How ambitious?

In good practice road safety management, ‘results focus’ is the overarching institutional management function [4]. It determines the country’s level of ambition for road safety and takes into account the interventions and institutional arrangements which need to be put in place in order to realise it. The process involves

• Appraising current road safety performance through high-level strategic review
• Adopting a far-reaching road safety vision or goal for the longer term
• Analysing what could be achieved in the shorter term and proposing targets
• Agreeing targets across the road safety partnership and ensuring stakeholder accountability for results

All other management functions influence this activity and what can be achieved in road safety for the future such as the effectiveness of the coordination framework as a decision-making forum across government including consultation with the broader partnership; whether sustainable funding and resource allocation mechanisms are in place; the possibility of securing legislative time for interventions; the likelihood of high-level promotion; the quality of data sets for target-setting work and for subsequent monitoring and evaluation as well as ready access to research and development and knowledge transfer [4].

Appraising performance

The aim is to achieve a clear overview of country organizational needs to understand present road safety performance - what is working and where there is room for improvement - and to specify or better specify challenging but achievable road safety outcomes in the national road safety strategy. The process of appraising current road safety performance will involve high-level multi-sectoral strategic examination of a range of activity and typically involve a senior coordination group of officials from Transport, Health, Justice and Education sectors. In-house technical input from the lead agency as well outside research sector input support this activity.

Adopting an ambitious long term goal

European countries are increasingly adopting long term visions or goals for road safety e.g Vision Zero and Sustainable Safety. Such visions for a safer road traffic system where deaths and serious injuries can be substantially reduced and ultimately avoided, as sought in other areas of public safety can stimulate, guide and ensure continuity in road safety work.

Vision Zero is presented as a long-term, ideal objective for a traffic system where the amount of biomechanical energy to which people can be exposed without sustaining serious injury is the basic design parameter. As with the Sustainable Safety. Strategy being implemented in the Netherlands which has a similar approach, Parliamentary scrutiny and approval stimulated public debate and prepared the way for future successful work. Finland has recently adopted a policy based on the Vision Zero strategy. Switzerland’s Via Secura theme and the Safe System concept of the Australian State of Victoria’s are also derived from the Vision Zero philosophy. These long-term strategies for a safer traffic system supplemented with casualty reduction targets require fundamental and wide-scale re-working of various aspects of the design and operation of the national traffic system, to achieve better interface between human, vehicle and road environment.

Far reaching visions of total road safety promote a level of ambition that goes beyond incremental performance gains and the implicit acceptance of death and injury that will be determined by the rate of improvement shown by the best performing countries. These desired longer term results, together with shorter term targets, underpin the national road safety strategy in several EU countries and can help to create a sympathetic climate for the introduction of interventions [4]

Analysing short term potential

This entails analysis by a high-level expert group of the identification of the most important road casualty problems throughout the road traffic system on the basis of data analysis, survey and research. It involves survey of the current safety performance of different aspects of the traffic system, analysis of information on the effectiveness of different countermeasures in achieving road safety outcomes, socio-economic appraisals and the identification of useful implementation tools [28]. This analytical activity usually involves a high-level multi-sectoral group supported by advisory groups comprising in-house, external research expertise and sometimes technical experts from abroad.

Use of a sound methodology Effective national target-setting requires a sound statistically based methodology to set credible casualty reduction targets. Several countries have used models which provide a powerful means of organizing available knowledge and thinking systematically about the future development of road transport and its safety [6][20][21][22] [23]. The model used for the development of the New Zealand 2010 targets can be used to determine what target is achievable with given amounts and types of interventions and to determine the amounts and types of intervention needed to achieve a given target [20][21].

Forecasting future trends on the basis of past performance The starting point is analysis of past and current safety performance and on the basis of this forecasting what may be realistically achieved in future with additional efforts. The first stage of the forecasting process consists of developing statistical models that explain past changes in the casualty numbers for different user groups with reference to measures of the changing exposure to risk of these groups, including the amount of motor traffic and the average distances walked and cycled per person per year; and available information about the effectiveness at the national level of measures that have influenced casualty numbers substantially [7].

Identifying the potential for further improvements The forecasting process produces a wide range of results reflecting different scenarios about the future development of road transport and road safety measures. Scenario planning and computer modelling is often used to predict possible outcomes. Assessment of future long-term casualty, traffic and demographic trends is also necessary to understand underlying factors which may influence achievement of future results

Typically, working papers analysing a range of countermeasures in terms of their cost-effectiveness and public acceptability are developed to inform target-setting and strategy development [23][6]. These working papers are typically published at the same time of the road safety strategy. Information is derived from surveys, practical trials or from national or overseas experience of successful implementation effectiveness of policies. During the last forty years a substantial international knowledge base of effective interventions has grown up to inform national policymaking [15][29][28]

Developing countermeasures and action plans at national, regional and/or local levels are integral to the formulation of road safety targets. For further information on relevant considerations [6] . Proposed plans, supported by analysis to identify the best suite of measures, need to be discussed with stakeholders and divergent interests need to be considered.

Socio-economic appraisals need to be carried out to determine the best use of public resource to meet the objectives. In some countries targeted plans are also established at regional and local levels. Opportunities for road safety through integrating road safety into other areas of Government policy at national, regional and local levels need to be analysed. This involves discussion and agreement with key Government stakeholders.

Public opinion survey data informs about the acceptability of potential measures. Most road safety lead agencies put in place public opinion tracking, usually with an outside agency to monitor the public acceptability of different measures. The European SARTRE survey is a cross national study of attitudes to road safety.

Proposing targets

Road safety targets are proposed by the lead agency and/or the coordination body and are then submitted for Ministerial/Cabinet approval and Parliament. The activity is driven by the lead agency which reviews safety performance, identifies priorities, and organizes the other key government stakeholders to consider and approve proposed outcomes and outputs. Several examples of targeted road safety programmes can be found through the following links:

Finland http://www.mintc.fi/oliver/upl762-Finnish%20transport%20policy.pdf

Denmark http://www.trm.dk/graphics/synkron-library/trafikministeriet/publikationer/pdf_uk/003.pdf

New Zealand http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/strategy-2010/strategy-content.html

Great Britain http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/strategytargetsperformance/2ndreview/print

An OECD/Joint Research Transport Centre working group is currently working on an international review on Achieving Ambitious Road Safety Targets.

Agreeing targets and ensuring accountability

Agreeing targets

Targets need to be agreed across the road safety partnership since they specify the desired safety performance which is endorsed by governments at all levels, stakeholders and the community. Full consultation with the key governmental stakeholders, the wide range of stakeholders involved in helping to achieve road safety results and the public is essential. Good practice indicates that governmental and professional consultation on targets is usually conducted within the national road safety coordination hierarchy followed by a public consultation process. Governmental approval of the targets and national strategy is carried out within the upper tier of the multi-sectoral coordination body

Performance assessment

The establishment and use of road safety targets in OECD countries has, in general, coincided with broader organisational change in governance and public sector reform. The accountability mechanisms put in place between central government and its agencies for key responsibilities and use of public resource can also underpin the accountabilities of road safety stakeholders.

Public service targets and agreements are means by which Government demonstrates its role and accountability for road safety responsibilities. Audit and inspection bodies monitor compliance.