AnalysisofFatalCrashesofChennaiCity’sMetropolitanTransportCorporation
Usingdatafor283fatalcrashes,codedfromdetailedaccidentreports(dars)maintainedbymtc.researchersdeterminedthatmotorizedtwo-wheelers(m2ws),pedestriansandbuspassengersfallingofffootboardstogetherconstitute89%offatalroadusers.Itwasfoundthatfatalitiescouldbesignificantlyreducedbypreventingreartirerunoverinbuses(30%)usingengineeringinterventionsinbusdesign,usingbusdoorstopreventpassengersfromfallingoffthefootboard(22%),helmetuse(22%)bym2wriders,pedestrianfriendlyinfrastructureatcrossings(64%)andbusstops(30%),andbyeducatingroadusersonprecautionarydrivingmeasures.With30%ofpedestrianaccidentshavingoccurredatornearbusstops,theseareaswouldbeagoodplacetostartaninfrastructureintervention.Functionaldesignsforbusstopsandpedestriancrossingsneedtobelookedinto.IncaseofMTCbuscrasheswithM2Ws,front-rearcollisionsandsideswipesarecommonondividedroadsindicatingthatinfrastructuredesign,atleastfornewroads,shouldincorporatesolutionswhichcanseparatebusesandheavyvehiclesfromlightvehicles.
no
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
62
4 TrafficSafetyandCityPublicTransportSystem:CaseStudyofBengaluru,India(Kharola,P.S.etal.,2010)
ThispaperpresentsananalysisofthefatalcrashesthatinvolvedpublictransportbusesinBengaluru,India.
Busesareinvolvedin12-20percentoffatalcrashesinindiancities.Bususersfacerisksofroadtrafficinjuriesonaccesstripsandbusesalsoareassociatedwithroadtrafficcrasheswithotherroadusers.Inabsolutenumbers,motorizedtwo-wheelerridersconstitutethelargestshareoffatalities(40%)andcyclistsaccountforabout10percentforbeingitsaccidentvictims.AdequateRight-of-WayforAllModesofTransport;InstallingAutomaticDoors;ChangingtheDesignoftheBusBody;BetterPersonnelPolicies;SelectivebutEffectiveEnforcementofRegulations;IncentivesforDrivers;StructuralChangesforanIntegratedApproach;areproposed.Thepaperestablishesthatchangeinbusdesignwithlowfloors,automatically-closingdoors,saferbusfronts,andsegregatedinfrastructureforbicyclesandpedestrianswouldgoalongwayinreducingthenumberoffatalcrashesoncityroadsinvolvingpublicbuses.
No
URBANSAFETY
S.N. Title/year/author/journal(conf/report)
Objective Recommendations Statisticalanalysis
1 Two-wheelerinjuriesindelhi,india:astudyofcrashvictimshospitalizedinaneuro-surgeryward(Mishra,B.etal.,1984)
Thepresentstudywasundertakentodeterminetheheadinjurypatternsoftwo-wheelerridersadmittedtoahospitalinDelhi.Atotalof87crashvictimswerestudiedoveraperiodofoneyear.
Theresultsindicatethatcollisionpatterns,agedistribution,averageinjuryseverityanddrivingexperienceofpatientsadmittedweredifferentfromthosereportedinstudiesconductedinindustrializedcountries.Themotorizedtwo-wheelerpopulationhasincreasedindelhibymorethan300%inthelastdecade(1970-80).Bicyclistsandmotorcyclistsaccountedfor244trafficaccidentdeathsindelhiin1980.Amajority(83%)oftheinjuredpatientsweremtwridersandtherestbicycleriders.Avastmajorityofthecrasheswerereportedtohaveoccurredonstraightroadsandonly16wererecordedascollisionswithcars,trucksandbuses.
No
2 AnanalysisofroadtrafficfatalitiesinDelhi,India(Mohan,D.andBawa,P.,1985)
ThisstudyisanattempttounderstandfatalcrashpatternsinDelhiin1980usingpolicedata.TheresultsindicatethatfatalitypatternsinDelhiareverydifferentfromthoseinhighlyindustrializedcountries.
Pedestrians,two-wheelerridersandbuscommuterscomprise80%offatalitiesandmotor-vehicleoccupantsasmallminority.Busesandtrucksaccountedfor65%ofthecrashes,andcarsandjeeps7%.TherestwerekilledbyimpactswithMTWs,tractors,three-wheelerscooterrickshas,bullockcarts,andtongas.Busesaloneaccountedfor29%ofthefatalities.Thehighrepresentationofbusesandtrucksispartlyduetothefactthattheyhavehighexposureontheroad.Only18%ofthepedestrianfatalitiesoccurredatroadjunctionsand82%onthestraightroad.Alargeproportion(51%)ofthefatalitiesatjunctionsoccurredatT-junctionsandonly28%atfour-armjunctionsandatotalof79%atuncontrolledjunctions.Onthe
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
63
straightroad21%ofthefatalitiestookplaceatpedestriancrossings.Thismeansthat26%ofallpedestrianfatalitiesonthestraightroadoccurredatmarkedpedestriancrossings.Smallvehicleslikemotorcyclesandbicyclesandotherslow-movingsmallvehiclesshouldbepaintedonlyincombinationsofconspicuouscolourslikewhite,orangeandyellow,andgreateruseofreflectivestripsshouldbeencouraged.Thiswouldmakesmallervehiclesmorenoticeable,especiallyatnight.Speedlimitersmustbeinstalledonpublicbusesandtruckswhichoperatewithinthecityonly.Alowerminimumagelimit,of25years,shouldbeestablishedforbusandtruckdrivers.HelmetuseshouldbemadecompulsoryforallMTWriders.Pedestriansandtwo-wheelerridersshouldbemadeawareoftheadvantagesofwearinglight-colouredclothingsothattheyaremoreconspicuousontheroad.Roaddesignsshoulddiscouragehighspeedsinthecity.Pedestriancrossingsonthestraightroadsshouldnotbeprovidedunlesstherearebuilt-inmethodsofslowingdownvehiculartrafficoneithersideBUSdesignsshouldbeevolvedwhichallowlargenumberstoboardthebusveryquicklyandthenmovethroughthebuswhilethelatterisinmotion.Low-poweredsmallvehicleslikethree-wheelerscooter-rickshasmaybeencouragedforuseastaxis,andsaferdesignsevolvedwhicharemorecomfortableforthedriverandpassengers;MTWswithenginecapacitiesgreaterthan150ccshouldbediscouraged,ashigher-poweredMTWsriderstendtosustainmoreseriousinjuries.Designfeaturesonroadswhichkeepvehiclevelocitieslowconsistentlyoverlongdistancesshouldbeevolved.Thesecouldincludecombinationsofroadmarkings,ripples,serrations,andappropriateintersectiondesigns.
3 Roadsafetyinandaroundvadodaracity(Raichur,M.etal.,1993)
ThispaperpresentsaccidentstatisticsforVadodaraCity,India,andthesurroundingruralarea,andproposesseveralsafetyimprovementsforthem.Accidentstatisticstablesaregivenforeachoftheyears1981to1990
.Themostimportantcausesofroadaccidentsare:motorvehicledriver(54%),cyclist(6%),othervehicledriver(10%),andpedestrian(6%).Urbanroadsafetymeasuresproposedare:(1)increasingthesafetyofaccidentblackspots,ofwhichsixarenamed;(2)avarietyofengineeringmeasures,includingjunctionimprovement;(3)severalenforcementmeasures;(4)properuseofmediatoeducatethepublic,andpropertrafficeducationforchildren
Yes
4 Injurypatternamongroadtrafficaccidentcases:astudyfromsouth
Toknowtheprevalenceofinjuriespresentamongtheroad.Trafficaccidentcases.Studywasdonein
Pedestriansanddriverswere22%and35%ofrtavictimsrespectively.Theoccupantsofvehiclesconstitutedthelargest(43%)groupofvictims.Thirty-fivepedestrians(21.9%)injuredwereinvolvedinanrta
No
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
64
India(Jha,N.etal.,2003)
Pondicherry.
withatruck.Busescausedinjuriesto20pedestrians(12.5%j.Motorisedtwowheelersandfourwheelerswereinvolvedinrtasinwhich39(24.4%)and34(21.3%)pedestrianswereinjuredrespectively.Atotalof254driverswereinvolvedinrtas.Amongthedriversofdifferenttypesofvehicles,therewere38.6%bicyclistsand16.9%bullockcartdrivers.Motorizedtwowheelerdriverswerevictimsin31.1%caseswhilebusandfourwheelerdriverswerevictimsin5.1%and3.5%casesrespectively.Amongmotorizedtwowheelers14(5.5%)werescooterdrivers.Occupantsoftrucks(12.6%).Amongthemotorizedtwowheelers(11.3%),thepillionridersofscooterswereleastinvolved(2%),otheroccupantswerefromfourwheelersof312occupants,busoccupantswerethehighestnumbers(48%)ofvictimsinvolvedinrtasfollowedbylikejeep,car.Amongthemotorizedtwowheelers,mopeddriversweremorecommonlyinvolvedinrtas.Thiscouldbeduetothehigherspeed,whichcanbeachievedovershortdistancesandlessstabilityofthevehicle.Oneofthemostcommonmodeoftransportationusedbypeopleisthebusandthisisreflectedbythefactthatbusoccupantsconstitutedthehighestnumber(48%)ofrtavictims.Promptandadequateambulanceserviceshouldbeprovidedtothevictimswiththehelpofgovernmentandothervoluntaryagencies.ComputerizationanduseofInternationalClassificationofDiseasescodeinthehospitalswouldhelpinpreparationofagooddatabaseforfuturestudiesandotheruses.
5 DeathsduetoroadtrafficcrashedinHyderabadcityinIndia:needforstrengtheningsurveillance(Dandona,R.andMishra,A.,2003)
ObjectivewastoassesstheutilityoftheavailabledataondeathsduetoroadtrafficcrashesforroadcrashsurveillanceforamajormetropolitancityofsouthernIndia.analysedtheDepartmentofPolicedatabaseondeathsduetoroadtrafficcrashesfor2002inHyderabad,southernIndiaandcollecteddatafromaleadingnewspaperforthesameinformationusingastandardizedformat.
Pedestriansandridersoftwo-wheelerswerethemostvulnerable.Collisionwithavehiclecaused86.4%ofallcrashesand60%ofthevictimsdiedbeforereachingahospital.Theavailabledatahavelimitationsandthereisaneedforstrengtheningtheroadtrafficcrashsurveillancesystemtohavereliable,accurateandadequatedataonroadtrafficcrashesandtheresultingfatalitiesandinjuries.Thesecouldthenformthebasisforplanningeffectiveinterventionstrategiestoimproveroadsafety.
no
6 RoadAccidentAnalysis:ACaseStudyofPatnaCity(Singh,S.K.andMisra,A.,2001)
Aimstoanalyzetheroadaccidentsinpatnafrom1996-2000.
Inpatnafatalitiesrelatedtopedestrian,twowheelerandcyclistaccountedformorethan98%ofcaseswhichisveryhigh.mostoftheaccidentswereduetobusesandtrucks(22and20%resp)Segregationoftrafficisoneofthesolutiongiven
no
7 AcomprehensivestudyofmotorcyclefatalitiesinSouth
NinetyfourcasesofmotorcyclefatalitiesreceivedfromSouthDelhiwere
Motorcyclefatalitiescasesrepresented5.38%ofallautopsycasesduringthestudyperiod.Inamajorityofcasesoffendingvehicleswere,theheavyweightmotor
no
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
65
Delhi(Behera,C.etal.,2009),
studiedduringApril2007toMarch2008atAllIndiaInstituteofMedicalSciences,Delhi.Datawasanalyzedwithregardtotheageandsexofthevictim,patternofinjury,useofhelmetandpresenceofalcoholinvictim,causeofdeath,timeofaccident,modeoftransportationofthevictimstohospital,andoffendingvehicles.
vehicle(34.04%)followedbythemediumweightmotorvehicle(19.14%).mostofthedeceasedonmotorcycleweredrivers(78.72%),outofwhichonly54.05%woreahelmetatthetimeofaccident
8 TwowheeleraccidentsonIndianroads--astudyfromMangalore,India(Jain,A.etal.,2009)
Thisstudywasundertakentofindthetrendoftwowheeleraccidentsoverthefiveyears(2000–2004)withrespecttoageandsexofthevictim,typeofinjurysustained,typeofvehicleinvolvedandtimedistributionofaccidents.
Theriderwasaffectedinmaximumnumberofaccidents(51.3%),thepillionandpedestrianwerealsoaffected,buttoalesserextent.thetypeoftwowheelermainlyinvolvedinaccidentswasthegearedvehicle;thenumberofsuchvehiclesbeing865(81%)comparedto211(19%)non-gearedvehicles.Inthelightofthefindingsofthisstudy,itisrecommendedthateducationregardingroadsafetyshouldbeimpartedespeciallytotheyoungagegroup.Theyshouldbemadeawareofthetrafficrulesandurgedtostrictlyfollowtrafficrules.Constructionofproperlyplannedroadsandover-bridgestocopeupwiththeincreasingburdenofvehicleswithemphasisonlanedrivingwillhelpthecause.Speedlimitshouldbestrictlyenforcedinaccident-proneareas.Effortsshouldbemadetoreducecongestiononroadparticularlyduringrushhoursandespeciallyinthezonesproneforaccidents.Periodicsurveillanceandrepairofroadsespeciallyafterrainyseasonissuggestedinthisregion.Useofhelmetsshouldbemademandatorynotonlyfortheriderbutalsoforthepillion.Forpedestrians,thereshouldbecompletesegregationbyprovidingsidewalksonbothsidesoftheroad.Measureslike‘zebracrossing’andconstructionofover-passorsub-wayiffeasiblecangoalongwayinreducingmorbidityandmortalityamongpedestrians.
no
9 AnalysisoffatalroadtrafficaccidentsinacoastaltownshipofSouthIndia/2012(Kanchan,T.etal.,2012)
WiththeaimofexploringvariousepidemiologicalcharacteristicsofRTAs,thisretrospectiveanalysisofmedico-legalautopsieswasconductedbetweenJanuary2005andDecember2009intheDepartmentofForensicMedicine,KasturbaMedicalCollege,ManipalinKarnataka,SouthIndia.Theinformationwascollectedfrompost-mortemregistersandinquestdocumentsreceivedfromtheinvestigatingpoliceofficers.
Occupantsofmotorizedtwowheelers(43%)andpedestrians(33%)werethemostcommonvictimsofRTAsfollowedbyoccupantsoflightmotorvehicles(LMVs).Themostcommonoffendingagentsinroadtrafficaccidentswereheavymotorvehicles(35.2%)followedbylightmotorvehicles(31.7%).
no
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
66
10 APopulation-BasedStudyonRoadTrafficInjuriesinPuneCity,India(Mirkazemi,R.andKar,A.,2014)
Thisstudywasconductedwiththeaimofidentifyingtheburden,pattern,andriskfactorsofRTIsinthepopulationofPuneCity.Apopulation-basedcross-sectionalstudywasconductedamong9014individualsinarandomlyselectedandrepresentativesampleofthepopulationfrom14administrativewardsofthecityfromMarch2008toApril2009.
Univariateanalysisshowedasignificantassociationbetweenrtisandage,gender,occupation,modeoftransport,drivingavehicle,andalcoholabuse.Multivariateanalysisshowedthatonlyage,drivingavehicle,andalcoholabusewerethefactorsassociatedwithrtis.Injuryoccurrencewassignificantlymoreamongtheagegroup15-30,males,andstudentsandworkers.
yes
11 EvaluatingSafetyofUrbanArterialRoadsofMediumSizedIndianCity(Prajapati,P.andTiwari,G.,2013)
Thispaperestimatesthesafetyperformanceofurbanarterialmid-blockofmediumsizedIndiancitybasedonfatalcrashesasafunctionoftrafficlevelandroadnetworkfeatures.Thefatalcrashesonarterialmid-blocksareanalyzedseparatelyfromjunctioncrashes.Theaccidentpredictionmodelsdevelopedarebasedon126fatalcrashesoccurredin6years(2005-2010)inVadodara,Indiaon263mid-blockarterialroadsegments.
Itwasfoundthatnumberoffatalcrashesincreasesasthetrafficlevelandlengthofroadsegmentincreasesanddecreasesasthenumberofjunctionperkilometerincreasesontheroadsegment.Thesefindingshaveimportantbearingonthedesignofurbanarterialroads.Intheabsenceoffacilitiesforpedestriansandbicyclists,arterialroadswithwidercarriagewayandhighernumberoflanesincreasetheriskoffatalcrashforpedestriansandbicyclists.Presenceofmediansmayresultinhigherspeedsofmotorizedvehiclesandintheabsenceoffacilitiesforpedestriansandbicycliststhecrashriskincreases.Theimpactofothergeometricdesignparametersshouldbeevaluatedtoimprovetheroadsafety.
yes
12 EpidemiologyofroadtrafficaccidentdeathsinchildreninChandigarhzoneofNorthWestIndia(Singh,D.etal.,2015)
Presentstudywascarriedouttoprovideabaselinedatatopolicymakerstoplansafertransportationroutesandinsettingupofhealthcarecentersinareasthatreportahighernumberofaccidents.Thepresentstudyisananalysisofpostmortemrecordsof709RTA-relateddeathsinchildren(⩽18years)inChandigarhzone,undertakenatPostGraduateInstituteofMedicalEducationandResearch(PGIMER),Chandigarhbetween1974and2013.TheautopsiesonthesecaseswereconductedbythedepartmentofForensic
Maximumfatalitieswerereportedamongthepedestrians(47.8%)followedbytwowheeleroccupants(33.1%).Theproportionofpedestriansandheavymotorvehicle(hmv)fatalitiesdecreasedfrom64%to46%and14%to5%correspondinglyintheyears1974–78and2009–13.However,theproportionoftwowheelerandlightmotorvehicle(lmv)fatalitiesincreasedfrom18%to39%and0%to7%respectivelyintheyears1974–78and2009–13.TheleastcommonlyaffectedwasthethreewheelergroupTobringthemortalityratedown,children,especiallywithruralbackgroundshouldbemadeawareabouttheimportanceofstrictcompliancetotrafficrulesandregulations.Oneofthebestwaystodoitistoincluderoadsafetyissuesinschoolcurriculum.Thosechildrenwhoridebicyclesshouldbemadetowearhelmetsasitisexpectedtoreducetheseverityofinjurytothehead.Driversshouldavoidtalkingonmobilephoneswhileonroads.
yes
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
67
Medicine,PGIMER,Chandigarh.
ThepresentstudyhashighlightedtheurgentneedtoframeroadsafetypolicieslikeseparatelanesfordifferentvehiclesasthetrafficinIndiaingeneralandthisregioninparticularconsistofallkindsofautomobilesincludingtwowheelers,threewheelersandfourwheelersthusincreasingthechancesofaccidents.Installationofredlightsandmarkingofzebracrossingsontheroadsnearschoolsandplaygroundswouldbeawelcomedecision.Thegovernmentshouldalsoensurethatthevehiclesfollowspeedlimits.
13 PatternofRoadTrafficAccidentsinBhubaneswar,Odisha(Kar,S.etal.,2015)
Objectiveswasto(1)ToestimatetheincidenceanddistributionofRTAintheyear2012.(2)Todeterminetheepidemiologicalvariationsofaccidentsinthecity.(3)Tosuggestrecommendationstothetrafficpoliceandadministration.
Theepidemiologicaltrendsthatemergedwerethat84%occurredinurbanareasandmainlyontheNationalHighways(46.7%);18%ofRTAoccurredduringrainfall,thoughnosignificantassociationcouldbemadeoutandmuchisattributedtounderreportingofdata;motorcars(37%)andtrucks(19.1%)werepredominatelyinvolved.Majorityofthevictimswereintheproductiveagegroup,18–24,yearsandmainlyconstitutedmales(68%).Reportingoftheaccidentsshouldbemadeaspertheformatsgeneratedatthenationallevel.-Amappingofaccidentsareawiseshouldbedonebypolicetoidentifyvulnerablepointsandpatrollingreinforcedinthoseareas.-Strictreinforcementoflawsforrashdriving,assideandhead-oncollisionshavebeenidentifiedasthemajorcausesofRTA.-Astheproductiveagegroupisbeingaffected,especiallytheteens,somecounselingprogramsandAwarenessDrivesshouldbeinitiatedregardingthis.-Thereshouldbeayearlyassessmentinliaisonwiththehealthfacilitysothatotherconcernscanbebroughtoutandeffectivemanagementoftheinjuredcanbeplanned.-Timingsofaccidentsshouldbekeptinmindwhiledeputingtrafficpersonnel,andforthelatetimingsalso,aback-upplanshouldbedevised.-Urbanandruralplansshouldbemade,asproblemsaredifferentinboth.
no
14 Whydothree-wheelerscarryingschoolchildrensufferverylowfatalcrashes?(Pandey,G.etal.,2015)
Theobjectiveofthestudywastoinvestigatethehypothesisthatdriversbehavedifferentlywhilefollowingorovertakingthree-wheelerscarryingchildren.Thispaperinvestigatesthepossiblecausesoflowfatalitiesinthree-wheelers(autorickshaw)carryingschoolchildreninIndia.ThedatawascollectedintheformofFirstInformationReport(FIR)fromlocalpolicestationsfrom2007to2012andvideo-graphicsurveys
Itwasfoundthatheavyvehiclesmaintainmoregapswhilefollowingorovertakingthree-wheelerscarryingchildrenascomparedtothosenotcarryingchildren.Itwasalsofoundthatthiseffectismoreprominentatspeedshigherthan40km/h.Ontheotherhandlightervehicleskeepthehighestlateralandlongitudinalgapstoheavyvehiclesandthree-wheelerswithoutchildrenrespectively.
yes
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
68
weredoneonfourarterialroadsrunningthroughLudhiana,Punjab,India.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
69
6. Way forward
INTERNATIONAL KNOWLEDGE BASE FOR CONTROL OF ROAD TRAFFIC INJURIES
International road safety research has involved a large number of very well trained professionals from a variety of disciplines over the past four decades. Some very innovative work has resulted in a theoretical understanding of road traffic crashes as a part of a complex interaction of sociological, psychological, physical and technological phenomena. The results could be exchanged and solutions transferred from one high-income country to another because the conditions in these countries were roughly similar. This understanding of injuries and crashes has helped high-income countries design safer vehicles, roads and traffic management systems. A similar effort at research, development and innovation is needed in India and similar countries. A much larger group of committed professionals needs to be involved in this work for new ideas to emerge.
International cooperation in the area of road safety should focus on exchange of scientific principles, experiences of successes and failures, and in scientific training of a large number of professionals in India. The scientific principles of road safety can be exchanged for the benefit of everyone. However, the priorities in road safety policies cannot be global in nature because of the differing patterns of traffic and crash patterns around the world. We analyse below the risk factors and the availability of known road safety countermeasures in the context of concerns specific to India.
Results of systematic reviews
Legislation and enforcement Most attempts at enforcing road-traffic legislation periodically will not have any lasting
effects, either on road-user behaviour or on accidents. Imposing stricter penalties (in the form of higher fines or longer prison sentences) will not affect road-user behaviour, and imposing stricter penalties will reduce the level of enforcement (Bjornskau, T. and Elvik, R., 1992).
Increased normal, stationary speed enforcement is in most cases cost-effective. Automatic speed enforcement seems to be even more efficient. However, there is no evidence to prove that mobile traffic enforcement for speed control with patrol cars is cost-effective (Carlsson, G., 1997).
The only effective way to get most motorists to use safety belts is with good laws requiring their use and sustained enforcement. When laws are in place, education and/or advertising can be used to inform the public about the laws and their enforcement (O'neill, B., 2001).
In general, the deterrent effect of a law is determined in part by the severity and swiftness of the penalty for disobeying it, but a key factor is the perceived likelihood of being detected and sanctioned. Laws against drinking and driving are effective when combined with active enforcement and the support of the community (Elder, R. W. et al., 2004, Koornstra, M., 2007, Sweedler, B. et al., 2004).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
70
Policing methods and enforcement techniques have to be optimized for India to be effective at much lower expenditure levels. There are no systematic studies evaluating different techniques followed around the world. Research needs to be done on the effectiveness of professional driver education, driver licensing methods, and control of problem drivers in Indian settings.
Education campaigns and driver education Road-safety campaigns often aim to improve road-user behaviour by increasing knowledge
and by changing attitudes. There is no clearly proved relationship between knowledge and attitudes on the one hand and behaviour on the other (O'neill, B., 2001, OECD, 1986). Most highway safety educational programmes do not work. They do not reduce motor-vehicle crash deaths and injuries (Robertson, L. S., 1980, Robertson, L. S., 1983, Robertson, L. S. et al., 1974). Only a few programmes have ever been shown to work, and contrary to the view that education cannot do any harm, some programs have been shown to make matters worse (Robertson, L. S., 1980, Sandels, S., 1975)(Robertson 1980; Sandels S. 1975). Driver or pedestrian education programmes by themselves usually are insufficient to reduce crash rates (Elvik, R. and Vaa, T., 2004). They may increase knowledge, and even induce some behaviour change, but this does not seem to result in a reduction in crash rates (Duperrex, O. et al., 2003, Roberts, I. et al., 2003). There is, however, no reason to waste money on general campaigns. Campaigns should be used to put important questions on the agenda, and campaigns aimed at changing road-user behaviour should be focused on clearly defined behaviours and should by preference fortify other measures such as new legislation and/or police enforcement.
The effects of campaigns using tangible incentives (rewards) to promote safety-belt usage have been evaluated by means of a meta-analytical approach. The results (weighted mean effect) show a mean short-term increase in use rates of 12.0 percentage points; the mean long-term effect was 9.6 percentage points (Hagenzieker, M. P. et al., 1997). Research first from Australia, later from many European countries, then from Canadian provinces, and finally from some US states clearly shows that the only effective way to get most motorists to use safety belts is with good laws requiring their use.
Studies show that driver education may be necessary for beginners to learn the elementary skills for obtaining a license, but compulsory training in schools leads to early licensing. There is no evidence that such schemes result in a reduction in road-crash rates. On the other hand they may lead to increased road-crash rates (Mayhew, D. R. and Simpson, H. M., 1996, Vernick et al., 1999, Williams, A. F. and O'neill, B., 1974). While there may be a need to train professional drivers in the use of heavy vehicles, there is no evidence that formal driver education should be compulsory in schools and colleges.
Helmet use reduces bicycle-related head and facial injuries for bicyclists of all ages involved in all types of crashes, including those involving motor vehicles (Thompson, D. C. et al., 2003). Similar results have been confirmed for motorcyclists (American College Of, S., 2001, Bledsoe, G. H. et al., 2002, Brandt, M. M. et al., 2002, Liu, B. et al., 2003, Mcknight, A. J. and Mcknight, A. S., 1995, Mohan, D. et al., 1984, National Highway Traffic Safety, A., 1996).
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
71
Vehicle factors Vehicles conforming to EU or USA crashworthiness standards provide significant safety
benefits to occupants, and the effectiveness of the following measures have been evaluated.
Use of seatbelts and airbag-equipped cars can reduce car-occupant fatalities by over 30%. It is estimated that air-bag deployment reduced mortality by 63%, while lap–shoulder-belt use reduced mortality by 72%, and combined air-bag and seatbelt use reduced mortality by more than 80% (Crinion, J. D. et al., 1975, Kent, R. et al., 2005, Parkin, S. et al., 1993).
High-mounted rear brake lights reduce the incidence of rear-end crashes (Etsc, 1993).
A meta-analysis of 17 studies that have evaluated the effects on traffic safety of using daytime running lights on cars shows that their use reduces the number of multi-vehcle daytime crashes by about 10–15% for (Elvik, R., 1993). Similar results have been confirmed for the use of daytime running lights by motorcyclists (Radin Umar, R., 2006, Radin Umar, R. S. et al., 1996, Yuan, W., 2000).
Improvements in vehicle crashworthiness and restraint use have contributed to a major reduction in occupant fatality rates and are estimated to be more than 40% in most reviews (Elvik, R. and Vaa, T., 2004, Koornstra, M., 2007, Noland, R. B., 2003).
However, not enough work has been done to make vehicles safer in impacts with vulnerable road users, or on vehicles specific to Indian condtions.
Environmental and infrastructure factors The road environment and infrastructure must be adapted to the limitations of the road user
(Van Vliet, P. and Schermers, G., 2000).
Traffic-calming techniques, use of roundabouts, and provision of bicycle facilities in urban areas provide significant safety benefits and limited-access highways with appropriate shoulder and median designs provide significant safety benefits on long-distance through roads (Elvik, R., 1995, Elvik, R., 2001, Hyden, C. and Varhelyi, A., 2000).
Though improvements in road design seem to have some beneficial effects on crash rates, increases in speed and exposure can offset some of these benefits (Noland, R. B., 2003, O'neill, B. and Kyrychenko, S., 2006). Road designs that control speeds seem to be the most effective crash control measure (Aarts, L. and Van Schagen, I., 2006).
A great deal of additional work needs to be done on rural and urban road and infrastructure design suitable for mixed traffic to make the environment safer for vulnerable road users. This would require special guidelines and standards for design of, (a) roundabouts, (b) service lanes along all intercity highways, and (c) traffic calming on urban roads and highways passing through settlements.
Pre-hospital care Recent Cochrane Reviews have concluded that (Bunn, F. et al., 2001, Kwan, I. et al.,
2004a, Kwan, I. et al., 2004b, Sethi, D. et al., 2004):
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
72
There is no evidence from randomized controlled trials to support the use of early or large-volume intravenous fluid administration in uncontrolled haemorrhage. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of fluid resuscitation in patients with bleeding.
The effect of pre-hospital spinal immobilization on mortality, neurological injury, spinal stability, and adverse effects in trauma patients therefore remains uncertain. Because airway obstruction is a major cause of preventable death in trauma patients, and spinal immobilization – particularly of the cervical spine – can contribute to airway compromise, the possibility that immobilization may increase mortality and morbidity cannot be excluded.
In the absence of evidence of the effectiveness of advanced life support training for ambulance crews, a strong argument could be made that it should not be promoted outside the context of a properly concealed and otherwise rigorously conducted randomized controlled trial.
A recent study by Lerner and Moscati shows that no scientific evidence is available for supporting the concept of the ‘golden hour’ (Lerner, E. B. and Moscati, R. M., 2001). While it is desirable that we possible time, it is equally important that ambulances do not endanger the life of others while doing so, and do not waste scarce resources in promoting systems of dubious benefit (Becker, L. R. et al., 2003).
Before we import expensive pre-hospital care systems from high income countries, it is necessary that their effectiveness be established.
THE WAY FORWARD
Practice points
Some of the policy options are outlined below.
Pedestrian and bicyclist safety 1. Reserving adequate space for non-motorized modes on all roads where they are present. 2. Free left turns must be banned at all signalized junctions. This will give a safe time for
pedestrians and bicyclists to cross the road. 3. Speed control in urban areas: maximum speed limits of 50 km/h on arterial roads need to be
enforced by road design and police monitoring, and 30 km/h in residential areas and by judicious use of speed-breakers, dead-end streets and mini roundabouts.
4. Increasing the conspicuousness of bicycles by fixing reflectors on all sides and wheels and painting them yellow, white or orange.
Motorcyclist and motor vehicle safety 1. Notification of mandatory use of helmet and daytime headlights by two-wheeler riders. 2. All cars to conform to latest international crashworthiness regulations. 3. Pedestrian safety regulations for cars to be notified 4. Enforcement of seatbelt use laws countrywide. 5. Restricting front-seat travel in cars by children and the use of child seats has potential for
reducing injuries to child occupants.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
73
6. Introduction of active safety technologies like automatic braking, pedestrian detection, electronic stability control, and alcohol locks.
Road measures 1. Traffic calming in urban areas and on rural highways passing through towns and villages. 2. Improvement of existing traffic circles by bringing them in accordance with modern
roundabout practices and substituting existing signalized junctions with roundabouts. 3. Provision of segregated bicycle lanes and disabled-friendly pedestrian paths. 4. Mandatory road safety audit for all road building and improvement projects. 5. Construction of service lanes along all 4-lane highways and expressways for use by low-
speed and non motorised traffic. 6. Removal of raised medians on intercity highways and replacement with steel guard rails or
wire rope barriers.
Enforcement 1. The most important enforcement issue in India is speed control. Without this it will be difficult
to lower crash rates as a majority of the victims are vulnerable road users. 2. The second most important measure to be taken seriously is driving under the influence of
alcohol. 30%–40% of fatal crashes in India may have alcohol involvement. 3. Enforcement of seatbelt and helmet use.
Pre-hospital care, treatment and rehabilitation 1. Modern knowledge regarding pre-hospital care should be made widely available with
training of specialists in trauma care in the hospital setting. 2. Pre-hospital care programmes should be rationalized on evidence-based policies so that
scarce resources are not wasted.
Research agenda 1. Development of street designs and traffic-calming measures that suit mixed traffic with a
high proportion of motorcycles and non-motorized modes. 2. Highway design with adequate and safe facilities for slow traffic. 3. Design of lighter helmets with ventilation. 4. Pedestrian impact standards for small cars, buses and trucks. 5. Evaluation of policing techniques to minimize cost and maximize effectiveness. 6. Effectiveness of pre-hospital care measures. 7. Traffic calming measures for mixed traffic streams including high proportion of motorised
two-wheelers.
Institutional arrangements
International experience suggests that unless a country establishes an independent national road traffic safety agency it is almost impossible to promote safety in a comprehensive and scientific manner. This was stated powerfully in a report Reducing Traffic Injury: A Global Challenge almost 22 years ago (Trinca, G. W. et al., 1988):
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
74
“Each country should create (where one does not exist) a separate traffic safety agency with sufficient executive power and funding to enable meaningful choices between strategy and program options. Such an agency would ideally report directly to the main legislative/political forum or to the head of government.”
The World Health Organization, in its report World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention (Peden et al. 2004) recommends:
• Makeroadsafetyapoliticalpriority.• Appointaleadagencyforroadsafety,giveitadequateresources,andmakeitpubliclyaccountable.• Developamultidisciplinaryapproachtoroadsafety.• Setappropriateroadsafetytargetsandestablishnationalroadsafetyplanstoachievethem.• Createbudgetsforroadsafetyandincreaseinvestmentindemonstrablyeffectiveroadsafety
activities.”
ThefollowingsuggestionsmadebytheNationalTransportDevelopmentCommittee(NationalTransportDevelopmentPolicyCommittee,2014b)shouldbeconsideredforimplementation.
Establish National Board/Agency for Road Safety. ThisBoardmustbe:
(a)Independentoftherespectiveoperationalagenciestoavoidconflictofinterest
(b)TheCEOoftheBoardshouldbeofarankofSecretarytotheGovernmentofIndiaandreportdirectlytotheMinisteroftheconcernedministry
(c)TheBoardshouldbestaffedbyprofessionalswhohavecareeropportunitiesandworkingconditionssimilartoprofessionalsworkinginIITs/CSIRlaboratories
(d)TheBoardshouldhaveanadequatefundingmechanismbasedontheturnoverofthatsector
(e)ThetermsofreferencecanincorporatetherecommendationssimilartothoseincludedinthereportssubmittedbytheCommitteeonRoadsSafetyandTrafficManagement(Committee,2007).
TheCommitteealsorecommendedthattheBoardbegivenpowertonotonlysetstandardsbutalsomonitortheiradoptionandimplementation.Forthispurpose,theBoardwouldempanelauditorstodospotchecksandauditsofhighwaysunderdesign,constructionoroperationtoensurethatsafetystandardsareadheredto.Ifstandardsarenotadheredto,theBoardwouldhavepowerstoissuesuitabledirectionswithregardtocorrectivemeasures.TheBoardwouldhavesimilarpowerstoensurethatmechanicallypropelledvehiclesconformtosafetystandardssetbytheBoard.Inaddition,theBoardwouldhavepowerstoseekinformationandreportsandaccessrecordsanddocuments.WherethestandardssetordirectionsissuedbytheBoardhavenotbeenadheredtotheBoardshouldhavethepowertolevypenalties.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
75
TheCommitteerecommendedthataminimumofonepercentofthetotalproceedsofthecessondieselandpetrolshouldbeavailabletotheRoadSafetyFundofCentreandtheStatesasroadsafetyisamatterofconcernnotonlyonnationalhighwaysbutalsoonthestateroads,villageroadsandrailwaylevelcrossings.Also,atleast50percentoftheamountretainedbytheGovernmentofIndiabywayoftheshareofthenationalhighwaysandtheRailwaysshouldbeallocatedtoaccident-proneurbanconglomerationsandStatesinadditiontotheirentitlement.AssistancetotheStatesfromtheNationalRoadSafetyFundshouldbereleasedtosupportroadsafetyactivitiesprovidedthattheStatesenterintoagreementswiththeGovernmentofIndiainrespectoftheseactivitiesandfaithfullyimplementtheagreements.
Manpowerrequirements
InternationalexperiencesuggeststhattheproposedNationalRoadSafetyandTrafficManagementBoardatmaturitywouldneedatleast250-350professionalstomantheelevendepartmentsenvisionedinthereportoftheCommittee.Almostalloftheseprofessionalswouldhavetobeatthepost-graduatelevelinthedifferentareasofexpertiseneededforroadsafety.Thisisessentialforthefollowingreasons:(a)theagencywouldneedtohavein-housetechnicalexpertisetokeepabreastofscientificandtechnicaladvancementsinroadsafetyknowledgeinternationally.(b)SincetheBoardwillhavetheresponsibilityofestablishingsafetystandards,itisessentialthatitsstaffhavedomainexpertiseforthesame.(c)TheBoardwillbesponsoringresearchinvariousareasofroadsafety.ForestablishmentofresearchprioritiesandmonitoringofprojectstheBoardwouldneedtohaveprofessionalswhoseexpertiseissimilartothoseworkinginacademicandresearchinstitutions.
TheroleofanationalagencysuchastheoneproposedabovewashighlightedintheWorldReportonRoadTrafficInjuryPrevention(Peden,M.etal.,2004).Withouttheexistenceofsuchanagency,accountableroadsafetyleadershipatcountry,state,provincialandcitydoesnotgetestablished.Intheabsenceofsuchleadershipitisalmostimposabletoevolvesustainablepoliciesandestablishmechanismsfortheirimplementation.Thenationalagencywillhavetofocusonthefollowingobjectivesintheimmediatefuture(Bliss,T.andBreen,J.,2009):
1. Setprojectobjectives2. Determinescaleofprojectinvestment3. Identifyprojectpartnerships4. Specifyprojectcomponents5. Confirmprojectmanagementarrangements6. Specifyprojectmonitoringandevaluationprocedures7. Preparedetailedprojectdesign8. Highlightprojectimplementationpriorities
BlissandBreen(2009)haveproposedasetofquestionsthatcanbeaskedtoevaluatethestrengthsandweaknessesofanationalsafetyagency(Box3).Theprojectimplementationandresearchprioritieswillhavetobedevelopedonanurgentbasisandmeasureabletargetsestablishedforeachfive-yearplanperiod.AnillustrativelistisgiveninBox4.Themeasuresandprinciplesoutlinedforthenationalroadsafetyagencycanbemodifiedappropriatefornationalagenciesforothersectors.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
76
National Data Base and Statistical Analysis Systems
AtpresentverylittleepidemiologicalinformationisavailableinIndiafordeathsandinjuriesassociatedwithtransport.Forevolutionofevidencebasedsafetypoliciesandstrategiesbasedonthesystemsapproach,itisnecessarytosetupreliabledatacollectionandanalysisproceduresfortrafficaccidentsinconsonancewithinternationalpracticesatdifferentlevels.Thisneedsaspecialinputforestablishingspecialagenciesinallsectorsoftransport.
Thenationalsafetyagencymustincludeaspecialdepartmentfordatacollectionandstatisticalanalysis.Internationalexperiencesuggeststhatsuchdepartmentsneedtoemployabout50-100statisticalandepidemiologyexpertswhodesignsurveys,datacollectionmethods,performstatisticalanalysesandpublishreports.Itisequallyimportantthatallsuchdatabeavailableinthepublicdomainsothatindependentresearchersoutsidetheofficialagencycanalsoperformindependentanalysesandstudies.
ThefunctionsoftheseDepartmentscouldinclude:
• Collating relevant data from existing surveillance systems: Census Bureau, National SampleSurveyOrganisation,NationalCrimeRecordBureau,CentralBureauofHealthIntelligence,etc.
• Establishingsystemsforscientificdatacollectionbythepolicedepartment• Nationalsurveillancesystemsforallfatalaccidents• Samplesurveysforspeciallyidentifiedproblems• Samplesurveillancesystemsinidentifiedhospitals• Establishment of multidisciplinary accident investigation units in academic and research
institutions• Coordinatingwith relevantministries and departments at the central, state and city level for
collatingdatacollectedbytherespectiveagencies
Establish safety departments within operating agencies
MoRTHshouldhaveaninternalsafetydepartment(atdifferentlevels)forensuringdaytodaycompliancewithsafetystandards,studyingeffectivenessofexistingpoliciesandstandards,conductingsafetyaudits,collectingrelevantdata,andliaisonwiththeNationalSafetyAgency,etc.Thesedepartmentsmustemploy30-60professionalwithexpertiseintherelevantareaofsafety,with30-40percentofthestaffondeputationformthefield.
AgenciesoperatingundertheMinistry(e.g.NationalHighwayAuthorityofIndia)shouldalsoestablishtheirowndepartmentsofsafetywithdomainspecialists.Thefunctionsofthesedepartmentswouldincludefieldaudits,beforeandafterstudies,datacollectionfromthefield,andliaisonwiththerelevantministryandthenationalsafetyagency.
Fund establishment of multidisciplinary safety research centres at academic institutions.
Thenationalsafetyagenciesineachofthetransportministriesshouldestablishmultidisciplinarysafetyresearchcentresinindependentacademicandresearchinstitutions.Thesecentreswouldideally
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
77
includethreeormoredisciplinesofresearch,andforeachareaofworkshouldbeatpursuedinthreeormorecentres.Thiswouldpromotecompetitionamongcentresandlikelytoresultinmoreinnovation.Safetyresearchinvolvesthefollowingdisciplines:relevantengineeringsciences,statisticsandepidemiology,traumaandmedicalcare,sociology,psychology,jurisprudence,andcomputerscience.Forthesecentrestobeproductive,eachcentreshouldhaveaminimumof8-10professionals.Itisalsopossiblethatoneacademicinstitutionhasmorethanoneofthesesafetyresearchcentres.Itisrecommendedthat15suchcentresbeestablishedby2020andanother15by2025.
Thefundingforeachofthesecentresshouldinclude:
• Endowmentforthreeormoreprofessorialchairs• Endowmentgrantforatleasttwopostgraduatescholarshipsperendowedchair• Establishmentfundsforcriticallaboratories• Fundsforsupportingvisitingprofessionals• Supportforsurveys,software,travel
ForthesecentrestofunctioneffectivelytheminimumgrantpercentreperyearwouldbeintherangeofRs.30-40millionannuallyincludingendowmentfunds.Eachnationalsafetyagencyshouldestablishproceduresforissuingcallforproposalsandforevaluatingthesameunderopencompletion.Aprocedureshouldalsobeestablishedforanacademicpeerevaluationofeachcentreeverytwoyears.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
78
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
79
References
2015.CoimbatoreRuralRoadAccidentStudy.Aarts,L.&VanSchagen,I.2006.Drivingspeedandtheriskofroadcrashes:Areview.AccidentAnalysis
&Prevention,38,215-224.Abay,K.A.2015.Investigatingthenatureandimpactofreportingbiasinroadcrashdata.
TransportationResearchPartA:PolicyandPractice,71,31-45.Adams,J.1987.Smeed'sLaw:somefurtherthoughts.TrafficEngineeringandControl,28,70-73.AmericanCollegeOf,S.2001.Statementinsupportofmotorcyclehelmetlaws[ST-35].Bulletinofthe
AmericanCollegeofSurgeons,86Amoros,E.,Martin,J.L.,Lafont,S.&Laumon,B.2008.Actualincidencesofroadcasualties,andtheir
injuryseverity,modelledfrompoliceandhospitaldata,France.EuropeanJournalofPublicHealth,18,360-365.
Amoros,E.,Martin,J.L.&Laumon,B.2006.Under-reportingofroadcrashcasualtiesinFrance.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,38,627-635.
Arjun,P.,Arjun,C.,Rajkamal,S.,Santhosh,K.G.,Hassan,A.,Ravishankar,R.&Padmanaban,J.AnIn-DepthStudyofMotorizedTwo-WheelerAccidentsinIndia.IRCOBIConferenceProceedings,2014.
Arora,P.,Chanana,A.&Tejpal,H.R.2013.Estimationofbloodalcoholconcentrationindeathsduetoroadsideaccidents.JournalofForensicandLegalMedicine,20,300-304.
Barffour,M.,Gupta,S.,Gururaj,G.&Hyder,A.A.2012.Evidence-basedroadsafetypracticeinIndia:assessmentoftheadequacyofpubliclyavailabledatainmeetingrequirementsforcomprehensiveroadsafetydatasystems.Trafficinjuryprevention,13,17-23.
Baviskar,S.1998.Analysisofroadaccidentsonnationalhighwaysinnashikdistrict.IndianHighways,26,37-48.
Becker,L.R.,Zaloshnja,E.,Levick,N.,Li,G.&Miller,T.R.2003.Relativeriskofinjuryanddeathinambulancesandotheremergencyvehicles.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,35,941-948.
Behera,C.,Rautji,R.,Lalwani,S.&Dogra,T.2009.AcomprehensivestudyofmotorcyclefatalitiesinSouthDelhi.JIndianAcadForensicMed,31,6-10.
Bhalla,K.&Mohan,D.2015.Safetyofyoungchildrenonmotorizedtwo-wheelersaroundtheworld:Areviewoftheglobalepidemiologicalevidence.IATSSResearch,38,83-91.
Bhalla,K.,Shotten,M.,Cohen,A.,Brauer,M.,Shahraz,S.,Burnett,R.,Leach-Kemon,K.,Freedman,G.&Murray,C.J.L.2014.Transportforhealth:theglobalburdenofdiseasefrommotorizedroadtransport.Washington,DC:WorldBankGroup.
Bjornskau,T.&Elvik,R.1992.Canroadtrafficlawenforcementpermanentlyreducethenumberofaccidents?AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,24,507-520.
Bledsoe,G.H.,Schexnayder,S.M.,Carey,M.J.,Dobbins,W.N.,Gibson,W.D.,Hindman,J.W.,Collins,T.,Wallace,B.H.,Cone,J.B.&Ferrer,T.J.2002.ThenegativeimpactoftherepealoftheArkansasmotorcyclehelmetlaw.JTrauma,53,1078-1086.
Bliss,T.&Breen,J.2009.ImplementingtherecommendationsoftheWorldReportonRoadTrafficInjuryPrevention,WahingtonD.C.,TheWorldBankGlobalRoadSafetyFacility.
Borse,N.&Hyder,A.A.2009.Callformoreresearchoninjuryfromthedevelopingworld:Resultsofabibliometricanalysis.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
80
Brandt,M.M.,Ahrns,K.S.,Corpron,C.A.,Franklin,G.A.&Wahl,W.L.2002.Hospitalcostisreducedbymotorcyclehelmetuse.JTrauma,53,469-471.
Brüde,U.&Elvik,R.2015.Theturningpointinthenumberoftrafficfatalities:Twohypothesesaboutchangesinunderlyingtrends.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,74,60-68.
Bunn,F.,Kwan,I.,Roberts,I.&Wentz,R.2001.EffectivenessOfPre-HospitalTraumaCare.OnbehalfoftheWHOPre-hospitalCareSteeringCommittee.CochraneReviews.
Carlsson,G.1997.Cost-Effectivenessofinformation,campaignsandenforcementandthecostsandbenefitsofspeedchanges.EuropeanSeminarOnCost-EffectivenessOfRoadSafetyWorkAndMeasures.Luxembourg.
Chanchani,R.&Rajkotia,F.2012.AstudyoftheautorickshawsectorinBangalorecity.Bangalore:CentreforInfrastructureandSustainableTransportation&UrbanPlanning(CiSTUP),IndianInstituteofScience.
Chand,M.1995.Accidentcausativefactors.IndianHighways,23,23-29.Chand,M.1999.Ananalyticalstudyofbus-relatedaccidentsinIndia.IndianHighways,27,9-20.Chaurasia,V.K.&Sachdev,S.AccidentStudyonIdentifiedRoadsofKurukshetra.Chikkakrishna,N.K.,Parida,M.&Jain,S.S.CrashPredictionforMultilaneHighwayStretchinIndia.
ProceedingsoftheEasternAsiaSocietyforTransportationStudies,2013.Committee.2007.ReportoftheCommitteeonRoadSafetyandTrafficManagement[Online].
http://morth.nic.in/writereaddata/linkimages/SL_Road_Safety_sundar_report4006852610.pdf:CommitteeonInfrastructure,PlanningCommission,GovernmentofIndia,NewDelhi.
Crinion,J.D.,Foldvary,L.A.&Lane,J.C.1975.TheeffectoncasualtiesofacompulsoryseatbeltwearinglawinSouthAustralia.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,7,81-89.
Dandona,R.&Mishra,A.2003.DeathsduetoroadtrafficcrashedinHyderabadcityinIndia:needforstrengtheningsurveillance.TheNationalmedicaljournalofIndia,17,74-79.
Das,A.,Gjerde,H.,Gopalan,S.S.&Normann,P.T.2012.Alcohol,Drugs,andRoadTrafficCrashesinIndia:ASystematicReview.TrafficInjuryPrevention,13,544-553.
DelhiTrafficPolice2014.RoadAccidentsinDelhi-2013.NewDelhi:AccidentResearchCell,DelhiPolice.Derriks,H.M.&Mak,P.M.2007.Underreportingofroadtrafficcasualties.In:Derriks,H.M.&Mak,P.
M.(eds.).Paris:InternationalTransportForum.Dinu,R.&Veeraragavan,A.2011.Randomparametermodelsforaccidentpredictionontwo-lane
undividedhighwaysinIndia.Journalofsafetyresearch,42,39-42.Duperrex,O.,Roberts,I.&Bunn,F.2003.Safetyeducationofpedestriansforinjuryprevention
(CochraneReview).Oxford:UpdateSoftware.Elder,R.W.,Shults,R.A.,Sleet,D.A.,Nichols,J.L.,Thompson,R.S.&Rajab,W.2004.Effectivenessof
massmediacampaignsforreducingdrinkinganddrivingandalcohol-involvedcrashes:asystematicreview.AmJPrevMed,27,57-65.
Elvik,R.1993.TheeffectsonaccidentsofcompulsoryuseofdaytimerunninglightsforcarsinNorway.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,25,383-398.
Elvik,R.1995.Thesafetyvalueofguardrailsandcrashcushions:ameta-analysisofevidencefromevaluationstudies.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,27,523-549.
Elvik,R.1996.Ameta-analysisofstudiesconcerningthesafetyeffectsofdaytimerunninglightsoncars.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,28,685-694.
Elvik,R.2001.Area-wideurbantrafficcalmingschemes:ameta-analysisofsafetyeffects.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,33,327-336.
Elvik,R.&Vaa,T.2004.Thehandbookofroadsafetymeasures,Amsterdam,Elsevier.Esser,M.B.,Wadhwaniya,S.,Gupta,S.,Tetali,S.,Gururaj,G.,Stevens,K.A.&Hyder,A.A.2015.
CharacteristicsassociatedwithalcoholconsumptionamongemergencydepartmentpatientspresentingwithroadtrafficinjuriesinHyderabad,India.Injury.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
81
Etsc1993.ReducingTrafficInjuriesThroughVehicleSafetyImprovements.Brussels:EuropeanTransportSafetyCouncil.
Evans,L.1991.TrafficSafetyandtheDriverNewYork,VanNostrandReinhold.ExpertCommitteeonAutoFuelPolicy2002.Urbanroadtrafficandairpollutioninmajorcities:Volume
1.NewDelhi:GovernmentofIndia.Garg,N.&Hyder,A.A.2006.Exploringtherelationshipbetweendevelopmentandroadtrafficinjuries:
acasestudyfromIndia.TheEuropeanJournalofPublicHealth,16,487-491.Garnaik,M.M.2014.Effectsofhighwaygeometricelementsonaccidentmodeling.GBD2013MortalityandCausesofDeathCollaborators2015.Global,regional,andnationalage–sex
specificall-causeandcause-specificmortalityfor240causesofdeath,1990–2013:asystematicanalysisfortheGlobalBurdenofDiseaseStudy2013.TheLancet,385,117-171.
Giuliano,G.&Narayan,D.2003.AnotherLookatTravelPatternsandUrbanForm:TheUSandGreatBritain.UrbanStudies,40,2295-2312.
Goel,R.,Guttikunda,S.K.,Mohan,D.&Tiwari,G.2015.BenchmarkingvehicleandpassengertravelcharacteristicsinDelhiforon-roademissionsanalysis.TravelBehaviourandSociety,2,88-101.
Grimm,M.&Treibich,C.2013.DeterminantsofroadtrafficcrashfatalitiesacrossIndianstates.Healtheconomics,22,915-930.
Gururaj,G.2001.EpidemiologyofroadaccidentsandheadinjuriesinBangaloreBangalore:DepartmentOfEpidemiology,NationalInstituteOfMentalHealth&NeuroSciences.
Gururaj,G.2006.RoadtrafficinjurypreventioninIndia.Bangalore:NIMHANS.Gururaj,G.,Uthkarsh,P.S.,Rao,G.N.,Jayaram,A.N.&Panduranganath,V.2014.Burden,patternand
outcomesofroadtrafficinjuriesinaruraldistrictofIndia.InternationalJournalofInjuryControlandSafetyPromotion.
Hagenzieker,M.P.,Bijleveld,F.D.&Davidse,R.J.1997.Effectsofincentiveprogramstostimulatesafetybeltuse:ameta-analysis.AccidentAnalysisandPrevention,29,759-777.
Hingorani,D.&Sarna,A.1978.Areviewofroadaccidentsinindia-theircausativefactorsandpreventivemeasures.IndianHighways,6,32-54.
Hsiao,M.,Malhotra,A.,Thakur,J.S.,Sheth,J.K.,Nathens,A.B.,Dhingra,N.&Jha,P.2013.RoadtrafficinjurymortalityanditsmechanismsinIndia:nationallyrepresentativemortalitysurveyof1.1millionhomes.BMJOpen,3,1-9.
Hupkes,G.1982.Thelawofconstanttraveltimeandtrip-rates.Futures,14,38-46.Hyden,C.&Varhelyi,A.2000.Theeffectsonsafety,timeconsumptionandenvironmentoflargescale
useofroundaboutsinanurbanarea:acasestudy.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,32,11-23.InternationalTrafficSafetyDataandAnalysisGroup2011.Reportingonseriousroadtrafficcasualties.
Paris:InternationalTransportForum/OECD.InternationalTrafficSafetyDataandAnalysisGroup2015.Whydoesroadsafetyimprovewhen
economictimesarehard?Paris:OECD/ITF.IRTAD2014.IRTAD2014AnnualReport.Paris:OECD/InternationalTransportForum.Jain,A.,Menezes,R.G.,Kanchan,T.,Gagan,S.&Jain,R.2009.TwowheeleraccidentsonIndianroads–a
studyfromMangalore,India.Journalofforensicandlegalmedicine,16,130-133.Jain,S.,Singh,P.&Parida,M.RoadSafetyAuditforfourlaneNationalHighways.3rdInternational
ConferenceonRoadSafetyandSimulation,2011.JeyaPadmanaban,R.R.,SwastikNarayan,BharatRamesh2010.AnalysisofFatalCrashesofChennai
City’sMetropolitanTransportCorporation(MTC)Buses.InternationalCrashworthinessConference(ICRASH).
Jha,N.,Srinivasa,D.,Roy,G.&Jagdish,S.2003.Injurypatternamongroadtrafficaccidentcases:AstudyfromSouthIndia.IndianJCommunityMed,28,84-90.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
82
Kadiyali,L.,Gopalaswami,T.,Lakshmikanthan,P.,Pathak,U.&Sood,A.1983.EffectofroadcharacteristicsonaccidentratesonruralhighwaysinIndia.HighwayResearchBulletin,(NewDelhi).
Kanchan,T.,Kulkarni,V.,Bakkannavar,S.M.,Kumar,N.&Unnikrishnan,B.2012.AnalysisoffatalroadtrafficaccidentsinacoastaltownshipofSouthIndia.Journalofforensicandlegalmedicine,19,448-451.
Kar,S.,Das,S.,Tiwari,A.&Pharveen,I.2015.PatternofRoadTrafficAccidentsinBhubaneswar,Odisha.ClinicalEpidemiologyandGlobalHealth.
Kent,R.,Viano,D.C.&Crandall,J.2005.TheFieldPerformanceofFrontalAirBags:AReviewoftheLiterature.TrafficInjuryPrevention,6,1-23.
Kharola,P.S.,Tiwari,G.&Mohan,D.2010.Trafficsafetyandcitypublictransportsystem:CasestudyofBengaluru,India.JournalofPublicTransportation,13,63-91.
Knoflacher,H.2007.Frommythtoscience.Seminar,579,40-44.Koornstra,M.2007.Predictionoftrafficfatalitiesandprospectsformobilitybecomingsustainable-safe.
Sadhna-AcademyProceedingsinEngineeringSciences,32,365-396.Kopits,E.&Cropper,M.2005.Trafficfatalitiesandeconomicgrowth.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,
37,169-178.Kumar,P.2000.Roadsafetyforvulnerableroadusers:someissuesandsuggestions.IndianHighways,
28,21-26.Kumar,R.P.,Venkatramayya,V.&Kashinath,T.2004.MacrolevelstudyofroadaccidentsonDindigul-
PalanisectionofNH-209.IndianHighways,32,31-38.Kwan,I.,Bunn,F.&Roberts,I.2004a.Spinalimmobilisationfortraumapatients(CochraneReview)on
behalfoftheWHOPre-HospitalTraumaCareSteeringCommittee.Chichester,UK:JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
Kwan,I.,Bunn,F.&Roberts,I.2004b.Timingandvolumeoffluidadministrationforpatientswithbleeding(CochraneReview).OnbehalfoftheWHOPre-HospitalTraumaCareSteeringCommittee.Chichester,UK:JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
Lai,C.-H.,Huang,W.-S.,Chang,K.-K.,Jeng,M.-C.&Doong,J.-L.2006.Usingdatalinkagetogenerate30-daycrash-fatalityadjustmentfactorsforTaiwan.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,38,696-702.
Leaf,W.A.&Preusser,D.F.1999.LiteratureReviewonVehicleTravelSpeedsandPedestrianInjuries.Washington,D.C.:NationalHighwayTrafficSafetyAdministration,U.S.DepartmentofTransportation.
Lerner,E.B.&Moscati,R.M.2001.Thegoldenhour:Scientificfactormedical"urbanlegend"?AcademicEmergencyMedicine,8,758-760.
Liu,B.,Ivers,R.,Norton,R.,Blows,S.&Lo,S.K.2003.Helmetsforpreventinginjuryinmotorcycleriders.CochraneDatabaseofSystematicReviews2003.
Malhan,A.2014.Nighttimecrash-ratestudiesinAgraandLudhiana.B.Tech.,IndianInstituteofTechnologyDelhi.
Mani,A.&Tagat,A.2013.Safetyassessmentofauto-rickshawsinMumbai.Mumbai:EmbarqIndia.Martinez,R.1996.Trafficsafetyasahealthissue.In:VonHolst,H.,Nygren,A.&Thord,R.(eds.)Traffic
Safety,CommunicationandHealth.Stockholm:TemaplanAB.Mayhew,D.R.&Simpson,H.M.1996.Effectivenessandroleofdrivereducationandtrainingina
graduatedlicensingsystem.Ottawa,Ontario:TrafficInjuryResearchFoundation.Mcknight,A.J.&Mcknight,A.S.1995.Theeffectsofmotorcyclehelmetsuponseeingandhearing.
AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,27,493-501.MinistryofRoadTransportandHighways1988.MotorVehiclesAct,1988.NewDelhi:MinistryofRoad
TransportandHighways,GovernmentofIndia.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
83
Mirkazemi,R.&Kar,A.2014.Apopulation-basedstudyonroadtrafficinjuriesinPuneCity,India.Trafficinjuryprevention,15,379-385.
Mishra,B.,Banerji,A.&Mohan,D.1984.Two-wheelerinjuriesinDelhi,India:astudyofcrashvictimshospitalizedinaneuro-surgeryward.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,16,407-416.
Mishra,B.K.,Banerji,A.K.&Mohan,D.1984.Two-wheelerinjuriesinDelhi,India:Astudyofcrashvictimshospitalizedinaneuro-surgeryward.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,16,407-416.
Mittal,N.&Sarin,S.2001.Characteristicsofroadaccidentsonlowercategoryofroadsinindia.IndianHighways,29,15-23.
Mohan,D.1984.AccidentaldeathanddisabilityinIndia:astocktaking.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,16,279-288.
Mohan,D.2002.TrafficsafetyandhealthinIndiancities.JournalofTransportandInfrastructure,9,79-94.
Mohan,D.2004.Theroadahead:TrafficinjuriesandfatalitiesinIndia.TransportationResearchandInjuryPreventionProgramme.IndianInstituteofTechnology,Delhi,8.
Mohan,D.2009.RoadaccidentsinIndia.JournalofInternationalAssociationofTrafficandSafetySciences,33,75-79.
Mohan,D.&Bawa,P.1985.AnanalysisofroadtrafficfatalitiesinDelhi,India.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,17,33-45.
Mohan,D.,Goel,R.,Guttikunda,S.&Tiwari,G.2014.AssessmentofmotorvehicleusecharacteristicsinthreeIndiancities.Lyngby,Denmark:UNEPRisøCentreonEnergy.
Mohan,D.,Kothiyal,K.P.,Misra,B.K.&Banerji,A.K.1984.HelmetandHeadInjuryStudyofCrashInvolvedMotorcyclistsinDelhi.Proceedings1984InternationalConferenceontheBiomechanicsofImpacts.Bron,France:IRCOBI.
Mohan,D.&Roy,D.2003.Operatingonthreewheels.Economic&PoliticalWeekly,XXXVIII,177-180.Mohan,D.&Tiwari,G.2000.RoadSafetyinLessMotorisedCountries-RelevanceofInternational
VehicleandHighwaySafetyStandards.ProceedingsInternationalConferenceonVehicleSafety.London:InstitutionofMechanicalEngineers.
Mohan,D.,Tiwari,G.,Khayesi,M.&Nafukho,F.M.2006.Roadtrafficinjurypreventiontrainingmanual,Geneva,WorldHealthOrganization.
Mohan,D.,Tiwari,G.&Mukherjee,K.2013.Astudyoncommunitydesignfortrafficsafety.FinalreportforIATSS.NewDelhi:TransportationResearchandInjuryPreventionProgramme,IndianInstituteofTechnologyDelhi.
Mohan,D.,Tsimhoni,O.,Sivak,M.&Flannagan,M.J.2009.RoadsafetyinIndia:Challengesandopportunities.AnnArbor,MI:UniversityofMichiganTransportationResearchInstitute.
Moher,D.,Liberati,A.,Tetzlaff,J.&Altman,D.G.2009.Preferredreportingitemsforsystematicreviewsandmeta-analyses:thePRISMAstatement.PLoSMed,6,e1000097.
MoRTH2015.AnnualReport2014-2015.NewDelhi:MinistryofRoadTransport&Highways.Naqvi,H.M.&Tiwari,G.AssessingriskfactorsforpedestrianfatalcrashesonNationalHighwaysin
India.EASTS,2015Cebu,Philippines.Narayan,S.,Balakumar,S.,Kumar,S.,Bhuvanesh,M.,Hassan,A.,Rajaraman,R.&Padmanaban,J.
CharacteristicsofFatalRoadTrafficAccidentsonIndianHighways.NationalCenterforStatisticsandAnalysis2015.TrafficSafetyFacts2013.WahingtonD.C.:National
HighwayTrafficSafetyAdministration.NationalHighwayTrafficSafety,A.1996.DoMotorcycleHelmetsInterfereWiththeVisionandHearing
ofRiders?Washington,D.C.:U.S.DepartmentofTransportation.NationalTransportDevelopmentPolicyCommittee2014a.IndiaTransportReport:MovingIndiato2032,
NewDelhi,Rutledge.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
84
NationalTransportDevelopmentPolicyCommittee2014b.Safety.IndiaTransportReport:MovingIndiato2032.NewDelhi:Routledge.
NCRB2015.AccidentalDeathsandSuicidesinIndia2014.NewDelhi:NationalCrimeRecordsBureau,MinistryofHomeAffairs.
Noland,R.B.2003.Trafficfatalitiesandinjuries:theeffectofchangesininfrastructureandothertrends.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,35,599-612.
O'neill,B.2001.RoleofAdvocacy,Education,andTraininginReducingMotorVehicleCrashLosses.ProceedingsfromWHOmeetingtoDevelopa5-YearStrategyonRoadTrafficInjuryPrevention.Geneva:WHO.
O'neill,B.&Kyrychenko,S.2006.UseandMisuseofMotorVehicleCrashDeathRatesinAssessingHighwaySafetyPerformance.Arlington,VA:InsuranceInstituteforHighwaySafety.
OECD1986.OECDroadsafetyresearch:asynthesis.Paris:OECD.OfficeoftheRegistrarGeneral&CensusCommissioner2015.C-14fiveyearagegroupdatabyresidence
andsex2011.NewDelhi:MinistryofHomeAffairs,GovernmentofIndia.Padmanaban,J.,Rajaraman,R.,Narayan,S.,Ramesh,B.&Stadter,G.AnalysisofIn-DepthCrashDataon
IndianNationalHighwaysandImpactofRoadDesignonCrashesandInjurySeverity.4thInternationalESARConference,Hanover,Germany,2010.
Pandey,G.,Mohan,D.&Rao,K.R.2015.Whydothree-wheelerscarryingschoolchildrensufferverylowfatalcrashes?IATSSResearch,38,130-134.
Parkin,S.,Mackay,G.M.&Framton,R.I.1993.EffectivenessandLimitationsofCurrentSeatBeltsinEurope.ChronicDiseasesinCanada,14,S53-S59.
Peden,M.,Scurfield,R.,Sleet,D.,Mohan,D.,Hyder,A.A.,Jarawan,E.&Mathers,C.2004.Worldreportonroadtrafficinjuryprevention,GenevaWorldHealthOrganization
Ponnaluri,R.V.2012.RoadtrafficcrashesandriskgroupsinIndia:Analysis,interpretations,andpreventionstrategies.IATSSresearch,35,104-110.
Prajapati,P.&Tiwari,G.EvaluatingSafetyofUrbanArterialRoadsofMediumSizedIndianCity.ProceedingsoftheEasternAsiaSocietyforTransportationStudies,2013.
RadinUmar,R.2006.MotorcyclesafetyprogrammesinMalaysia:howeffectivearethey?InternationalJournalofInjuryControlandSafetyPromotion,13,71-79.
RadinUmar,R.S.,Mackay,M.G.&Hills,B.L.1996.Modellingofconspicuity-relatedmotorcycleaccidentsinSerembanandShahAlam,Malaysia.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,28,325-332.
Raichur,M.,Panwala,C.,Chawda,S.&Shah,J.1993.RoadsafetyinandaroundVadodaraCity.IndianHighways,21,7-15.
Rajaraman,R.AnalysisofRoadTrafficAccidentsonNH45,KanchipuramDistrict(TamilNadu,India).INDIA,JPResearch,4thIRTADCONFERENCE,2009.16-17.
Rao,B.S.,Madhu,E.,Jalihal,S.&Reddy,T.AccidentStudyOnNationalHighway-5BetweenAnakapallitoVisakhapatnam.ProceedingsoftheEasternAsiaSocietyforTransportationStudies,2005.1973-1988.
Roberts,I.,Kwan,I.&CochraneInjuriesGroupDriverEducation,R.2003.Schoolbaseddrivereducationforthepreventionoftrafficcrashes(CochraneReview).Oxford:UpdateSoftware.
Robertson,L.S.1980.Crashinvolvementofteenageddriverswhendrivereducationiseliminatedfromhighschool.AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,70,599-603.
Robertson,L.S.1983.Injuries:Causes,ControlStrategiesandPublicPolicy,Lexington,MA,LexingtonBooks.
Robertson,L.S.,Kelley,A.B.,O'neill,B.,Wixom,C.W.,Eiswirth,R.S.&Haddon,W.,Jr.1974.Acontrolledstudyoftheeffectoftelevisionmessagesonsafetybeltuse.AmericanJournalofPublicHealth,64,1071-1080.
Rogers,L.2012.IrapIndiaFourStatesRoadSafetyReport.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
85
Rosman,D.L.&Knuiman,M.W.1994.Acomparisonofhospitalandpoliceroadinjurydata.AccidentAnalysis&Prevention,26,215-222.
Saija,K.,Patel,C.&Sureja,G.2000.Spectrumanalysisofroadaccidents-acasestudy.Indianhighways,28,29-41.
Saija,K.K.&Patel,C.D.2002.MicrolevelstudyofaccidentsonNH-8passingthroughValsadDistrict.IndianHighways,30,43-51.
Sandels,S.1975.Childrenintraffic,Surrey,ElekBooksLtd.Santos,A.,Mcguckin,N.,Nakamoto,H.Y.,Gray,D.A.&Liss,S.2011.Summaryoftraveltrends:2009
nationalhouseholdtravelsurvey.WashingtonD.C.:U.S.DepartmentofTransportation,FederalHighwayAdministration.
Sarin,S.,Chand,F.&Rao,V.2005.Minorimprovementsofhighwaysforbetterroadsafety.IndianHighways,33,15-54.
Sethi,D.,Kwan,I.,Kelly,A.M.,Roberts,I.&Bunn,F.2004.Advancedtraumalifesupporttrainingforambulancecrews(CochraneReview).OnbehalfoftheWHOPre-HospitalTraumaCareSteeringCommittee.Chichester,UK:JohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.
Shaheem,S.,Mohammed,K.M.S.&Rajeevan2006.EvaluationofcosteffectivenessofimprovementsofaccidentpronelocationsonNH-47inKeralastate.IndianHighways,34,35-46.
Sharma,A.&Dua,L.2000.Roadsafetyconsiderationsfornationalhighways.IndianHighways,28,15-22.
Sharma,A.&Landge,V.2012.Pedestrianaccidentpredictionmodelforruralroad.InternationalJournalofScienceandAdvancedTechnology,2,66-73.
Shrinivas,P.L.L.2004.StudiesundertakentoidentifycriticalcausesofaccidentsinthehighwaysofTamilNadu.IndianHighways,31,11-22.
Singh,D.,Singh,S.P.,Kumaran,M.&Goel,S.2015.EpidemiologyofroadtrafficaccidentdeathsinchildreninChandigarhzoneofNorthWestIndia.EgyptianJournalofForensicSciences.
Singh,S.K.&Misra,A.2001.Roadaccidentanalysis:acasestudyofPatnacity.UrbanTransportJournal,2,60-75.
Sweedler,B.,Biecheler,M.,Laurell,H.,Kroj,G.,Lerner,M.,Mathijssen,M.,Mayhew,D.&Tunbridge,R.2004.Worldwidetrendsinalcoholanddrugimpaireddriving.TrafficInjuryPrevention,5,175-184.
Thompson,D.C.,Rivara,F.P.&Thompson,R.2003.Helmetsforpreventingheadandfacialinjuriesinbicyclists.Oxford:UpdateSoftware.
Tiwari,G.2015.HighwaysafetyinIndia.NewDelhi:IndianInstituteofTechnologyDelhi.Tiwari,G.,Mohan,D.&Gupta,D.P.2000.EvaluationofCapacityAugmentationProjectsofNational
HighwaysandStateHighways.NewDelhi:MinistryofSurfaceTransport,GOI.TransportforLondon2011.TravelinLondon,supplementaryreport:Londontraveldemandsurvey
(LTDS).London:TransportforLondon.TransportResearchWing2014.RoadTransportYearbook2011-12.NewDelhi:MinistryofRoad
Transport&Highways,GovernmentofIndia.TransportResearchWing2015.RoadAccidentsInIndia2014.NewDelhi:MinistryofRoadTransportand
Highways.Trinca,G.W.,Johnston,I.R.,Campbell,B.J.,Haight,F.A.,Knight,P.R.,Mackay,G.M.,Mclean,A.J.&
Petrucelli,E.1988.ReducingTrafficInjury-AGlobalChallenge,Melbourne,RoyalAustralasianCollegeofSurgeons.
Valli,P.P.2005.RoadaccidentmodelsforlargemetropolitancitiesofIndia.IATSSresearch,29,57-65.VanVliet,P.&Schermers,G.2000.SustainableSafety:ANewApproachforRoadSafetyinthe
Netherlands.Rotterdam:TrafficResearchCentre,MinistryofTransport.
ROADSAFETYININDIA:STATUSREPORT©TRIPPIITDELHI
86
Varghese,M.&Mohan,D.1991.TransportationInjuriesinRuralHaryana,NorthIndia.ProceedingsInternationalConferenceonTrafficSafety.NewDelhi:MacmillanIndiaLtd.
Vernick,J.S,Guohua,L.,Ogaitis,S.,Mackenzie,E.J.,Baker,S.P.&Gielen,A.C.1999.Effectsofhighschooldrivereducationonmotorvehiclecrashes,violations,andlicensure.AmericanJournalofPreventiveMedicine,16,40-46.
Victor,D.&Vasudevan,J.1989.FACTORSAFFECTINGBUS-RELATEDACCIDENTS-CASESTUDYOFFIVECORPORATIONSINTAMILNADU.HighwayResearchBulletin,(NewDelhi),40.
W.H.O.2015.Globalstatusreportonroadsafety2015.Geneva:WorldHealthOrganization.WilburSmithAssociates2008.Studyontrafficandtransportationpoliciesandstrategiesinurbanareas
inIndia-Finalreport.NewDelhi:MinistryofUrbanDevelopment,GovernmentofIndia.Williams,A.F.&O'neill,B.1974.On-the-roaddrivingrecordsoflicensedracedrivers.AccidentAnalysis
&Prevention,6,263-270.WorldBank2015a.Laborforceparticipationrate,female(%offemalepopulationages15+)(modeled
ILOestimate).2015ed.WashingtonD.C.:TheWorldBankGroup.WorldBank2015b.Urbanpopulation(%oftotal).WashingtonD.C.:TheWorldBankGroup.Yuan,W.2000.Theeffectivenessofthe'ride-bright'legislationformotorcyclesinSingapore.Accident
Analysis&Prevention,32,559-563.Zegras,C.2010.TheBuiltEnvironmentandMotorVehicleOwnershipandUse:EvidencefromSantiago
deChile.UrbanStudies,47,1793-1817.
Transportation Research and Injury Prevention ProgrammeIndian Institute of Technology Delhi
Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016http://tripp.iitd.ernet.in/