Are crash characteristics and causation mechanisms similar in crashes involving fatigue to those involving alcohol?

The effect of fatigue on driving has been compared to the effect of alcohol impairment in both driver performance and crash studies. However are crash characteristics and causation mechanisms similar in crashes involving fatigue to those involving alcohol when studied in the real world? This has been explored by examining data held in the EC project SafetyNet Accident Causation Database. Causation data was recorded using the SafetyNet Accident Causation System (SNACS). The focus was on Cars/MPV crashes and drivers assigned the SNACS code Alcohol or Fatigue. The Alcohol group included 44 drivers and the Fatigue group included 47. ‘Incorrect direction’ was a frequently occurring critical event in both the Alcohol and Fatigue groups. The Alcohol group had more contributory factors related to decision making and the Fatigue group had more contributory factors relating to incorrect observations. This analysis does not allow for generalised statements about the significance of the similarities and differences between crashes involving alcohol and fatigue, however the observed differences do suggest that attempts to quantify the effect of fatigue by using levels of alcohol impairment as a benchmark should be done with care

Exploring inattention and distraction in the SafetyNet accident causation database

The SafetyNet Accident Causation Database was formulated as part of the SafetyNet Integrated Project. Data were collected in 6 European countries using ‘on-scene’ and ‘nearly on-scene’ crash investigation methods. 32% of crashes recorded in the Database, involved at least one driver, rider or pedestrian, which had been assigned the SNACS codes ‘Inattention’ and/or ‘Distraction’. 212 of the drivers were assigned ‘Distraction’ and 140 drivers were given the code ‘Inattention’. Distraction and Inattention often leads to missed observations and ‘Timing’ or ‘Direction’ critical events. In addition, the type of distraction and inattention differs according to the crash type

Identifying the causes of road crashes in Europe

This research applies a recently developed model of accident causation, developed to investigate industrial accidents, to a specially gathered sample of 997 crashes investigated in-depth in 6 countries. Based on the work of Hollnagel the model considers a collision to be a consequence of a breakdown in the interaction between road users, vehicles and the organisation of the traffic environment. 54% of road users experienced interpretation errors while 44% made observation errors and 37% planning errors. In contrast to other studies only 11% of drivers were distracted and 8% inattentive. There was remarkably little variation in these errors between the main road user types. The application of the model to future in-depth crash studies offers the opportunity to identify new measures to improve safety and to mitigate the social impact of collisions. Examples given include the potential value of co-driver advisory technologies to reduce observation errors and predictive technologies to avoid conflicting interactions between road users

The journey to work – a barrier to older workers

According to the National Audit Office, transport difficulties are one of the barriers to employment experienced by people aged 50 plus. Huber and Skidmore suggest that “the happiest grannies are those who achieved a balance of caring and part-time work.” However, difficult conflicts may arise for older workers regarding work location, travel arrangements, mode of travel, family or caring commitments, and the need for leisure time and a well-earned degree of freedom and flexibility. The journey to work is being investigated as a part of “Working Late”, a 4-year collaborative research project funded by the New Dynamics of Ageing Programme. Following evidence from discussion groups with domain experts, employer representatives and older workers, a questionnaire survey was conducted, both online and paper based, to quantify the scale of the problem. More focussed interviews then contribute towards design solutions and strategies which will support personally sustainable travel and well-being, not just for older people but for all employees

Project report - months 1 - 18, Deliverable 1.2 of the H2020 project SafetyCube.

This report, D1.2 Project Report - months 1 – 18, provides an overview of the work undertaken in the SafetyCube project. At the time of the preparation of the project the reporting requirements were not known and an internal mid-term evaluation of the project was considered to be helpful to the project team. Since then the formal project reporting requirements have become known and the internal mid-term evaluation of the project has been superseded by the Mid-term Project Review which covers M1 – M18. The objectives for the first 18 months of the project were to: 1. Implement the project management framework to support communication between partners and achievement of project objectives. 2. Establish a project dissemination and consultation platform to ensure all stakeholders can remain informed of the project progress and can contribute to the DSS. 3. Develop the methodological framework of the DSS, and process for extracting data on risks and measures. 4. Estimate the numbers of seriously injured traffic casualties in Europe and the resulting health impacts. 5. Define the functionality of the DSS and prepare the underlying structure. Very good progress has been made in the first 18 months of the project and all objectives have been achieved. Notably; 1. The project now has a very effective management framework that is focussed on: • The project coordinator and a dedicated project administrator. • Monthly Work Package (WP) Leaders meetings for routine decision making. • Regular WP partner meetings. • Periodic full partner plenary meetings. • A dedicated web conferencing system to facilitate communication together with a central web-based document repository. 2. A dissemination platform has been established to facilitate communication between the project and future DSS users. • The project website (www.safetycube-project.eu) provides information about the project and news of recent developments. • A newsletter, published typically four times each year, provides more detailed information to recipients. • A series of stakeholder consultation workshops have provided the project team with very useful guidance regarding the functionality and content of the DSS. 3. The methodological framework for the DSS has been established and data on risks has been evaluated and recorded for entry to the DSS. • The procedure to be used to record details of risks and measures from studies has been defined. • A sophisticated data entry template has been developed to provide a consistent means to gather data for entry onto the database and to enable an automatic quality check of template use. • A total of 600 studies have been reviewed and data of 3,500 risks has been entered onto the templates. The studies cover road user, infrastructure and vehicle risks. • A total of 60 topic syntheses have been prepared to provide summaries and critical evaluation of the existing knowledge about road safety risks. The studies cover road user, infrastructure and vehicle risks. 4. Important advances have been made regarding the enumeration of serious injuries and the societal level impact. • With the assistance of EC DG-MOVE a strong collaboration has been established with the EU CARE experts group representing the Member States. • The methods used across the EU to estimate the numbers of seriously injured casualties have been reviewed and the comparability assessed. • Recommendations for approaches to improve accuracy of serious injury counting have been made. 5. The structure and functionality of the DSS has been developed and a provisional “look and feel” prepared. • A comprehensive taxonomy of risks and measures has been prepared to provide the internal structure of the DSS. • The basic functionality of the DSS has been specified and entry points, search methodologies and output descriptions have been prepared. • Wireframe screens have been prepared to illustrate the possible appearance of the DSS

Collaboration with other H2020 projects, Deliverable 1.1 of the H2020 project SafetyCube.

SafetyCube was one of five projects to be funded under the H2020 Topic MG‐3.4‐2014 Traffic Safety Analysis and Integrated Approach towards the Safety of Vulnerable Road Users. The five projects were invited by the European Commission to explore the possibilities to cooperate in technical and dissemination aspects. Early collaborations have been established between SafetyCube and other projects supported under the H2020 Topic MG‐3.4‐2014 Traffic Safety Analysis and Integrated Approach towards the Safety of Vulnerable Road Users. A series of joint activities have been conducted including: Project Coordinator collaboration meeting Joint Session at Transport Research Arena Conference, Warsaw April 2016 Informal joint project meeting at TRA Specific Joint Work Package meetings with InDeV in relation to the estimation of accident costs Future joint activities are planned to further explore collaboration opportunities between SafetyCube and other projects Invitation to other project representatives to attend SafetyCube Mid‐term workshop A joint session at the International Cycle Safety Conference in Bologna, November 2016 Further Work Package level discussions to explore potential cooperation in estimating the under‐reporting of crashes

An investigation of policy makers’ priorities for data and tools and their availability. Deliverable 1.4 of the EC FP7 project DaCoTA

An investigation of policy makers’ priorities for data and tools and their availability. Deliverable 1.4 of the EC FP7 project DaCoT

Data collection, analysis methods and equipment for naturalistic studies and requirements for the different application areas. PROLOGUE Deliverable D2.1

Naturalistic driving observation is a relatively new method for studying road safety issues, a method by which one can objectively observe various driver- and accident related behaviour. Typically, participants get their own vehicles equipped with some sort of data logging device that can record various driving behaviours such as speed, braking, lane keeping/variations, acceleration, deceleration etc., as well as one or more video cameras. In this way normal drivers are observed in their normal driving context while driving their own vehicles. Optimally, this allows for observation of the driver, vehicle, road and traffic environments and interaction between these factors. The main objective of PROLOGUE is to demonstrate the usefulness, value, and feasibility of conducting naturalistic driving observation studies in a European context in order to investigate traffic safety of road users, as well as other traffic related issues such as eco-driving and traffic flow/traffic management. The current deliverable aims to develop an inventory of the current and appropriate data collection and data analysis equipment for naturalistic observation studies together with a theoretical analysis of the requirements for different application areas. The deliverable also discusses data quality issues and top level data base management requirements. Among the reviewed literature, maximal use is made of the extensive knowledge and experience that comes from the EU projects FESTA and EuroFOT, the 100car study and the SHRP2 preparatory safety

Fatal and serious pedal cycle and truck collisions in the UK: A systems approach

Collisions between cyclists and trucks are a concerning contributor to road traffic crash fatalities within the UK. This paper applied a systems approach using the accimap method of analysis to probe deeper into contributory factors involved in cyclist/truck crashes occurring in London. In a single example case study of a cyclist/truck collision it is apparent that high level systems factors such as road design and vehicle regulations play a contributory role in such crashes. Considering the physical process and actor activates from 27 crashes it is apparent that decisions made by both the cyclist and truck driver have individual and interacting effects on crash causation. Overall, accimaps appear to be an appropriate method for considering the contributory factors of cyclist/truck collisions, however, it is acknowledged that the robustness of findings is limited by the scope of information included in the original incident reports

Cyclist deaths in London: implications from a safe systems perspective

Cyclist deaths in London: implications from a safe systems perspectiv