1. dia

1
XII-th INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT CONFERENCE ROAD
TRANSPORT PROBLEMS, WAYS OF THEIR SOLUTION
AND DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS Successfull
solutions for road safety (Hungarian
exprerience) Presented by mr. Zsolt Csaba
HORVATH Master, assistant professor Budapest
University of Technology and Economy Yalta,
14-17/09/2011
2
Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU

• 2001
• Over 40,000 people killed
• 3.3 million people injured
• Costs exceeded 180 billion (i.e. twice the
  annual budget of the EC 2 of EU GDP)

3
Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU
(cont.)

• 1st of May 2004
• 10 accession countries joined the EU
• Total population increased to over 450 million
  people
• Estimated number of road crashes is expected to
  increase by 25 to over 50,000 each year

4
Extent and nature of casualty problem in EU
(cont.)

• EC
• Adopted a target of reducing fatalities by 50
• Identified several areas where it could make a
  direct contribution within the constraints of
  subsidiarity
• Road Safety Action Program (RSAP)
• Reaffirmed the target
• Provided further detail about actions it planned
  to introduce

5
The ultimate goal No road deaths

• How to get there?
• Introduce and implement safe system approach in a
  long-term
• Adopt a level of ambition to eliminate road
  fatalities and serious injuries in the longer
  term - with steady progress through interim (good
  practice) strategies and targets in the short to
  medium term

OECD, 2008
6
Why and what to set goals for?

• Setting goals in road safety alone leads to
  improvements by creating a structure for their
  realization, monitoring
• The overall goal needs to be accompanied by
  partial objectives so as to allow for evaluation,
  accountability

Eksler, 2009
Wegman et al., 2004
7
EU target

• In 2002, the EU set an ambitious target to halve
  the number of road victims between 2001 and 2010
• Shared target supposing different contribution
  from Member States
• Limited accountability measures and tools
  availability

White Paper (2001) "European transport policy
for 2010  time to decide
3rd Road Safety Action Programme (2003) Sharing
responsibility
8
Shared responsibility (3rd RSAP)

• Weakness comes from the lack of accountability
  responsibility is not sufficiently attributed to
  concrete actors.

Make safer vehicles
Improve road users behavior
Improve road infrastructure
9
EU target

• 1st EU target triggered further road safety
  improvement particularly in Western Europe

10
EU progress towards targets

• Currently, a delay at least of 6 years for the EU
  as a whole.

11
Contribution of Member States (1)

• Five countries at sight of the target
• France and Luxembourg are almost there

ETSC, 2009
12
Contribution of Member States (2)

• Most EU countries have a general road safety
  target Many of them a very detailed strategy with
  sub-targets
• No accountability mechanisms exists and the EU
  has no legal instrument to put a pressure on
  underperforming countries.
• Only approach available is blame and shame used
  by NGOs, associations, media
• ETSC has been monitoring contribution of MSs and
  their performance in various areas of road safety

13
Policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020

• 3 Pillars
• A common European road safety area
• Shared responsibility (EU, national, local)
• An integrated approach with other policies
  (health, environment, employment, etc.)

14
A shared responsibility

• Action by ALL stakeholders is needed
• Public Authorities EU Central
• Governments Local Authorities
• Private Companies Car industry
• Transport companies Road operators
•  Corporate responsibility 
• Users everybody !
• The EU acts wherever it provides an added value

15
Integrated approach
16
Main strategic items

• Improve education and training of road users
• Increase compliance with road traffic rules
• Safer road infrastructure
• Safer vehicles
• Promote the use of modern technology to improve
  road safety
• Improve emergency and post-care services
• Improve safety of vulnerable road users.

17
Case of France (1)

• Targets introduced bottom-up
• Political will from the highest level - to bring
  credibility to the enforcement system
• Zero Tolerance of speeding offences
• Introduction of a fully automated speed
  management system

French Road Safety Observatory estimated that 75
of the massive reduction in road deaths in early
2000s was due to reduced speeds.
18
Case of France (2)

• A new target set in 2008 no more than 3,000
  deaths in 2012
• Through speed management, drink-driving
  counter-measures, red-light passing and
  safe-distance keeping checks

19
Case of Portugal (1)

• Top-down approach in target setting
• In 2003, the 1st National Road Safety Plan
  adopted with the objective of -50 of road deaths
  by 2009
• More than 100 concrete measures involving
  revision of Highway Code, Extensive high risk
  site removal schemes
• Sub-targets 90 seat belt wearing rate on front
  seats, 60 on rear seats

20
Case of Portugal (2)

• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network
• New National Road Safety Strategy includes new
  quantitative targets for the period 2008-2015
• New subtarget on injuries

21
Case of Hungary (1)

• Main targets
• - Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 30 -os
  till 2010
• - Reduce a road and fatal accidents with 50 -os
  till 2015

22
Case of Hungary, modules

• New powerfull orgazation for coordination (NTA)
• New National Road Safety Strategy i
• Objective resposibility
• zero tolerance
• new tarffic penalty point system
• New list for speed limit
• Higher penalty for using a mobile phones
• More legal support to pedestrains and children

23
Case of Hungary, documented speed records(2009,
2010)
24
Case of Hungary, equipments and tools (1)

• Establish a new, powerfull and well-equipped
  central transport authority (NTA) for a
  coordination of
• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network
  (and its safety)
• New National Road Safety Strategy implemented
  based on using a central database
• New legal action Objective resposibility and
  zero tolerance
• Plus new tarffic penalty point system
• New speed limit for each type of vehicle
• Higher penalty for using a mobile phones
• New traffic rules implemented based on More
  legal support to pedetrains and children
• -

25
Case of Hungary, equipments and tools (2)

• Made good use of EU funds to improve road network
• New National Road Safety Strategy implemented
• Objective resposibility
• zero tolerance
• new tarffic penalty point system
• New and adectave speed limit
• Higher penalty for using a mobile phones
• More support to pedetrains and children

26
Case of Hungary, Objective responsiblity

• Based on law nr. I./1988y
• New system for sharing of responsibility
• Key issue I. dedicated main responsibility to
  owner or operator of the vehicle
• Key issue II. the identify a driver not so
  important
• since 02.05.2008.
• New legal action Direct penalty to
  owner/operator
• Covering (eg.) speed limit, railroad crossing,
  using a highway emergency line, by-pass traffic
  lamp indication ,

27
Case of Hungary, results (1)

• Decreased trumatic road accident with 9,4
  compare to 2009
• Fatal accident decreased with 11,8 compare to
  2009
• Drunken driving decreased with 21,5 compare to
  2009
• Yearly more than 12000 driving licence cancelled
• Compare with y2010. and y2001. a fatalities
  decreased with 39

28
Case of Hungary, results (2)Accidents due to
drunken driving2001 2009.
29
Case of Hungary, results (3)Fatalities in road
accidents2001 2009.
30
Case of Hungary, results (4)cumulated1957-2009
31
Case of Hungary, next steps

• Continious increasing a road side controll (eg
  DG, technical inspection, covered and uncovered
  speed limit check)
• Develoving and updating a technical background,
  focusing a intensive utilization of central
  database
• Direct communication with participants of traffic
• Sharing an experience with another authorities
  and partners

32
Lessons from other countries

• Czech Republic Over-ambitious target with the
  absence of a credible enforcement system failed
  to bring effects
• Belgium Separatelly setting targets for 3
  federal regions helped to drive actions at
  relevant level of governance and led to
  significant improvements
• Scandinavian countries Sub-targets were
  established with the help of economic criteria
  and closely monitored
• Germany No national target, but comprehensive
  approach at local administrative level bringing
  fruits in long-term
• Netherlands, UK Targets in terms of number of
  Police controls

33
European perspectives

• Road Safety Action Plan 2011-2020 under
  preparation
• Most likely -40 road fatality reduction target
  and separate target for road injuries
• Most likely separate targets for particular
  road-user groups
• Benchmarking and data driven policy-making on the
  rise
• More accountability and professionalism...

34
Special thanks to the following websites
Commission transport website (road, care, driving
licence)http//europa.eu.int/comm/transport/inde
x_en.htmlhttp//ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safet
y http//europa.eu.int/comm/transport/road/index_
en.htmhttp//europa.eu.int/comm/transport/care/in
dex_en.htmhttp//europa.eu.int/comm/transport/hom
e/drivinglicence/ index_en.htm www.baleset-megelo
zes.euwww.etsc.euwww.kti.huwww.bme.huwww.sze.h
uwww.police.huwww.uhasselt.be
www.kozigbirsag.police.hu Used sources
published papers of ETSC, OECD, EU, EC
(2000-2011)
35
Thank you for your attention!