ATCAT C

AUSTRALIAN
TRANSPORT COUNCIL

National Road Safety Strategy
2011–2020

Foreword
On average four people die and 90 people are seriously injured on
Australian roads every day. Most Australians have been personallyaffected by the trauma of a road crash and the cost to the community interms of economic loss and personal suffering is enormous.
While there has been a measureable decrease in death on Australianroads over the past decade, there has been slower national progress in
reducing the number of serious injuries. Any level of serious road trauma is
unacceptable and we must do more.
The National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020 aims to set out a path fornational action on reducing fatal and serious injury crashes on Australianroads. It coincides with the International Decade of Action for Road
Safety.
This strategy is founded on the internationally recognised ‘Safe System’
approach formally endorsed by the OECD. This approach accepts thatpeople using the road network will make mistakes and therefore the wholesystem needs to be more forgiving of those errors. This means there must
be a focus on roads, speeds, vehicles and road user behaviour as well asa range of associated activities, including performance monitoring andreporting.
Through the national consultation process for the development of thisstrategy, feedback from stakeholders and members of the public wasgathered, collated, analysed and used to inform the way forward for the
strategy and associated initiatives. With so many competing priorities
for us all personally, professionally and socially in Australia’s current
environment, we acknowledge the significant time and energy invested
across all consultation sessions and feedback submissions. The volume of
responses received, and the level of interest and passion within them isan indicator of the ongoing commitment in our community to strive toimprove road safety for all road users. A list of groups who contributed
feedback either via consultation sessions or lodging a submission can befound as Appendix 1 at the back of this document.
With this strategy, our governments make commitments and takeresponsibility for critical issues in the system. However, government can
only do so much and we need the support of organisations, industry,businesses, community groups and individuals. With your help we canmove towards eliminating death and serious injury on our roads.

page ii

Foreword

Australian Transport Council
20 May 2011

page iii

Contents

1.

Introduction..................................................................................................................... 3

2.

The Australian Road Safety Journey............................................................................. 5
General progress ............................................................................................................ 7
National Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010.................................................................... 9
What factors have influenced national trends over the past decade?................. 12
What were the important road safety initiatives? . ................................................... 12
What lessons have been learned?.............................................................................. 18

3.

Current Situation........................................................................................................... 23
Size and nature of the problem................................................................................... 23
Key challenges............................................................................................................... 26

4.

The Way Forward ......................................................................................................... 31
Our vision........................................................................................................................ 31
Building a national road safety culture—our strategic objective ........................... 32
Targets............................................................................................................................. 32
Safe System principles................................................................................................... 33
Shared responsibility ..................................................................................................... 34
Corporate responsibility................................................................................................ 35
International collaboration........................................................................................... 36
Interventions................................................................................................................... 37
Making it happen.......................................................................................................... 38

5.

Strategy Interventions.................................................................................................. 41
Presentation of interventions in this strategy............................................................... 41
Developing interventions to address the most important road safety issues......... 42
Tailoring interventions for different areas.................................................................... 44
Safety Performance Indicators.................................................................................... 45

6.

Safe Roads.................................................................................................................... 49
EVIDENCE — what is known.......................................................................................... 51
DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020..................................... 54
FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years.............................................................. 55
FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?.......................................................... 56
How will progress be assessed?.................................................................................... 56

7.

Safe Speeds.................................................................................................................. 59
EVIDENCE — what is known.......................................................................................... 59
DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020..................................... 67
FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years.............................................................. 68
FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?.......................................................... 69
How will progress be assessed?.................................................................................... 69

page v

8

Safe Vehicles................................................................................................................ 73
EVIDENCE — what is known.......................................................................................... 74
DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020..................................... 75
FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years.............................................................. 76
FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?.......................................................... 78
How will progress be assessed?.................................................................................... 78

9.

Safe People . ................................................................................................................ 81
Responsible road use ................................................................................................... 81
EVIDENCE — what is known.......................................................................................... 81
DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020..................................... 84
FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years.............................................................. 85
FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?.......................................................... 86
How will progress be assessed?.................................................................................... 86
Irresponsible road use.................................................................................................... 87
EVIDENCE — what is known.......................................................................................... 87
DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020..................................... 91
FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years.............................................................. 92
FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?.......................................................... 93
How will progress be assessed?.................................................................................... 93

10.

Making It Happen........................................................................................................ 97
Results focus................................................................................................................... 97
Linkages and Synergies................................................................................................. 97
Legislation, regulation and standards....................................................................... 100
Funding and resource allocation............................................................................... 100
Promotion and education.......................................................................................... 101
Accountability . ........................................................................................................... 101
Monitoring and evaluation......................................................................................... 102
Capacity development, research and knowledge transfer.................................. 103
Training and staff development . .............................................................................. 104

Appendix 1............................................................................................................................. 105
References............................................................................................................................. 108

page vi

Definitions

Alcohol interlock: device that prevents a vehicle starting if the operator
has been drinking.
Australian Transport Council (ATC): a national body comprising
Commonwealth, state, territory and New Zealand Ministers with transport
responsibilities.
Austroads: company of Australian and New Zealand road transport andtraffic authorities.
Casualty crash: a road crash in which someone is injured (to any level ofseverity).
Chain of responsibility: legislation that extends the general liability for onroad transport offences to all parties in the supply chain.
Electronic work diaries: used to record a heavy vehicle driver’s work/rest
history.
Fatality (or death): death resulting from, and occurring within 30 daysof, any apparently unpremeditated event reported to police, or otherrelevant authority, attributable to the movement of a road vehicle on a
public road.
Graduated licensing system: a series of conditions and/or restrictions in
the early years of licensing that allows novice motorists to gain experiencein low-risk settings.
National Road Safety Council (NRSC): an advisory body that reports to theAustralian Transport Council on road safety implementation issues.
Point-to-point speed enforcement: continuous automated speed
enforcement system that measures the average speed of vehicles overan extended length of road.
Safe System principles: a road safety approach which holds that people
will continue to make mistakes and that roads, vehicles and speeds should
be designed to reduce the risk of crashes and to protect people in theevent of a crash.

page vii

Tables

Seatbelt reminder or interlock: device that detects the failure of a vehicle
occupant to wear a seatbelt and: provides a conspicuous visual and/or
audible alert (reminder system); or prevents the vehicle from starting or
accelerating (interlock).
Serious injury: injury from a road crash with enough severity to require
hospitalisation.
Serious casualties: people killed or seriously injured in road crashes.
Social cost: total cost of road crashes to society, including estimates offoregone future production, pain and suffering of victims, and services
rendered.
Speed camera enforcement tolerance: the margin between thelegal speed limit and the minimum detected speed that will incur an
infringement.
Tactile line treatments (rumble strips): Road lines that give an audible andtactile sensation to drivers of vehicles passing over them.
Telematics: integrated computing and communication technologies invehicles that enable electronic monitoring, management and regulation.
Willingness-to-pay: an economic method of valuing human life to inform
investment decisions — see further explanation in box on page 50.

page viii

Abbreviations

ABS

Anti-lock Braking Systems

ADRs

Australian Design Rules

ANCAP

Australasian New Car Assessment Program

ATSB

Australian Transport Safety Bureau

BAC

Blood Alcohol Concentration

ESC

Electronic Stability Control

GTRs

Global Technical Regulations

ISO

International Standards Organisation

ISAIntelligent Speed Adaptation

ITSIntelligent Transport Systems

MUARC

Monash University Accident Research Centre

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment

RBT

Random Breath Testing

RIS

Regulation Impact Statement

SPI

Safety Performance Indicator

UNECE

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

USCR

Used Car Safety Ratings

VKT

Vehicle-kilometres travelled

page ix

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page x1. Introduction

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 2

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Introduction

Australia’s first National Road Safety Strategy was established by federal,state and territory transport Ministers in 1992. It provided a framework fornational collaboration on road safety improvement that has evolved
over the last two decades. Our last national strategy, for the period 2001
to 2010, aimed to achieve a 40 per cent reduction in the per capita rateof road deaths. We fell some way short of the target — recording an
actual reduction of 34 per cent — but we strengthened our commitment
to national action on road safety issues and made significant gains inmany areas.
Under the 2001–2010 strategy, Australia was one of the first countries toformally adopt the Safe System approach to road safety improvement.
The Safe System approach takes a holistic view of the road transportsystem and the interactions of its various elements. It aspires to create aroad transport system in which human mistakes do not result in death orserious injury.
This National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020 aims to elevate Australia’sroad safety ambitions through the coming decade and beyond. It is firmly
based on Safe System principles and is framed by the guiding vision thatno person should be killed or seriously injured on Australia’s roads. As astep towards this long-term vision, the strategy presents a 10-year plan
to reduce the annual numbers of both deaths and serious injuries onAustralian roads by at least 30 per cent. These targets will be challenging:
they compare, for example, with a 23 per cent reduction in road deaths
achieved over the last decade1.
The casualty reduction targets for 2020 are ambitious, but achievable.
These targets and the supporting initiatives set out in the strategy werepartly informed by independent analysis and data modelling carriedout by the Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC). The
modelling was designed to estimate the potential reductions in deaths
and serious injuries that could be expected from a range of road safety
interventions.
However, the level of trauma reduction that can actually be achieved by
2020 will depend on the costs and policy changes that the community is
prepared to accept in return for a safer road transport system.
The new strategy sets out a range of high-level directions and priority
actions to drive national road safety performance to the end of 2020. It
also lays the groundwork for longer-term goals and aspirations.

1

Based on a comparison of the actual number of road deaths during calendar year 2010 withthe average annual number of deaths during the period 1998–2000.

page 3

Chapter 11.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Many severe road crashes are preventable and history provides evidence
that the right interventions can make a significant positive impact.
Since 1970, Australia has continuously achieved large and lasting roadsafety gains from road improvements, safer vehicles, lower speed limits,
graduated licensing and a range of successful behavioural programs
targeting drink driving, seatbelt usage and speeding. Independent studies
and other objective evidence have demonstrated the success of eachof these initiatives in reducing road trauma. Despite these achievements,
road crashes still cause some 1,400 deaths and 32,500 serious injuries eachyear. The social impacts are devastating — and the annual cost to theAustralian economy is estimated to be $27 billion [1]2.
The strategy sets out our 10-year directions for a safer road transportsystem, with governments committing to a number of first steps, andidentifying a range of additional steps for further consideration. It focuseson the main areas where there is evidence that sustained, coordinatedeffort can lead to large gains. It also focuses on measures which may not
see results for some time but which will lead to long-term improvement.
In 2014 there will be the first of two reviews of the strategy, including
assessment of the progress we are making in delivering the strategy’s
initiatives.
This National Road Safety Strategy represents the commitment of federal,state and territory governments to an agreed set of national roadsafety goals, objectives and action priorities. It will be supported by acomprehensive performance monitoring and reporting regime.
However, the strategy is not an implementation plan. The detailed planningrequired to give effect to the strategy, including funding, legislative andadministrative arrangements, will require ongoing work by all governments
and their respective transport agencies. Furthermore, the mix of measures
adopted in individual jurisdictions, and the details of specific measures,may vary to reflect local circumstances and priorities.

2

The estimate of $27 billion is based on an economic method of valuing human life known as‘willingness-to-pay’. An alternative method based largely on the ‘human capital approach’
has produced a more conservative estimate of $18 billion. See further explanation of thesemethods in the box on page 50.

page 4

2. The Australian Road
Safety Journey

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 6

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The Australian Road Safety Journey

Chapter 1

2.

General progress

The chart below shows the progressive reduction in fatality numbers overthat period.

Figure 1: Annual number of Australian road deaths
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Note:

Refers to deaths resulting from, and occurring within 30 days of, any apparently
unpremeditated event reported to police, or other relevant authority, attributable tothe movement of a road vehicle on a public road.

Trends in Australian road trauma have been characterised by short periodsof rapid decrease — large downward steps — followed by longer periodsof consolidation and incremental improvement. Evaluation evidence
indicates that many of these gains can be attributed to specific roadsafety interventions, some of which have been big and bold enough(such as the introduction of seatbelt laws and random breath testing) tofundamentally change the road safety landscape.
However, the rate of progress has been slow in recent years. Between 2005
and 2010, the average annual reduction in road fatality numbers was
3.3 per cent. Hospital admissions data also point to little, if any, national

page 7

Chapter 2

Australia has achieved substantial reductions in road crash fatalities overthe last 30 years, despite a 50 per cent growth in population and a twofold increase in registered motor vehicles. Between 1980 and 2010, thenation’s annual road fatality rate declined from 22.3 to 6.1 deaths per
100,000 people.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

improvement in the number of people who were seriously injured in roadcrashes.
Australia ranked 16th out of 27 OECD3 countries in terms of road fatalities
per capita in 2009 (Figure 2). Our population fatality rate now stands
at 6.1 deaths per 100,000 people, while the best performing countries(United Kingdom, Sweden and the Netherlands) have achieved rates
below 4.0 — and some of these countries have set targets to cut theirroad casualty numbers by a further 33 per cent or more over the coming
decade.

Figure 2:

Road fatality rates per 100,000 population among OECD
countries, 2009

15

12

9

6

3

N Sw UK
et e
he de
rla n
nd
Is s
N rae
or l
w
J
Sw a ayitz pa
e n
G rla
er nd
m
a
Fin ny
la
Ic nd
el
a
Ire nd
D la
en nd
m
a
Sp rk
C a
an in
ad
a
A Ita
us ly
tra
Fr liaan
A ceu
Po strrtu ia
Hu g
n al
S g
C lov aryz
N ec enew h ia
Z Re
Lu ea p.
xe lan
m d
bu
rg
U
Po SA
l
G and
re
ec
e

0

These simple statistical comparisons do not recognise the effects ofdifferent social, demographic and geographic circumstances on road
fatality rates. However, there is evidence that Australia’s relative roadsafety performance internationally has slipped in recent times. Figure 3
shows that Australia’s rate of improvement over the last decade waslower than most other OECD countries.

3

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

page 8

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Average annual percentage decrease in road deaths
among OECD countries, 1999-200910

Chapter 2

8

6

4

2

rtu
Fr ga
an l
c
G Sp eer am in
Sw Ja any
So itze pa
ut rla nh n
K d
N Ic oreet e ah la
Lu er ndxe lan
m d
b s
A urg
us
tri
Be It alg alySw iume *Ir de
D ela nen nm d
C Slo arze ve k
ch n
ia
N Rep
o
N rw .
.I a
re y
la
nd

U
Is K
Fin raeG lan lN H ree d
ew u c
n e
Ze ga
al ry
Po and
A la
us nd
tra
C U liaa
Slo na SA
va da
kia *
**

0

Po

Chapter 1

Figure 3:* Refers to the period 1999–2008** Refers to the period 1999–2007

National Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010
In November 2000, Australia’s transport Ministers endorsed the National
Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010. The strategy provided a framework forprioritising the road safety activities of federal, state, territory and local
governments, as well as other organisations that could influence roadsafety outcomes. Its target was to reduce the annual road fatality rateby at least 40 per cent over the 10-year period to the end of 2010: from
9.3 deaths to no more than 5.6 deaths per 100,000 population.

page 9National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Despite significant gains over the decade, the 40 per cent reduction
target was not reached. By the end of 2010 an actual reduction of
34 per cent had been achieved and the fatality rate stood at 6.1 deaths
per 100,000 population — some way short of the 5.6 target (Figure 4).

Figure 4:

Australian road fatality rate per 100,000 population,2000 to 2010

10
Actual reduction to Dec 2010 = 34%98
Dec 2010 rate=6.1

7
NRSS Target
6
Target reduction to Dec 2010 = 40%

5.6

5Dec-00

Dec-01

Dec-02

Dec-03

Dec-04

Dec-05

Note: based on a moving 12-month calculation

page 10Dec-06

Dec-07

Dec-08Dec-09Dec-10National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Ave.
annualchangea
19992010
changeb
Note:

a.
b.

NSW
9.0
9.3
8.0
8.5
8.1
7.6
7.5
7.3
6.3
5.3
6.4
5.8

VIC
8.2
8.6
9.2
8.2
6.7
6.9
6.9
6.6
6.4
5.7
5.3
5.2

QLD
9.0
8.9
8.9
8.7
8.1
8.0
8.3
8.2
8.6
7.6
7.5
5.5

SA
10.1
11.0
10.1
10.1
10.3
9.0
9.5
7.5
7.8
6.2
7.3
7.2

WA
11.8
11.3
8.7
9.3
9.2
9.0
8.1
9.7
11.1
9.4
8.5
8.4

TAS
11.2
9.1
12.9
7.8
8.6
12.0
10.5
11.2
9.1
7.8
12.5
6.1

NT
25.4
26.1
25.3
27.6
26.5
17.3
26.7
21.8
27.0
34.0
13.7
21.3

ACT
6.1
5.7
5.0
3.1
3.4
2.7
7.9
3.9
4.1
4.0
3.4
5.0

Aust
9.3
9.5
8.9
8.7
8.1
7.9
8.0
7.7
7.6
6.7
6.8
6.1

-4.4%

-4.8%

-2.8%

-4.5%

-1.7%

-2.1%

-2.0%

-1.9%

-3.6%

-35.5%-36.5%-38.5%-28.8%-28.7%-45.7%-16.1%-17.6%-34.4%

Annual rates in smaller jurisdictions (Tasmania, Northern Territory and ACT) can change
substantially from year to year because of the relatively low fatality numbers comparedwith larger jurisdictions.
Average annual change is based on the exponential trend for the eleven 12-month
periods from 1999 to 2010.
The 40 per cent reduction target in the NRSS 2001-2010 was based on benchmark datafor 1999.

Australia made significant road safety gains under the 2001–2010
strategy, both statistically and in terms of major policy action. Some of theimportant achievements are outlined in the next section. However, it mustnot be overlooked that more than 15,000 people have lost their lives onAustralian roads in this period, and some 300,000 have been hospitalisedwith serious injuries.
Over the past several decades, Australia has earned an international
reputation as a model country in many areas of road safety intervention.
But the overall performance in recent times has not kept pace with theachievements of other developed countries, and there is a need for amajor shift in thinking by governments and the community.
The time is ripe for a fresh approach — for a new National Road Safety
Strategy that will address the safety deficiencies in the road transportsystem and deliver significant further reductions in trauma levels.
page 11

Chapter 2

Table 1: Road fatality rates per 100,000 population

Chapter 1

As shown in Table 1, the trends have not been uniform across the nation.
Between 1999 and 2010, reductions in fatality rates varied across states
and territories from 16.1 per cent to 45.7 per cent and average reductions
per year ranged from 1.7 to 4.8 per cent.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

What factors have influenced national trends over the past
decade?
• Australia experienced conditions of relatively high economic
growth, partly driven by the minerals booms in Western Australia andQueensland, until the global financial crisis brought a downturn towards
the end of the decade. Periods of increased economic activity anddiscretionary spending are often associated with higher crash rates— and vice versa. While the relationships are indirect, the effects are
typically linked to changes in vehicle usage patterns, including theamount of travel during high-risk times of the day.
• When Australia’s 2010 fatality reduction target was set at the start ofthe last decade, a key consideration was the expected increase in thenumber of vehicles on our roads. The projections at the time anticipatedan increase of 2 per cent per year. However, the annual increase in
vehicle numbers actually jumped to 3 per cent after 2004.
• Another measure of vehicle usage commonly linked to road trauma
trends is the number of vehicle-kilometres travelled (VKT). Over the lastten years, total VKT in Australia increased by about 14 per cent. While
this aggregate growth in road travel was not unusually high comparedwith previous decades, the increase in usage varied markedly acrossstate borders and vehicle categories:»» Western Australia and Queensland recorded VKT increases of morethan 20 per cent»» in the commercial transport sector, heavy truck VKT increased by
20 per cent and light commercial vehicle VKT by 25 per cent»» the growth in motorcycle (and scooter) usage was a very high82 per cent.
• The rapid expansion of motorcycling activity — reflected in both VKTestimates and new motorcycle sales data — was unforeseen at thestart of the decade and contributed to a 17 per cent increase in annual
rider fatalities between 2000 and 2010.

What were the important road safety initiatives?
Australia has a strong record of road safety achievement and we have
led the world with key behavioural measures such as compulsory seatbelt
wearing, random breath testing (RBT), intensive speed camera programs
and, more recently, roadside drug testing. A study by the Bureau ofInfrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) has shownthat the combined effects of seatbelt wearing, RBT and speed camera
programs have been a major influence on road fatality reductions overthe last 40 years [2].

page 12

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• Safety outcomes in higher-risk pedestrian and school areas were
improved through the introduction of 40 km/h and lower limits. For
example, School Speed Zones adopted in Victoria in 2003 resulted in a
23 per cent reduction in casualty crashes and a 24 per cent reduction
in all pedestrian and bicyclist crashes outside schools. [7].
• Enforcement of speed limits was strengthened, particularly in urban
areas, using covert and overt speed cameras and other measures
to address the significant risks associated with low-range speeding.
Evaluation evidence showed substantial safety gains from these
initiatives [see the Victorian case study on page 61].
• There was some strengthening of drink driving measures over the
decade, including adoption of tougher sanctions and the introductionof alcohol interlock programs for repeat or high-range offenders.
However, while drink driving behaviour has been contained to a small
proportion of the driver (and rider) population, it continues to be a major
cause of serious road trauma — and there is evidence that a substantial
proportion of drink drivers have serious alcohol abuse problems. In
recent years there has been increasing focus on interventions targeting
this ‘hard core’ minority of offenders.

page 13

Chapter 2• Early in the decade, a 50 km/h urban default speed limit was introduced.
This was linked to a 20 per cent reduction in casualty crashes, withgreater reductions for crashes involving serious injuries and fatalities;some evaluation studies identified particular benefits for pedestrians
and other vulnerable groups [3,4,5]. Community surveys found thatpublic support for the reduced limit increased after the change [6].

Chapter 1

Between 2001 and 2010, efforts continued to target the entrenchedbehavioural causes of serious road crashes. But there were also significant
improvements in the passive and active safety performance of our vehicle
fleet, and increasing attention was given to some of the more systemic
problem areas in the road transport system.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The chart in Figure 5 below suggests that deaths among alcohol-impaired
drivers may have increased in recent years.

Figure 5:

Percentage of killed vehicle operators over the BAC limit,
2000 to 2008

35

30

25

20
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Note: Percentages are based on cases with known BAC status.

• Three-point seatbelts were mandated for all seats in new passenger car
models and seatbelt and child restraint regulations were strengthened
to ensure that all children, up to the age of seven years, are appropriately
restrained in passenger vehicles. While deaths among unrestrained
occupants declined slightly in absolute numbers over the last decade,this problem continued to account for 26–30 per cent of all occupantfatalities on Australian roads (Figure 6).

page 14

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Percentage of killed vehicle occupants who were not
restrained, 2000 to 2008

Chapter 1

Figure 6:35

Chapter 2

30

25

20
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Note: Percentages are based on cases with known restraint status.

• States and territories progressively strengthened their respective
graduated licensing systems (GLS), with measures including: increased
supervised driving requirements; peer passenger and night driving
restrictions; mobile phone bans; zero blood alcohol concentration
limits; restricted access to high-powered vehicles; and targeted
increases in offence penalties (especially for speeding). While these
GLS components are generally supported by research on the safety
benefits, further investigation is needed to establish the optimal
approach in Australian conditions.

page 15

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The following chart shows annual fatality trends over the last decade(indexed to the year 2000) for young drivers and all drivers. The chart shows
an overall decline in young driver deaths that was broadly in line with thetrend for all drivers. However, there is some evidence of a higher rate of
improvement among 17 to 20 year-olds (the typical ‘P-plate’ years) thanfor 21 to 25 year-olds.

Figure 7:

Driver deaths by age group, 2000 to 2010(indexed: year 2000 = 100)

120
21–25
17–20
All drivers
100

80

60
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

• Most states introduced roadside drug testing programs targeting
driver impairment from commonly used illicit drugs. While the roadsafety impact of these programs requires further assessment, they
have produced relatively high detection rates and helped to increase
community awareness of drug-driving issues.
• Targeted treatment of crash locations continued through federal andstate black spot programs. Evaluation research has estimated that
the National Black Spot Program delivered a 30 per cent reduction
in fatality and casualty crashes at treated sites, with the overall safety
benefits of the program substantially greater than the costs4 [8].
• There was progress in infrastructure safety, with some states implementing
major reviews and remedial programs to improve the safety of high-riskroutes [see the NSW case study on the Pacific Highway on page 54].
• Pedestrian and bicyclist safety was improved through better crossing
facilities, cycleways, reduced speed limits (especially at school zones)
and barriers to protect pedestrians.
4

Estimates of the program benefit-cost ratio ranged from 4.7 to 7.7, depending on the applied
discount rate.

page 16

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Figure 8:

Percentage distribution of star-ratings awarded to ANCAP
tested vehicles

100

80

16

10

13

29

62

60
69

47

40

20

0

62
38

Before 2000

14

40

2000–042008

3 stars or less4 stars

2009–10
5 stars

Note: Percentages based on rated models by year(s) of ANCAP publication.

• Important national fatigue management, compliance andenforcement, and speed reforms were initiated to support thedevelopment of a safer heavy vehicle transport sector.
• Figure 9 below illustrates the fatality trends over the last decade fordifferent road user categories (indexed to the year 2000). Motorcycle
riders stand out as a group that has experienced a clear upward trend
in deaths, though it is important to note that motorcycle usage over thisperiod grew by about 80 per cent. Because the frequency of bicyclist
deaths is relatively low compared with other road user categories, thenumbers tend to fluctuate from year to year.

page 17

Chapter 2• Efforts to promote the benefits of vehicle safety were escalated
through public information campaigns and support for consumer
ratings initiatives such as the Australasian New Car Assessment Program(ANCAP) and the Used Car Safety Rating (UCSR) scheme (Figure 8).

Chapter 1• Standards for Dynamic Side Impact Occupant Protection and Offset
Frontal Impact Occupant Protection were mandated for all new
vehicles.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Figure 9:

Deaths by road user group, 1998 to 2010(indexed: year 2000=100)

150

125

100

75

50

1998

1999

2000

Motorcyclist

2001

2002

Cyclist

2003

2004

2005

Driver2006

2007

Pedestrian

2008

2009

2010

Passenger

What lessons have been learned?
• Road trauma levels are influenced by a vast array of factors. Manyof these — including changing economic conditions, pervasive social
trends and the emergence of new technologies — are difficult topredict and are beyond the direct control of governments and roadsafety organisations. Road safety strategies need to be alert to suchchallenges and flexible in their responses. This requires a commitment
to: continuous environmental scanning; effective data collection,
analysis and performance monitoring, periodic review of long-term
directions and short-term actions; and a willingness to adjust priorities
in response to new information.
• Australia has given a high priority to enforcement and education
measures designed to curb high-risk behaviours. Behavioural programs
targeting driver impairment (alcohol, drugs, fatigue), seatbelt wearing,
speeding and inexperience have produced substantial gains. These
programs still have a crucial strategic role to play in Australian roadsafety — but they must be maintained and refreshed to ensure they
continue to be effective.
• Greater emphasis is now required on non-behavioural means ofimproving the safety of our road transport system. Most importantly, weneed to:»» invest in safer infrastructure, aiming to create a more protective
road environment for motorists and other road users

page 18

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• Speed management has occupied an important place in road safety
thinking for many years. This is not just about speed limit enforcement
and compliance. It is about using all available measures — speed limits,
infrastructure treatments, enforcement and driver assist technologies,
and driver education — to achieve safe traffic speeds across theroad network. As noted in the previous section, Australia made somesignificant road safety gains from speed reduction measures overthe last decade. However, there is ample evidence that much more
could have been — and still can be — achieved in this area. Part ofthe challenge in this regard is to engage more effectively with thecommunity on the role of speed in road safety.
• In Australia’s federal system, individual state and territory governments
have direct responsibility for most areas of road safety regulationand management. There are advantages in this arrangement, notleast being the opportunity for jurisdictions to learn from each otherabout the effectiveness of different initiatives. However, there is scopefor greater national collaboration to determine and implement ‘bestpractice’ approaches in key road safety areas.
• It is known that road trauma rates increase with distance from major
cities. This is due to a number of factors, including higher speed
environments leading to more severe outcomes in the case of a crash,vehicles with lower safety standards, poorer quality infrastructure, andless enforcement activity. There is also some evidence that road trauma
trends over the last decade have varied between metropolitan,
regional and remote areas of Australia, though more work is required
to better understand and respond to the road safety issues affecting
people in different parts of our country.

page 19

Chapter 2»» make greater use of technological aids, including the new andemerging range of intelligent transport systems, as well as theuntapped potential of established technologies that can support
behaviour-change objectives: such as alcohol interlocks, intrusive
seatbelt reminder systems and intelligent speed adaptation
technologies.

Chapter 1»» find ways of accelerating safety improvements in our vehicle fleet,
recognising that new vehicle safety features currently take many
years to reach the majority of Australian motorists

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 20

3. Current Situation

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 22

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Current Situation

Chapter 1

3.

Size and nature of the problem

Major crash types
A large proportion of serious casualties involve three common crash types,
as shown below.

Figure 10: Serious casualties by crash type

Other crash types
30%

Intersection crashes
32%

Head-on crashes
8%Run-off-road crashes
30%

Run-off-road crashes, typically involving a single vehicle, account for
about 30 per cent of all serious casualties (and a higher proportion of
fatalities).
Crashes at intersections are the cause of another one-third of serious
casualties.

5
6

Based on a willingness-to-pay method of valuing human life – see further explanation in thebox on page 50.
The statistics in this Chapter are drawn from several data sources to provide national estimates.
They should be regarded as approximations only.

page 23

Chapter 4

The following analysis of serious casualty (death and serious injury) data6
offers some insight into the nature of Australia’s road trauma problem andthe issues requiring remedial attention.

Chapter 3

Each year, road crashes kill about 1,400 Australians and hospitalise
another 32,500. The total estimated cost to society is $27 billion [1]5 andthe direct human impacts are devastating: in addition to the many lives
cut tragically short, debilitating injuries often result in lifelong pain, griefand suffering among road crash victims, their families and communities.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Heavy vehicle crashes
Heavy trucks and buses make up only three per cent of registered vehicles
but account for about eight per cent of the vehicle-kilometres travelled(VKT) on Australia’s roads. As Table 2 shows, these vehicles are involved ina relatively large proportion of road fatalities.

Table 2:

Deaths and serious injuries involving heavy vehicles

Crashes involving:

Proportion of total
VKT (%)

Proportion of total
deaths (%)

Proportion of total
serious injuries (%)

Articulated trucks

3

11

n.a.

Rigid trucks

4

6

n.a.

Buses

1

2

n.a.

All heavy vehicles

8

18

3

Note:

Serious injury estimates are not available for individual heavy vehicle categories;
percentages for deaths sum to more than the total as some deaths were from crashes
involving more than one type of heavy vehicle.

Road user groups
The following table lists a number of particularly vulnerable or high-riskroad user groups, defined by their mode of transport, demographic profileor licence status.

Table 3:

Deaths and serious injuries among vulnerable road usergroups
Proportion of
total deaths (%)

Proportion of
total serious injuries (%)

Pedestrians

13

9Motorcyclists

16

22

Bicyclists

315Young drivers (17-25 years)

12

10

Older people (65+ years)

16

10Children (0-14 years)

4

10

Indigenous people

53Unlicensed motorists

6

n.a.

Note: categories are not mutually exclusive.

page 24

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Certain behavioural factors continue to be implicated in many serious
casualty crashes. The most significant are identified below.

Chapter 1

Behavioural factors

Table 4: Deaths and serious injuries by main behavioural factor
Proportion of total serious
injuries (%)

Proportion of total deaths (%)
Drink driving

30

9Drug driving

07a

2

20

4

20–30b8

Restraint non-use
Fatigue13

Note: categories are not mutually exclusive.
a.
Estimate excludes fatalities involving both alcohol and other drugs, which are includedin the drink driving estimate.
b.
Estimates of fatigue involvement in serious casualty crashes vary considerably. However,
it is widely recognised as a significant contributing factor.

Geographic distribution of crashes
As indicated in Table 5, crashes are widely dispersed across Australia’s
metropolitan, regional and remote areas. Furthermore, Figure 11 showsthat the incidence of fatal crashes on a population basis is substantiallyhigher in the outer regional and remote parts of the country. The issues indifferent areas can vary considerably, even though there are substantial
underlying similarities. What is materially important in one area may not
be as important in another.

Table 5:Major cities

Distribution of fatal road crashes by remoteness area,
2002–06
NSW
(%)

Vic
(%)

Qld
(%)

SA
(%)

WA
(%)

Tas
(%)

NT
(%)

ACT
(%)

Aust
(%)

35

40

29

38

36

0

0

88

34

Inner regional

28

40

33

27

21

37

0

7

30

Outer regional

15

13

23

23

17

50

29

0

18

Remote

1

1

7

5

9

10

23

0

4

Very remote

1

0

4

5

14

1

44

0

4

Unknown

20

6

4

1

3

2

4

5

9

Total

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

page 25

Chapter 4

34

Chapter 3

Speeding

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Figure 11: Road deaths per 100,000 population by remoteness area,
Australia, 2006
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Major cities

Inner regional Outer regional

RemoteVery remote

All areas

Key challenges
The statistics outlined above are far from comprehensive, but they indicate
the complexity of road trauma and the wide range of factors that need tobe considered by road safety organisations. They also point to some of the
major systemic problems on our roads, such as the frequent occurrenceof three basic crash types: run-off-road, intersection and head-on.
Much of Australia’s past road safety effort has focused on countering
illegal behaviours. While the benefits of this have been clear, it is now
understood that a large proportion of casualty crashes result from drivers— or other road users — making mistakes. To achieve substantially greater
gains in the future, much greater emphasis needs to be placed on
initiatives that improve the inherent safety of the road transport system.
Some of the major strategic challenges for Australian road safety are to:• Reduce the number of serious casualty crashes involving the threemajor crash types: single vehicle run-off-road, intersection and headon crashes.
• Reduce the number of crashes involving heavy vehicles.
»» Heavy trucks and buses make up only three per cent of the vehicle
fleet, but are involved in 18 per cent of all road fatalities — about
250 deaths each year.
• Reduce the number of serious casualties among pedestrians andcyclists.

page 26

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020»» Motorcycle riders make up 22 per cent of serious casualties, yet
motorcycle usage accounts for one per cent of vehicle-kilometrestravelled.

Chapter 1• Reduce the number of serious casualty motorcycle crashes.

»» Motorcycling activity has grown rapidly — motorcycle registrations
increased by 56 per cent between 2005 and 2010.
»» Between 2000 and 2010 the number of motorcyclist deaths increased
by 17 per cent.

• Protect young road users, particularly novice drivers.

• Reduce poor road user behaviour and the consequences of such
behaviour, particularly»» drink driving (28 per cent of fatality injured drivers are over the legal
limit)»» failing to wear seatbelts (28 per cent of vehicle occupant fatalities
are unbelted7)»» illegal and inappropriate speed (a major causal factor in 34 per centof deaths).
• Develop interventions that respond to the different needs andcircumstances of urban, regional and remote Australia.
»» The predominant crash types and risk factors vary between thesebroad areas.
»» Fatality rates per population are significantly higher in regional andremote areas.
• Reduce serious casualties on roads controlled by local government.
»» Local roads account for more than 50 per cent of serious casualties
in some states.
• Reduce the incidence of serious casualties within Indigenous
communities and among other disadvantaged people.

7

This is the equivalent to 20% of total road deaths, as presented in Table 4 on page 25.

page 27

Chapter 4»» People aged 17 to 25 years make up 25 per cent of drivers killed
or seriously injured, but represent only 16 per cent of the adult
population.

Chapter 3»» Single vehicle crashes account for 42 per cent of motorcyclist
deaths.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 28

4. The Way Forward

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 30

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The Way Forward

This strategy embraces the Safe System approach to road safety
improvement. It is guided by an ambitious vision for Australian road safety,
backed by challenging but realistic 10-year targets and performanceindicators. Achieving the targets will require a range of strategicinterventions and commitment to a road safety management system thatwill build towards the realisation of this vision.

Chapter 1

4.

Our vision

Australians should not regard death and serious injury as an inevitable
cost of road travel. Crashes will continue to occur on our roads because
humans will always make mistakes no matter how informed and compliant
they are. But we do not have to accept a transport system that allows
people to be killed or severely injured as a consequence.
While we will continue to educate road users and enforce the road rules
to encourage safe behaviours, Safe System principles demand a holistic
approach to the safety of our road system. This means we must manage
the combined effects of the speeds at which we travel, the safety of thevehicles we use, and the level of protection provided by our roads — not
only to minimise the number of crashes, but to ensure that when crashes
do occur they do not result in death or serious injury.
This is a new way of thinking about road safety in Australia. This strategy
marks the start of a journey to build an inherently safe road transportsystem. It reflects a high level of intolerance to road trauma, a focus on
the overall safety performance of our road transport system and attention
to each of the elements that make up the system.
We are not likely to see the elimination of death and serious injury on
Australia’s roads by the year 2020. However, the implementation of actionsin this strategy will lay the foundations for a genuinely safe system of roadtravel — a legacy that will benefit our future generations.
The journey towards our vision will require significant effort to enhance
the quality of our roads, to strengthen regulation and demand for safer
vehicles, to improve road user compliance with traffic laws and to createa safety culture through all levels of our society. We will need to movebeyond current standards and practice, to innovate and find solutions
that build a safe road transport system.
page 31

Chapter 4

No person should be killed or seriously injured on Australia’s roads

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

This strategy describes the steps needed now, and in years to come, toput safety at the very heart of our road transport system.

Building a national road safety culture—our strategic
objective
Road safety is a shared responsibility. Achieving lasting change in roadsafety will require governments, industry and the broader community
to work together. It will also require significant improvements in the way
governments and other organisations manage the safety of our roadtransport system.
This means we all need to change the way we think and act in relation toroad safety. We need to respond directly to our long-term vision by asking
questions such as what would we need to do to prevent serious crashes inthis situation? While our achievements may be modest in the first instance,
the transformation in our approach will lay down the foundations of the
Safe System during the life of this strategy.
Each one of us has a role — whether we are road planners, designers orbuilders, vehicle engineers or fleet operators, policy makers or businessprofessionals, or individual road users going about our everyday activity.
Our collective task is to build a culture where safety is an inherent part ofall decision-making that affects the road system, its operation and its use.
We must strive to implement Safe System solutions that allow for humanerror and provide forgiving environments that prevent serious injury or
death when crashes occur.
It is also recognised that Australia will continue to support developing
countries, which may draw on our successes to improve their own roadsafety performance.

Targets
As a step towards realising Australia’s long-term road safety vision, thestrategy has set the following casualty reduction targets to be achievedby the end of 20208:• to reduce the annual number of road crash fatalities by at least 30 per
cent• to reduce the annual number of serious road crash injuries by at least
30 per cent.

8

Target reductions are relative to the average numbers of fatalities and serious injuries in thebaseline period 2008–2010.

page 32

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

To assist the target-setting process for this strategy, data modelling was
carried out by the Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC).
This work was informed by a review of Australian and overseas researchon the effectiveness of a number of road safety interventions. The main
purpose of the modelling was to estimate the level of serious casualty
reduction that could be achieved during the life of this strategy and toindicate at a very broad level what kind of action would be required tobring this about.
The modelling was only one input into the target setting. The targets set forthis strategy are intended to strike a balance — reflecting the evidence
about what can realistically be achieved in the next ten years, but alsopresenting a significant challenge that will require commitment andinnovation.
Achieving these targets will require a concerted effort to implement
effective road safety measures. A range of proposed initiatives is set out
in Chapters 7 to 10 of this strategy.

Safe System principles
The strategy is based on the Safe System approach to improving roadsafety. Safe System principles require a holistic view of the road transportsystem and the interactions among roads and roadsides, travel speeds,
vehicles and road users. This is an inclusive approach that caters for allgroups using the road system, including drivers, motorcyclists, passengers,
pedestrians, bicyclists, and commercial and heavy vehicle drivers.
Consistent with our long-term road safety vision, it recognises that people
will always make mistakes and may have road crashes — but the systemshould be forgiving and those crashes should not result in death or serious
injury.
page 33

Chapter 4

While the previous strategy set a target for fatalities only, this new strategy
is giving greater attention to the serious injury dimension of the roadtrauma problem. There is currently no reliable national collection ofserious injury crash data, largely because of jurisdictional differences ininjury definitions and reporting arrangements. As a matter of priority, roadtransport agencies will work towards the adoption of nationally consistentroad crash classification definitions and an improved national serious
injury database. This will be essential for effective monitoring of progress
towards the serious injury target.

Chapter 1

Under the previous National Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010, a target was
set to reduce the annual rate of road fatalities per 100,000 population by
40 per cent. This was approximately equivalent to a 30 per cent reductionin the absolute number of fatalities. The actual reduction achieved inabsolute numbers was 23 per cent.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The Safe System approach was adopted in Australia during the period of
the previous national strategy, through the National Road Safety Action
Plans and the strategies of individual states and territories. It is consistent
with the approaches adopted by the safest countries in the world, andis a central theme of the landmark OECD report Towards Zero: Ambitious
road safety targets and the safe system approach, published in 2008 [9].
There are several guiding principles to this approach:
1. People make mistakes. Humans will continue to make mistakes, andthe transport system must accommodate these. The transport systemshould not result in death or serious injury as a consequence of errors
on the roads.
2.

Human physical frailty. There are known physical limits to the amountof force our bodies can take before we are injured.

3.

A ‘forgiving’ road transport system. A Safe System ensures that theforces in collisions do not exceed the limits of human tolerance. Speeds
must be managed so that humans are not exposed to impact forces
beyond their physical tolerance. System designers and operatorsneed to take into account the limits of the human body in designingand maintaining roads, vehicles and speeds.

Shared responsibility
Responsibility for road safety is shared by all.
While individual road users are expected to be responsible for complying
with traffic laws and behaving in a safe manner, it can no longer beassumed that the burden of road safety responsibility simply rests with
the individual road user. Many organisations — the ‘system managers’— have a primary responsibility to provide a safe operating environment
for road users. They include the government and industry organisations
that design, build, maintain and regulate roads and vehicles. These and arange of other parties involved in the performance of the road transportsystem, and the way roads and roadsides are used, all have responsibility
for ensuring that the system is forgiving when people make mistakes.
Road safety responsibilities also extend to various professional groups, aswell as the broader community. For example: health professionals havea role in helping their clients to manage their safety on the roads; andparents contribute significantly to the road safety education of theirchildren — not only through their direct supervision of learner drivers, butalso by modelling their own driving and road user behaviour.

page 34

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Companies and other employers will play a major role in building a roadsafety culture for Australia, particularly in the area of workplace reforms.

Chapter 1

Corporate responsibility

The links between work and road crashes are well established. On
average, company drivers travel more than twice the annual distanceof private car drivers and have about 50 per cent more incidents. Thissuggests fertile ground and great potential rewards from improving roadbehaviour by working closely with organisations and employers.

Corporate action can reduce employee involvement in road crashes
through workplace policies and practices that value and promote roadsafety, encourage safe road user behaviour among employees andcontractors, and provide for the purchase of vehicles with high safety
ratings.
Organisations have legal responsibilities to provide a safe workplace andactively manage for a safety-focussed environment. Specific Australianlegislation designed to ensure organisations meet this primary obligation
can be found in:• The Corporations Act 2001, and• Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004
A number of Australian companies and organisations have already
implemented road safety related policies. Important innovations include:• introducing workplace road safety policies (for example, requiring
strict compliance with the road laws from employee drivers andencouraging a focus on reducing driver distractions by requiring pullingover to answer mobile phone calls• focusing on safety behaviours in recruitment and selection• including road safety requirements and skills in induction programs toembed a safe driving culture• prioritising road safety records in fleet selection and maintenance (forexample, requiring 5-star ANCAP rated vehicles where possible andensuring key safety features are fitted to all new vehicles)• providing ongoing training and education of staff to build road safety
awareness and skills

page 35

Chapter 4

The potential costs of inaction are high. Overall, work-related roadcrashes in Australia account for about half of all occupational fatalities[10] and 15 per cent of national road deaths, and many people are killed
or seriously injured in motor vehicles or as bicyclists or pedestrians getting
to and from work.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

International collaboration
Australia will continue to collaborate in the global effort to improve roadsafety by participating in the work of international forums and bodies
including Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the World Road
Association (PIARC) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment (OECD) to share knowledge and expertise and to learn
from the experiences of other countries.
Our contribution to global road safety improvement will include projects
funded by AusAID, and work carried out by the Commonwealth
Department of Infrastructure and Transport, Austroads, state and territory
government road safety agencies and a number of dedicated roadsafety research institutions.
Australia is making a significant contribution to developing ISO 39001 —the world’s first road traffic safety management standard. The standard,
which is scheduled to be published in 2012, will be a voluntarily-adopted
tool to assist organisations to embed the Safe System approach in theireveryday operations.

Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011–2020
In March 2010 the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted
a resolution proclaiming 2011 to 2020 as the Decade of Action for Road
Safety. The resolution was introduced by the Russian Federation and cosponsored by 100 countries including Australia. The goal of the Decade is
to stabilise and then reduce the forecast level of road deaths worldwide
by 2020 by increasing road safety activities at national, regional andglobal levels.
The resolution invites all member states to set their own national roadtraffic casualty reduction targets for the decade and calls for the
implementation of road safety activities, particularly in the areas ofroad safety management, road infrastructure, vehicle safety, roaduser behaviour, road safety education and post-crash response. These
objectives are supported by the Global Plan for the Decade of Action
for Road Safety 2011–2020 [11], which provides a guiding implementation
framework based on Safe System principles.
Australia’s National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2010 is closely aligned with
the Global Plan — and it forms an important part of our country’s responseto the Decade of Action for Road Safety.

page 36

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Achieving the 10-year casualty reduction targets, and building a platform
for the strategy’s longer-term aspirations, will require a range of specificroad safety actions or interventions. These are grouped under the following
four ‘cornerstone’ areas of the strategy:

Chapter 1

Interventions• Safe roads• Safe speeds• Safe vehicles• Safe people

Under the Safe System approach, the cornerstone interventions listed
in this strategy will provide safety improvements for everyone using orinteracting with the road system: including while walking, cycling, riding
motorcycles or scooters, travelling in cars and other light vehicles, and inheavy vehicles. In some cases additional or specific actions are included
to address a particular at-risk group or risk factor, such as novice drivers, ortravel in remote areas. These may be found in more than one cornerstone
area: for example, specific actions to improve road safety outcomes for
Indigenous people are included in both Safe Roads and Safe People.
The strategy recognises that heavy vehicles are over-represented incrash statistics. A number of national reforms have been introduced overrecent years and the impact of these will take some time to assess. There
are some initiatives in the strategy that are specific to heavy vehicles, butmany of the other actions will also address heavy vehicle safety.
Similarly, interventions spread throughout the document will generate
benefits for bicyclists and pedestrians (including children and older
people), such as infrastructure improvements, initiatives to reduce vehicle
speeds, and actions aimed to minimise driving while impaired. Safealternative transport options are to be encouraged, including the use of
public transport.
The rapid increase in motorcycle use over the past decade has increased
the exposure of riders and the strategy recommends a number ofinterventions in terms of infrastructure treatments, licensing, technology
and speed management that will assist in reducing road trauma for theseroad users.
Separate road safety strategies for different user groups are not necessary,as the Safe System addresses all users. Under the principle of shared
responsibility, specific actions can be developed and implemented atregional or local level by different stakeholders, using the Safe System andthe four cornerstones.
page 37

Chapter 4

The cornerstone areas and interventions are described in detail in
Chapters 5 to 9 of this strategy.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The strategy highlights the influence technology will have in reducing
road trauma. New ways of communicating between vehicles suchas between trucks and trains near level crossings (vehicle to vehiclecommunication) and between vehicles and surrounding infrastructure(vehicle to infrastructure communication) are likely to be introduced
over the next ten years. Technology that assists in speed and fatigue
management already exists and will be enhanced. Vehicle safety will see
significant technological innovation.
The Safe System requires an holistic approach. Although the initiatives
are presented in four separate cornerstones, there are many interactions
between initiatives which contribute to the overall benefits. For example,
safer speeds in urban areas might be achieved through a combination of
infrastructure measures, changes to speed limits, and enforcement, withsignificant benefits, in particular, for vulnerable road users.

Making it happen
The cornerstone interventions must be supported by a series ofmanagement functions focused on achieving results. These are addressedin Chapter 10, which outlines the priorities for:• adopting a results focus for implementation of the strategy• ensuring effective coordination of activity among all key players• ensuring rules are in place to back commitment to road safety• identifying funding and prioritising allocation of resources to safety• promoting a shared responsibility for road safety• monitoring and evaluating road safety progress• investing in research and development, and knowledge transfer• continuing to monitor road safety technology trends and advances
domestically and internationally.

page 38

5. Strategy Interventions

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 40

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Strategy Interventions

Chapter 1

5.

Presentation of interventions in this strategy
As indicated in Chapter 4, this strategy is based on four cornerstone areasof intervention. The next Chapters (6 to 9) describe the interventions
intended for priority implementation, as well as others for further
consideration, for each of these areas. Table 6 describes the strategic
aim of improvements for each cornerstone.

Table 6: Strategic intent in each of the cornerstone areas
Roads and roadsides designed and maintained toreduce the risk of crashes occurring and to lessen
the severity of injury if a crash does occur. Safe
roads prevent unintended use through design andencourage safe behaviour by users.

Safe Speeds

Speed limits complementing the road environment
to manage crash impact forces to within humantolerance; and all road users complying with the
speed limits.

Safe Vehicles

Vehicles which not only lessen the likelihood of a crashand protect occupants, but also simplify the driving
task and protect vulnerable users. Increasingly thiswill involve vehicles that communicate with roads
and other vehicles, while automating protective
systems when crash risk is elevated.

Safe People

Encourage safe, consistent and compliant behaviour
through well-informed and educated road users.
Licensing, education, road rules, enforcement andsanctions are all part of the Safe System.

In Chapters 6 to 9 on each of the four cornerstone areas, the specific aims
and actions to be pursued through this strategy are presented under thefollowing headings:

Directions — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020
This is a broad picture of the major changes expected to take place overthe period of the strategy.

page 41

Chapter 5

Safe Roads

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

First Steps — actions for the first three years
These initiatives represent specific commitments to action in the earlyyears of the strategy.

Future Steps — what else will be considered?
These are some of the possible longer-term initiatives that will be given
further consideration as the strategy progresses. Many of these represent
measures which will require considerable discussion with the community
about how they might be implemented and why they are important. In
the medium-term, some of these may not proceed as initially envisaged.
Inclusion of the more forward looking initiatives will provide a basis for ongoing consultation.
A review of the strategy will be conducted in 2014, with a further review in2017. This will include an assessment of progress in delivering each of theinitiatives listed under First Steps and further consideration to implementing
other proposed initiatives.

Developing interventions to address the most importantroad safety issues
To guide the development of a combination of initiatives which are likely
to help reach the ten-year casualty reduction targets, first the major crashrisk issues were identified (see Chapter 3) and then the types of intervention
most likely to be effective in tackling these issues. These broad areas for
improvement became the focus for developing more detailed measuresin each cornerstone area. They need to:• have considerable potential to yield benefits based on available
evidence, and• not present the community with a potentially unreasonable burden.

page 42National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Table 7:

Chapter 1

Table 7 below shows how actions in each of the four cornerstone areas
address the major crash problems identified in Chapter 3, and the benefits
they can be expected to provide for specific road user groups.

Crash problem areas mapped to thestrategy cornerstone areas

Crash problem areas(See Chapter 3)

Safe Roads

Strategy initiatives
Safe Speeds Safe Vehicles

Safe People

Key to relative
benefits:

some or indirect
benefit only

Chapter 5

Crash typeIntersections
Run-off-road
Head-on
Crashes involving heavy vehicles
Behaviours
Speeding
Fatigue
Distraction
Drug driving
Drink driving
Restraint non-use
Road user groups
Novice drivers
Motorcyclists
Indigenous road users
Pedestrians
Bicyclists
Older road users
Unlicensed motorists
moderate benefit

substantial benefit

Where there is insufficient proof or community support for particularmeasures, establishing demonstration or pilot projects may provide ameans of demonstrating the practical application and benefits of new
initiatives.
Identification, monitoring, and responding to new and emerging crashrisk issues will continue, particularly in geographic sub-areas, or specificroad user/demographic groups, with a high crash risk.

page 43

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Tailoring interventions for different areas
A large proportion of Australia’s fatalities (65 per cent) and serious injuries(59 per cent) occur in regional areas and the fatality rates per population
are significantly higher in both regional and remote areas.
It is important that interventions are developed to respond to the different
needs and circumstances of metropolitan, regional and remote Australia.
It is just as important to acknowledge and respond to the differences
encountered in each jurisdiction. This process must take into account not
only differences in the most common crash types and risk factors, but also
the relative practicality and feasibility of certain interventions for different
areas.
The following table shows how some of the key interventions will have aparticular impact in certain locations.

Table 8:

Key areas of intervention by cornerstone andgeographical location.

Area

Safe roads

Safe speeds

Safe vehicles

Safe road use

All of Australia

All road projects
to comply withSafe Systemprinciples.
Safer roads
programs
targeting key
crash types.

Best practice
speed
enforcement.
Publicinformation
about thecommunity
benefits of lower
travel speeds.
Introductionof risk-based
national speed
limit guidelines.

Improved
vehicle safety
standards.
Increased
uptake of crash
avoidanceand occupant
protection
measures.

Ongoingbehaviourchangeprograms
to meetgeographic
needs.

Metropolitan
areas

Safer roads
programs
targetingintersection androadside crashes
and protecting
vulnerable road
users.

Reducespeed limits atintersections.
More speed
limits of 40 km/h
or lower inpedestrian andcycling areas.

Improvedintersection
crash avoidance
and pedestrian
and bicyclist
protection.

Regional andremote areas

Safer roads
programs
targeting runoff-road andhead-on crashrisk, and safer
intersection
treatments.

Review of speed
limits on higher
crash risk routes.

Focus oncountering runoff-road crashes.

page 44

Improved
access tograduated
licensing for
disadvantaged
groups.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The primary measure of success of this strategy will be the actual reductionin the number of serious casualties on the roads. This measure will be used
to monitor ongoing progress towards the 2020 fatality and serious injury
targets.

Chapter 1

Safety Performance Indicators

As shown in Table 9 below, a range of other high-level outcome indicators
will also be used to track Australia’s road safety performance over the
decade.
Table 9: High-level outcome measures
Number of deaths/serious injuries resulting from road crashes
Number of road crashes resulting in deaths/serious injuries
Number of deaths/serious injuries per 100,000 population
Number of deaths/serious injuries per 100 million vehicle-kilometres travelled
Number of deaths/serious injuries per 10,000 registered vehicles

A number of initial SPIs have been identified and are presented in thefollowing Chapters for each cornerstone, under the heading “How will
progress be assessed?” This initial list is necessarily limited to indicatorsthat can be supported by existing data collections. However, work willcontinue on the development of suitable SPIs and associated datacollection arrangements prior to the strategy review in 2014.

page 45

Chapter 5

In addition, a range of Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs) will beestablished to help assess progress in implementing the specific strategy
interventions. These will be based on measured changes in serious
casualty outcomes relating to key strategic directions, and indicators ofintermediate effects (such as changes in the availability of key vehicle
safety features) relating to particular initiatives.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 46

6. Safe Roads

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 48

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Safe Roads

Safety treatments to the road and roadside have a major influence inpreventing crashes or minimising the consequences of a crash.

Chapter 1

6.

Infrastructure investment
Road safety improvements derive from two broad categories ofinfrastructure investment:• Investment in new road construction and major upgrades, including
highway duplication. This activity is primarily associated with mobility
and economic performance benefits, with safety being an ancillary
benefit. Together with ongoing maintenance work, it accounts for mostof the road funding in Australia.
• Expenditure on safety-focused road works. This includes black spot
remedial programs, but also covers route-based (mass-action)
treatments to improve the risk profile of larger sections of the network.
Such investment is associated with high benefit-cost ratios in generaland high safety returns in particular.

Total national expenditure on specific safety-focused road works is
expected to be $506 million in 2010–119. This includes expenditure on
black spot remedial treatments, as well as more broadly based safetyfocused activities such as route risk assessment and treatment, road safety
audits and treatments applied over large sections of road networks. Whilesafety-targeted spending has increased substantially over recent years,
it still represents only five per cent of the total investment in Australia’sroad infrastructure. There may be scope to adjust the mix of generaland safety-focused road funding to substantially increase road safety
outcomes while still achieving other important transport objectives.
Investment decisions are informed by the estimated value of expectedsafety benefits. However, such estimates are influenced by the particularmethods used to place an economic value on human life. Best practice inthis area favours the use of a valuation method known as the willingness-topay approach, which tends to produce higher estimates than other, more
traditional, methods [see the box below]. There is a need for Australia todevelop and adopt suitable willingness-to-pay estimates at a national level.
9This estimate reflects total Commonwealth, state and territory road funding allocations for
dedicated safety programs, such as black spot treatment programs.

page 49

Chapter 6

Compared with many other countries, Australia has a very large road
network and a relatively small population. This places limits on the levelof expenditure on infrastructure and infrastructure safety per kilometre of
network, and on the proportion of highways that are likely to ever be
converted to dual carriageway. It is therefore important to maximise thesafety benefit of the overall investment in the nation’s road infrastructure.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Valuation of life for economic purposes — alternative estimation methods
Australian approaches to estimating the economic benefits of safety measures
have conventionally been based on the human capital method of valuing
human life. This technique treats an individual as a productive entity. Itsapplication to transport safety involves estimating the victim’s earning stream
from the time of their premature death to the end of their actuarially expected
lifetime.
The willingness-to-pay approach is an alternative method that relies on
individual preferences for reducing risk to life. Estimates are based on theamounts that individuals are prepared to pay for reduced risk (or to accept incompensation for bearing risk). For a particular type of risk, a value for society
is generally calculated by aggregating and averaging values obtained from a
representative sample of individuals.
While the willingness-to-pay approach is widely regarded as superior [1],the techniques for determining willingness-to-pay values vary and are quite
complex. Willingness-to-pay estimates are used in some areas of transport safetyvaluation; however, there is growing acceptance that this practice should be
adopted more widely and more consistently in Australia. When it comes tomaking investment decisions, particularly on road infrastructure projects, thiswould be expected to increase the economic justification for projects with asubstantial safety component.

Road function and vehicle speeds
The function of a road needs to be taken into account in designing
the road and applying infrastructure treatments. Different roads havedifferent functions and should be designed and modified so they are‘self-explaining’ to road users. Motorways and highways are high speed
environments while residential streets operate in a completely different
speed environment. Infrastructure treatments can assist in making it
obvious how the function of the road changes. For example, vulnerable
road users such as cyclists can be assisted by implementing trafficcalming measures on roads to slow cars down. On higher speed roads,
separation of cyclists from motorised vehicles is desirable. Cycle lanes
are one option but physical separation is more effective and likely to
encourage greater cycling activity. Likewise, in residential streets wherelimited vehicle access is needed, pedestrians benefit from lower travel
speeds through physical treatments and/or lower speed limits. Pedestriancrossings help concentrate pedestrian movements but they need to allow
clear vision, and illegal parking near a crossing or intersection can limit thisdramatically.

page 50

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The Safe System approach requires a holistic view of the road transportsystem. There are opportunities to improve overall safety, and in some cases
avoid the need for expensive remedial treatments, by considering theroad safety implications of land use planning decisions. This could ensure,for example, that strip shopping centres on major roads incorporate safe
access facilities for all road users, and that high speed roads are not builtwith uncontrolled access points.

Chapter 1

Land use planning

EVIDENCE — what is known• The majority of serious road casualties result from the following crashtypes: intersection crashes (about 32 per cent); run-off-road crashes(about 30 per cent); head-on crashes (about 8 per cent).
• There are many uncontrolled accesses to the arterial high-speed
network per kilometre.
• A low proportion of the network is fitted with median barriers to separate
opposing flows and side barrier protection.
• There are many high-speed intersections in rural areas and limited useof roundabouts and raised platforms at intersections.

• There is limited use of tactile line treatments (rumble strips) on road
medians and edges.
• Many roads have insufficient clear zones, which can be treated withincreased clear zones, sealed shoulders and/or appropriate barriers.
• Roads in Indigenous communities are generally not included ingovernment road construction and maintenance programs. Many ofthese roads are of a very poor standard, which is one of the contributors
to the higher rates of road trauma for Indigenous people.
These factors indicate that there is a substantial ongoing opportunity fortargeted improvement of infrastructure safety. Many of the treatments
are relatively low cost but collectively will require considerable funding.
Infrastructure improvements can have a major effect on reducing crashes.
In many cases these interventions are relatively low cost and can provide
community benefit worth many times the cost. Examples of treatments
known to provide significant casualty crash reduction benefits on highspeed rural roads are: installation of a roundabout (70 per cent), sealing
shoulders (30 per cent), adding a right turn lane at an intersection (32per cent), edge lining on the shoulder of the road (24 per cent), andinstallation of barrier systems (90 per cent of serious casualties involving
errant vehicles) [12].
page 51

Chapter 6• There are many narrow traffic lanes and unsealed and narrow shoulders
on many routes.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Substantial reductions in casualty crashes can also be achieved bylowering speed limits on the approaches to intersections, with or without
supporting infrastructure treatments [13].
Run-off-road crashes can be avoided or reduced in severity through:• Infrastructure treatments including safety barriers, tactile edgelines,
shoulder sealing, and removal/relocation of roadside hazards and objects.

• Setting speed limits according to the safety standards of roads androadsides.

• Effective management and clear accountability for removal and trimmingof vegetation in order to maintain the safety and efficiency of the road.

Head-on crashes can be the result of poor overtaking decisions but more often
come from drivers straying over the centre line due to inattention, fatigue,
or losing control of the vehicle for some other reason. This is particularly aproblem on higher-speed rural roads. A variety of proven treatments can beundertaken on standard two-lane or one-lane undivided roads to create moresecure separation:• This can be achieved with the addition of wirerope barriers in the median and on the side of theroad (see photo to right), with some provision of
overtaking opportunities.

• Median wire rope barriers can also be used toconvert single lane roads with wide shoulders to‘2+1 roads’ (an approach employed in Sweden),with two lanes in one direction and one lane in
the other, alternating every few kilometres.

• Median wire rope with clear zones either side also has the potential to yield
dramatic improvement. A recent study of this type of treatment on the
Pacific Highway in NSW indicates that the number and severity of crashes
have been substantially reduced along the treated sections of the highway[14].

• Separation of opposing traffic on rural roads
through wider (one metre) medians (see phototo right) has also been shown to reduce casualty
crashes [14].
All of these options are considerably less expensive
than dual carriageway and can deliver significant
safety benefits.

page 52

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• Roundabouts — the most effective safety treatment at intersections

Chapter 1

Intersection crashes can be reduced through:because they require motorists to significantly reduce their speed whenapproaching and travelling through an intersection.

• Platforms — raised pavement through an intersection to slow traffic, usuallyin urban areas.

• Traffic separation — can improve safety at intersections by creating a better
separation between traffic turning and travelling through the intersection.
Improvements can include better lane marking, traffic islands and separate
lanes (but still under signal control) for left and right turning vehicles; as well
as separation of vulnerable road users where possible in higher traffic areas.

• Rumble strips — can be installed at certain locations which will alert motoriststhat they are approaching intersections and rail level crossings.

• Reducing the speed limit on the approach to the intersection.
• Appropriate and safe amenity for pedestrians.

Road infrastructure has a life of 25 or more years, so the investment madetoday will not only save lives over the next 10 years, but will continue tosave lives and avoid serious injuries well beyond the life of this strategy.
Up to 50 per cent of serious casualty crashes occur on roads controlled
by local governments. Local governments will need support to apply
the Safe System approach and to find and apply cost-effective andinnovative solutions.

page 53

Chapter 6

Although black spot programs do a good job of fixing problems in specificlocations with poor crash records, the majority of crash sites are widelydispersed across the road network. A broader, more strategic (and moreresource intensive) approach to improving the safety of the road network
can be achieved by treating high-risk sections. These include lengths ofroad that have a history of serious casualty crashes (black links) or thathave been identified as high-risk through a safety review process. The aim
is to progressively make the overall network safer over time through thestrategic application of effective treatments.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Case study — road safety review of the Pacific Highway10
A comprehensive, multi-disciplinary road safety
review was undertaken for the Pacific Highway in
NSW from Hexham to the Queensland border. The
review focused on identifying measures able toprotect motorists from the consequences of error.
It involved inspections of the entire length of the
highway, analysis of all fatal crash locations for thelast five years, and detailed crash data analysis.
Based on this review, a program of engineering
works was developed, and the implementation of these works resulted in theannual number of fatalities being reduced from 55 to 25 and injuries being
reduced from 617 to 483 (between 2003 and 2006). The benefit-cost ratios forthe works were estimated to be over 10.
A similar review and resulting works on the Princes Highway also resulted indramatic reductions in annual fatalities from 25 to 4, and injuries from 324 to
294 (between 2004 and 2006).

DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020
• Adoption of improved standards for road design, construction andoperation to reflect Safe System principles11.
• All new roads and upgrades of existing roads will be designed, built
and operated in accordance with Safe System principles.
• A substantial reduction in serious casualties due to run-off-road, headon and intersection crashes.
• All levels of government to:» have assessed risk on their road network and re-focused roadinvestment programs to treat higher-risk sections of the road network(road segments, traffic routes and defined areas) in addition to moretargeted black spot programs» have adopted and applied the willingness-to-pay methodology12 tovalue reductions in fatalities and injuries (as discussed on page 50)» be assessing the benefits and costs of safety treatments using awhole-of-life assessment» have accepted accountability and responsibility for the road safety
performance of their networks in accordance with Safe Systemprinciples.
10 Supplied by the Roads and Traffic Authority, NSW.
11 Guidelines being developed by Austroads.
12 Willingness-to-pay is an economic method of valuing human life to inform investment
decisions – see further explanation in box on page 50.

page 54

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

1.

Road authorities at all government levels will ensure that Safe Systemprinciples are applied to all new road projects, including roadupgrades.

2.

Modify infrastructure funding guidelines and agreements to increase
the safety benefits resulting from expenditure on roads.

3.

Target infrastructure treatments to:5.

Ensure that roads in and around Indigenous communities areincluded in infrastructure treatment programs.

6.

Complete Austroads risk-based assessment model; and thensystematically assess risk levels for highest volume roads and prioritiseroad sections for safety improvement.

7.

Implement and evaluate Safe System demonstration projects inspecific local government areas and Indigenous communities.

page 55

Chapter 6

4.

a. Address run-off-road and head-on casualty crashes. Road
sections prioritised according to crash history will be treated with
infrastructure treatments such as protective barriers (for example,
wire rope), and/or reduced speed limits.
b. Address serious casualty crashes at intersections. Sites prioritised
according to crash history will be treated with infrastructure
treatments and/or speed reduction measures.
c. Address safety issues for vulnerable road users, for example:
safety improvements on popular motorcycle routes; infrastructure
improvements for bicyclists, older road users, people accessing
public transport and pedestrians.
d. Address safety on key arterial routes, prioritised by crash history.
Route safety reviews to be undertaken and findings implemented.
Develop a nationally agreed approach to applying the willingnessto-pay methodology to value safety.

Chapter 1

FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?
• Implementing innovative infrastructure safety treatments where
feasible and cost-effective, including 2+113 schemes and new types ofsafety barriers on major highways.
• Working with local governments to develop and deliver infrastructure
improvement strategies that include cost-effective safety treatments(for example, flexible barriers, roundabouts, shoulder sealing, rumble
strips).
• Implementing infrastructure measures to physically separate bicyclists
and motor vehicles on higher-speed roads with significant bicycle
usage.
• Introducing motorcycle black spot/black length programs in all
jurisdictions, potentially funded by a levy on compulsory third-party
injury insurance for motorcyclists (as Victoria has done).
• Improving land use planning to reflect Safe System principles, including
greater control of roadside development for safety.

How will progress be assessed?
Ongoing• Number of deaths from head-on crashes• Number of deaths from single-vehicle crashes• Number of deaths from intersection crashes• Number of deaths from crashes occurring on:» metropolitan roads» regional roads» remote roads

By 2014• Report on delivery of action items 1 to 7.

13 2+1 roads are created using wire-rope barriers to create two lanes in one direction and onelane in the other, alternating every few kilometres.

page 56

7. Safe Speeds

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 58

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Safe Speeds

Speed is highly implicated in a large proportion of serious casualty crashes.
As well as having a direct causal role in many instances, speed contributes
significantly to the severity of most crashes. Measures addressing vehicle
speed can mitigate the severity of crashes regardless of the underlying
reasons for the crash. The speed problem is partly a behavioural issue,
with motorists frequently choosing to travel at illegal or inappropriate
speeds. However, speed limits across the network should be aligned withSafe System principles.

Chapter 1

7.

EVIDENCE — what is known
Crash risk evidence
The likelihood of being involved in a serious casualty crash rises significantlywith even minor changes in travelling speed. For example, Australian
research has shown that the risk of a serious casualty crash doubles withjust a 5 km/h speed increase on 60 km/h urban roads or with a 10 km/h
increase on rural highways [15, 16].

Figure 12: Relationship between change in mean speed and crashes
50%% change in casualties

40%
30%

DeathsSerious Injuries
Other Injuries

20%
10%

0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
-50%
-10%

-8%

-6%

-4%

-2%

0%

2%

4%

% change in speed

6%

8%

10%

page 59

Chapter 7

Internationally accepted research by Nilsson [17] has established aclear relationship between changes in average traffic speed and crashoutcomes. As shown in Figure 12 below, the Nilsson model shows a
5 per cent speed increase leads to around a 15 per cent increase inserious injury crashes and a 22 per cent increase in fatal crashes. Similarly,
for a 5 per cent decrease in mean speed, there are typically about
15 per cent fewer serious injury crashes and 20 per cent fewer fatal crashes.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Recent analysis in Western Australia has shown that if every road user inthat state slowed down by 1 km/h for a year they would contribute to
a community benefit of ten fewer people killed (5% of fatalities in 2009)
and about 90 people from going to hospital (3.5% of people who wereseriously injured in 2009).

Survivability of crashes
The chances of surviving a crash decrease rapidly above certain impact
speeds, depending on the nature of the collision [18]:• car/pedestrian: 30 km/h
• car/motorcyclist 30 km/h
• car/tree or pole: 40 km/h
• car/car (side-impact): 50 km/h
• car/car (head-on): 70 km/h.

Figure 13: Survivable impact speeds for different crash scenarios

Impactcar/pedestrianType of collision

car/motorcyclist

car/tree or polecar/car (side impact)

car/car (head-on)
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Impact speed (km/h)
Note:

The range of impact speeds shown for each crash type are considered to be survivablein most cases.

ComplianceNon-compliance with speed limits contributes directly to a large proportionof serious casualty crashes. Crash statistics conservatively identify speeding
as a major causal factor in around 30 per cent of fatal crashes.

page 60

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

While site-based speed cameras can be a very cost-effective way of
reducing serious casualties at high-risk locations, large reductions inserious casualties can be achieved from enforcement programs aimed
at improving speed compliance more broadly across the network (asshown in the case study below).

Chapter 1

Speeds up to 15km/h over the speed limit contribute to a large proportionof serious casualties: speeding in this range is not as risky as higher-level
speeding, but it is far more common.

There is evidence that motorcycles are over-represented in speed-related
crashes and that current enforcement approaches as not as effective indeterring motorcycle speeding.

A speed enforcement case study
In 2000, Victoria had a relatively intensive enforcement program, including
covert speed cameras, backed by an extensive speed-related public
information program. Starting in December 2000, Victoria progressively
introduced a package of measures to improve speed compliance, including:increasing speed camera operating hours by about 50 per centmaking enforcement more covert and unpredictable
increasing the number of enforcement sites in use
lowering the speed camera enforcement tolerance
reducing the thresholds for penalties applying to different levels of speeding
offence• increasing the amount of speed-related advertising.
A comprehensive statistical evaluation of the impact of this package foundthat by the latter half of 2004 it had resulted in a 10 per cent reduction in allcasualty crashes (involving death or injury) and a 27 per cent reduction in fatal
crashes [19].

page 61

Chapter 7

•
•
•
•
•

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Point-to-point speed enforcement
Point to point speed camera technology allows continuous automated speed
enforcement to be applied over an extended length of road. While fixed speed
cameras are an effective mechanism for dealing with a specific location withknown crash history14, point-to-point cameras extend this over a much longer
length of road and hence have a greater influence on drivers. Instead ofchecking the spot speed of vehicles at a fixed point on the road, the cameras
measure the average speed of vehicles over a substantial distance. In this way,point-to-point enforcement targets sustained speeding behaviour and can be
more acceptable to the public than single-camera enforcement [20, 21].
Point-to-point systems are used widely in Europe including in the UK (20 fixedsystems and 20 temporary systems at road works), Italy (44 systems), Austria (2fixed and 2 mobile systems) and the Netherlands (16 systems). Other European
countries are trialling point-to-point systems.
Evaluations have demonstrated that point-to-point enforcement reduces
speeding, resulting in a low infringement rate and significant reductions indeaths and serious injuries. In the UK, reductions in the number of people killed
or seriously injured typically exceed 50 per cent. In Northamptonshire, fatal andserious injuries reduced by 78 per cent in the first five years of operation on the
A43 and by 85 per cent in the first four years of operation on the A428.
Point-to-point enforcement has a high level of public support. It has been
described as fairer than spot speed enforcement because speeding is detected
over a greater distance, demonstrating the behaviour was intentional and not
due to a momentary lapse of concentration. [20, 21, 22]Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA) systems are vehicle-based devices
incorporating digital speed limit maps and satellite navigation technology.
They have proven effectiveness in improving driver compliance withposted speed limits by warning drivers when they are speeding or (inmore interventionist approaches) by physically limiting the speed of thevehicle. Evaluation studies have found substantial crash reduction benefits
for the speed limiting systems. Implementation approaches could include
voluntary driver assist systems for the general community, speed limiting
systems for fleet operations, and/or mandatory ISA systems for high-risk
groups (such as repeat speeding offenders). 14

14 An independent evaluation of 28 fixed speed cameras in New South Wales revealed a
71 per cent reduction in speeding, resulting in a 90 per cent reduction in fatalities and a
20 per cent reduction in casualty crashes at the treated locations.[2].

page 62

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

More work needs to be done at a national level to enable the uptake of
this technology, such as developing and maintaining updateable digitalspeed limit maps across all networks and jurisdictions, and investigating
options to encourage and/or require uptake by vehicle manufacturers.

Speed limits
Australia has relatively high speed limits across much its road network
compared with the speed limits on similar roads in most OECD countries.
The majority of regional roads in Australia are single-carriageways where
the default speed limit applies (100 km/h in most jurisdictions). These roads
have been found to consistently have much higher fatal crash rates thanother road stereotypes [24].
As suggested by the images below, the safety standard of Australia’s
regional roads varies considerably and some may not be of an appropriate
standard for their current speed limit. Identifying and applying suitablespeed limits are necessary measures to improve safety. Alternatively, forhigher volume routes, infrastructure safety investment will be needed tomaintain speeds.

Chapter 7

page 63

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Crash risk and speed limits
The speed limit in each of these photographs is 100km/h. With the exception of
the divided road (first image), the crash rates on each of these road types arehigher than the average rate for regional arterial roads in that state.

The 100 km/h limits above all meet the current speed limit setting criteria. Yet theconsequences of driver error leading to a head-on, run-off-road or intersection(driveway access) crash in the situations shown above are highly likely to befatal.

Despite the legacy effect of these inconsistent crash risk situations,actual or perceived community pressure makes it very difficult for roads
authorities to address these issues in a systematic manner. The community
is entitled to expect that speed limit setting criteria would result in a levelof crash risk that is reasonably consistent and not above average for thatcategory of road.
Many lives could be saved if appropriate speed limits could be appliedon higher crash rate roads. The decisions on speed limits are a matter forroad authorities. Opportunities to review speed limits and apply changes
would reduce crash risk and improve safety.
page 64

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

There is a large body of Australian and overseas evaluation evidence toshow that significant casualty reductions flow from reductions in speed
limits.

Speed limits case studies
Victoria
Speed limits were increased on a number of Victorian regional highways in1987 from 100 km/h to 110 km/h. This resulted in a 20 per cent annual increasein casualty crashes on those roads.
Two years later, the speed limits were returned to 100 km/h, leading to a
20 per cent annual reduction in casualty crashes [25].
South Australia
In July 2003, the speed limit was reduced from 110 km/h to 100 km/h on about
1,100 kilometres of regional arterial roads in South Australia. These were typicalarterial roads with typical traffic volumes.
The casualty crashes on these roads in the two years before and after thechange were compared with crashes on 8,600 kilometres of road sections
where the speed limit remained at 110 km/h. The evaluation study concluded
that a 20 per cent reduction in casualty crashes on the affected roads could
be attributed to the lowered speed limit [26].

In early 2000, the speed limit on a 40 kilometre length of the Great Western
Highway between Bathurst and Lithgow was reduced from 110 km/h to
100 km/h. This part of the Great Western Highway is a typical undivided regional
highway and provides an important freight function though central west NSW.
The road passes through undulating countryside with adjacent farms, forestsand bushland. There was substantial community concern raised at the time;
however, it was demonstrated that increases to travel time were minimal andthat the lower speed limit would create a safer travel environment for all road
users. A comparison based on before and after the speed limit was loweredshows there has been a 26 per cent reduction in casualty crashes.

There is potential to obtain major national benefits by systematicallyreviewing crash rates and travel speeds, leading to either infrastructure
improvements (as detailed in Section 5) and/or speed limit reductions onhigher-risk roads.
15 Supplied by the Roads and Traffic Authority, NSW.

page 65

Chapter 7

New South Wales15

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Speed limit reviews and targeted infrastructure safety investment: twocomplementary and alternative means to reduce crash risk
Effective management of the road transport system aims to deliver timely, safe
and convenient travel. The preferred way of reducing crash risk on the moredangerous parts of the road network is therefore to invest in safety upgradesof the infrastructure. However, given the finite availability of road improvement
funds, road authorities need to consider speed limit reductions as an alternativemeans of reducing crash risk. One of the challenges then, is to determine when
to invest in road improvement and when to lower speed limits.
An analysis of road crash data in Victoria suggests that for the higher speed
parts of the network (greater than 80 km/h), infrastructure solutions to crashrisk are particularly cost-effective on roads with higher traffic volumes (greaterthan 4,000 vehicles per day). Conversely, speed limit solutions may be morecost-effective on roads carrying less than 2,000 vehicles per day.
The notion of reducing speed limits where travel times are little affected, andimproving the road and roadside infrastructure to allow high travel speeds onimportant commuter roads and roads of national significance, is a balancedmeans to improve overall safety. Such an approach indicates how speed limitchanges can be managed in a considered manner, while recognising thefunctional requirements for a viable and effective transport system.

Community acceptanceThe community generally recognises that speed is an essentialconsideration of any road safety strategy but there is reluctance by someto accept lower speed limits. Pedestrians and bicyclists strongly support
lower speed limits because they make sharing the roads safer and lessstressful and improve public amenity in urban areas.
There are mixed reactions to proposals for general reductions in speed
limits on metropolitan, regional and remote roads. Although evidence
concludes travel times are only increased by seconds on typical urban
journeys and less than five minutes for every hour on open road trips, thecommunity is concerned that speed limit reductions would increase travel
times and could affect mobility.
The community has an expectationthat travel speeds will be as high as
possible, while providing for safe
travel. National surveys over the
decade to 2004 show a gradualincrease in public understanding ofspeed-related risk and public support
for progressive speed management
measures [27]. However, there has
been little further change in recent
years, and the views of those opposed
page 66

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

to stricter speed management continue to have considerable influencein Australia. Achieving further substantial change in this area will requireongoing public engagement to build sufficient acceptance of new
initiatives. This will include:• an ongoing dialogue with motoring organisations and other key
stakeholder groups• a focus on improving community understanding of the importance of
speed limit compliance, including an appreciation of the social costs
associated with ‘low-level’ speed offences: while the risk for individuals
may be relatively small, the aggregate contribution to road trauma islarge• a national community dialogue explaining the safety rationale forspeed management actions and the complementary environmental
and economic benefits relating to reduced emissions, fuel consumption
and noise.

DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020
• Speed limits that reflect a better balance between safety and mobility
objectives.
• A substantial improvement in overall compliance with speed limits,
particularly on highly trafficked and/or higher-risk sections of the road
network.

page 67

Chapter 7• Network-wide alignment of speed limits with the inherent risk andfunction of the road and roadside environment.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years
8.

9.

Improve compliance with speed limits across the road network:
a. Adopt best practice enforcement, including a combination of
on-road policing and speed camera technologies, with a mix ofcovert and overt strategies.
b. Install where appropriate point-to-point cameras to improve
speed compliance among all vehicles.
c. Examine options for improved enforcement of motorcycle
speeding.
Improve the use of sanctions to more effectively deter people fromspeeding.

10. Develop a national public information campaign about thecommunity safety benefits of complying with speed limits. This
will provide education resources suitable for use by government
agencies, local governments and community forums.
11. Review speed limits where risk levels are high and engineering solutions
are not feasible or cost-effective:
a. Set safe speed limits on road lengths that are narrow, havesubstantial levels of roadside hazards, have many intersections
or property entrances, are winding or undulating, or have higher
than average serious casualty crash rates.
b. Reduce speed limits at high-risk intersections, especially on highvolume outer urban arterials.
c. Work with local governments to expand the number and scopeof projects that implement safe speed limits in areas of highpedestrian and cycling activity.
12. Develop new risk-based national speed limit guidelines for different
road categories/functions. Guidelines should encourage consistent
limits based on measured risk/crash rates, while minimising multiple
speed zones over short distances.
13. Facilitate the implementation of Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA)systems:a. Encourage the development of digital speed limit maps.
b. Examine the scope to require advisory ISA in all government fleets;and mandatory speed limiting ISA and/or other technologies forrecidivist speeders and P-plate drivers.
c. Initiate discussion with insurers to encourage voluntary fitting of ISA
and recorders through lower insurance premiums, especially foryoung drivers.
14. Increase the effective application of chain of responsibility legislation toprosecute heavy vehicle speeding (including speed limiter) offences,and harmonise legislation to assist cross-border enforcement.

page 68

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• Investigating the case for promoting or mandating speedometer
displays which place more emphasis on the range of Australia’s legallypermissible speeds, and limit the display of higher speeds.

Chapter 1

FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?

• Promoting or mandating speed governing and ISA in a broader range
of vehicles.
• Developing telematics as a regulatory tool for heavy vehicle speeding.
• Improving the effectiveness of registration sanctions for heavy vehicles
that have non-operational speed limiters.
• Working with toll road operators to implement point-to-point speed
enforcement on motorways.

How will progress be assessed?
Ongoing• Number of deaths from crashes where vehicle speed was acontributory factor

By 2014. • Report on delivery of action items 8 to 14

Chapter 7

page 69National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 70

8. Safe Vehicles

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 72

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Safe Vehicles

Improvements in vehicle safety have contributed significantly to roadtrauma reduction. These improvements reflect steady advances in
automotive safety design, including occupant protection performance,
braking, handling and lighting and the inclusion of life saving safety
features such as seatbelts and airbags.

Chapter 1

8

The Australian vehicle fleet has an average age of around 10 years, so
new vehicle safety features can take several years to permeate throughthe fleet. Improvements in occupant protection such as crumple zones
and airbags, as a result of regulation introduced in the late 1990s andearly 2000s, will continue to produce benefits throughout the period
2011–20. Mandatory electronic stability control (ESC) — which helps drivers
avoid crashes — for light passenger vehicles, and front underrun protection
for heavy vehicles from 2011, will have considerable effect over the next
10 years. Measures in this strategy will therefore be important in improving
vehicle safety in 2011–20, but even more for the period beyond.
New options based on advances in computing and sensor technologies
have paved the way for new primary safety systems such as lane departure
warning devices, collision avoidance warning and other advanced
braking and driver management systems. There are also a number ofvehicle safety technologies currently available or under developmentwith the potential to target illegal driving behaviours, including Intelligent
Speed Adaptation (ISA), alcohol interlocks, and seatbelt reminders andinterlocks.

Where the approach to be adopted involves regulation, standards for
new vehicles in Australia are set in the Australian Design Rules (ADRs)
by the Commonwealth, in consultation with the states and territories,
industry and the community. There are over 50 ADRs relating to vehicle
safety. They are generally harmonised with United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UNECE) vehicle regulations and Global TechnicalRegulations (GTRs), which are the peak international standards, because
over 85 per cent of vehicles are imported into Australia and Australia
constitutes only one per cent of the global vehicle market. There are also
some local ADRs such as the Full Frontal Occupant Protection ADR.

page 73

Chapter 8

Continued progress will be achieved through a combination of
manufacturers’ evolving designs, consumer information programs andother non-regulatory means, such as fleet purchasing policies and industry
codes of practice, as well as mandated standards. Initiatives adopted
need to be as responsive as possible to advances in vehicle safety design
and technology while distinguishing these from the ever-increasing rangeof features being promoted by manufacturers.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

All standard setting must be justified by a Regulation Impact Statement(RIS) through which industry and the community are consulted about
how the intended standard will impact and at what cost. Maintaining
harmonisation with the active program of international standards
development will provide the greatest safety benefit at the least cost,ensuring that new vehicles remain as affordable as possible.
In-service regulatory standards
for vehicles are set by thestates and territories, which
generally require continuing
conformance with relevant
ADRs.
Among consumer information
programs, the Australasian
New Car Assessment Program(ANCAP) provides star ratingsfor vehicles — up to five stars— based on crash testing andinclusion of safety features.
ANCAP continually reviews the criteria required for a vehicle to have afive-star rating. For example, in 2008, ESC was added to requirements fora five-star rating prior to agreement on an international vehicle regulation
on ESC and mandating it in Australia.
The Commonwealth, states and territories, and motoring and otherorganisations fund ANCAP and a recent increase in funding will significantly
expand its crash test program. Used Car Safety Ratings are also produced
by a consortium of government and motoring organisations. Work iscurrently underway to increase public awareness and usage of theseratings, particularly among younger drivers.

EVIDENCE — what is known• Australia has a relatively high average age of vehicles (around10 years).
• There has been a marked increase in the number of two-wheeledvehicles in the Australian fleet.
• Older vehicles are often used by higher-risk motorists such as novice
drivers.
• The risk of death or serious injury in a crash is lower for later model
vehicles: the risk in a vehicle made in 2007 is about half that of a vehicle
made in 1987 [28].
• The proportion of ANCAP tested cars to be awarded a five-star ratinghas grown from less than 10 per cent in 2003 to over 60 per cent in 2009.
page 74

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1• It has been estimated that if everyone drove the safest car in its
category, road trauma involving light passenger vehicles could be
reduced by 26 per cent. If each vehicle incorporated the safest design
elements for its class, such trauma could be reduced by 40 per cent.
[29]• Safety in light commercial vehicles has not kept pace with lightpassenger vehicle safety, in terms of ANCAP star ratings and inclusionof safety features. These vehicles are used in both the business andfamily environment.
• Considerable work is currently underway regarding vehicle to vehicle
and vehicle to infrastructure communication. A frequency for thesecommunications has been reserved (5.9 GHz) and research is active
regarding potential applications.
• Substantial work on vehicle safety is underway internationally onIntelligent Transport Systems (ITS), including the development ofguidelines for in-vehicle information systems.
• A large proportion of new vehicles in Australia are purchased for private
sector and government fleet use. As these vehicles are generally soldfor private use within a few years, there is an opportunity to improvethe uptake of safety features in Australian vehicles by encouraging
fleet purchasers to demand them.
• Australia has a uniquely diverse range of heavy vehicles, which makes it
important to ensure braking technologies are compatible. The National
Heavy Vehicle Braking Strategy released in 2008 recommended
the development of Australia’s brake regulations to capitalise on
the significant safety improvements achievable with new braking
technologies.

• A regulatory system ensuring that proven safety design features andtechnologies are mandated in new Australian vehicles as quickly as
possible.
• A greater penetrationof five-star ANCAP rated
vehicles in the general
fleet, with ANCAP star
ratings available for all
new vehicles.
• A reduction in the
average fleet age inAustralia.
• Enhanced safetycommitment from thecommercial sector,
page 75

Chapter 8

DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

including a demand for fleets to be equipped with key safety features
such as five-star ANCAP rated vehicles, ESC, side curtain airbags,
alcohol and seatbelt interlocks, and ISA.
• A substantial increase in the proportion of heavy vehicles withadvanced braking systems and other safety technologies.
• Significant improvement in the safety of the light commercial vehicle
fleet.

FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years
15. Facilitate the adoption of nationally-agreed best-practice fleet
purchasing policies:
a. Develop nationally-agreed fleet purchasing policies with practical,
evidence-based safety criteria that drive an increase in the safety
features required for vehicle purchases.
b. Require all government fleets to implement nationally-agreed
fleet purchasing policies and encourage adoption by other fleet
operators.
16. Improve safety regulations for new vehicles:a. Improve the ADR process to ensure that minor changes to UNECE
regulations are accepted automatically, timely consideration is
given to new and amended UNECE regulations and GTRs, andpriority is given to implementing new and amended ADRs thatcan deliver the greatest safety benefits.
b. Subject to the final outcomes of Regulatory Impact Statements(RISs), mandate the following vehicle safety features for new
vehicles: advanced seatbelt reminders (driver’s seat); provision for
ISOFIX child restraint fittings; ESC in light commercial vehicles; Antilock Braking Systems (ABS) / load proportioning brake systems forheavy vehicles and trailers.
c. Prepare RISs to consider mandating of ABS for motorcycles,
increased heavy vehicle cabin strength, ESC and Lane Departure
Warning Systems for heavy vehicles, and Brake Assist Systems forlight passenger vehicles.
d. Lead international development of a pole side impact standard,
which will require strong protective measures for vehicle occupants
involved in side impacts, including provision of effective sidecurtain airbags or other airbag configurations.

page 76

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

a. Expand the ANCAP program to increase the coverage of crashtest results across the full range of new vehicles on the Australianmarket, including light commercial vehicles, and develop a crashtest standard and protocol for rollover crashes.
b. Support the implementation of a national ‘Stars on Cars’ program
to increase consumer demand for safe vehicles through thepromotion of ANCAP safety ratings.
c. Encourage vehicle manufacturers to support ANCAP through theprovision of vehicles ahead of their release to the market.
18. Encourage vehicle manufacturers to develop industry codes ofpractice committing to incorporation of vehicle safety features, while
ensuring that safety features are not packaged only with luxury or
comfort features.

Chapter 1

17. Improve and promote the ANCAP program:

19. Investigate incentives relating to vehicle purchases:
a. Investigate incentives (including tax-based, registration-based
and insurance incentives) and promote options to encouragepurchase of safer vehicles, greater turnover of the vehicle fleet
and/or the inclusion of enhanced safety features.
b. Investigate incentives to encourage young drivers and theirparents to purchase safer new or used cars.
20. Evaluate community concerns and work with the vehicle industry toensure vehicle advertising avoids display and promotion of unsafe
and illegal behaviours.
21. Strengthen regulation of post-production modifications and additions(for example by limiting the raising of vehicles) which may compromise
the safety of the vehicle as manufactured.

23. Investigate options to maximise the efficiency and safety of restrictedaccess heavy vehicle operations.
24. Investigate technology-based options to minimise driver distraction
from in-vehicle devices.

page 77

Chapter 8

22. Investigate further regulation of speed and other safety features for
powered alternative vehicles (for example, mobility scooters andpower-assisted bicycles).

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?
• Mandating the following vehicle safety features for new vehicles,
subject to the outcomes of a RIS: Advanced Emergency Braking
Systems for heavy and possibly light vehicles; battery and system safety
and protection of servicing and emergency services personnel forelectric and hybrid vehicles; crash protection of occupants from highvoltage vehicle systems; rear impact injury mitigation (head restraints);
adaptive lighting16; the expansion of advanced seatbelt reminders orinterlocks to other vehicle categories and seating positions.
• Investigating the scope for regulatory action to further improvestability, traction and braking standards on motorcycles supplied to
the Australian market.
• Working with ANCAP, so that it continues to encourage the latest highbenefit vehicle safety innovations in areas where regulation cannot bejustified or is still being developed and supplements regulatory crashtest requirements.
• Introducing automatic crash notification similar to the European eCall
system.
• Developing telematics as heavy vehicle regulatory tools to enforce
speed and mass limits, to minimise road damage and maintain optimalvehicle braking and handling performance.
• Working with industry to secure good community understandingof vehicle safety ratings systems, including evaluating the case to
mandate display of safety ratings at point of sale on all new vehicles.
• Implementing international standards to improve light commercial
vehicle safety and achieve alignment with best practice passenger
vehicle standards.
• Review the current ADRs for vehicle occupant protection with a viewto raising the safety standards of Australia’s vehicle fleet.
• Working with the vehicle industry and emergency services to ensurethat vehicle design and manufacture does not compromise the safety
and efficiency of road crash rescue operations.

How will progress be assessed?
Ongoing• Average age of the Australian vehicle fleet• Percentage of new vehicles sold with a 5-star ANCAP rating• Percentage of new vehicles sold with key safety features

By 2014• Report on delivery of action items 15 to 24.
16 Headlights that switch on automatically in low-light conditions.

page 78

9. Safe People

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 80

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Most road users respect the law, have good safety awareness and use
the roads in a sensible manner. But even these people make unintended
mistakes — and sometimes those mistakes result in death or serious injury.
Improved road safety systems can be developed to reduce the level ofroad user error and provide greater forgiveness or protection in the eventof a crash occurring.

Chapter 1

9. Safe People

But people do not always use the roads in a responsible way. Somepeople frequently break the road laws, putting themselves and othersat unacceptable risk, and contribute disproportionately to the numberof casualties on the roads. There is a need to further reduce dangerous
behaviours on the roads through enhancing enforcement and ensuring
penalties are effective.
Since the early 1970s, Australia has had great success in changing
dangerous behaviours. Through a combination of enforcement andeducation, rather than education alone [30], community attitudes andsocial norms have shifted in areas such as drink driving and not wearing aseatbelt — these behaviours are now widely regarded as unacceptablein our community and road users are generally more compliant withtraffic laws. However, such risky behaviours are still prevalent among
an irresponsible minority and they continue to play a big role in serious
casualty crashes. The aim is to increase support for responsible road use
while toughening responses towards those who use the roads irresponsibly.
There is a need to maintain deterrence because many responsible drivers
are kept responsible by the threat of detection and sanctions.

Responsible road use
EVIDENCE — what is known

Chapter 8

page 81

Chapter 9

It has been estimated that people making mistakes contribute to morethan 50 per cent of serious casualty road crashes. There are many typesof mistakes and many underlying issues. A large part of the solution lies in
improving the safety design of roads, vehicles and speed limits — to makethem more forgiving of human error — but there is also a need to help
people avoid making mistakes in the first place.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

This can be done by improving licensing, education and information
systems. Other ways of supporting responsible road use also will be
explored. This is relevant to all road users; however, some groups of road
users are particularly vulnerable:• Young drivers are over-represented, making up about 14 per cent of
all licence holders but being involved in about 25 per cent of all serious
crashes. This reflects a number of factors, including inexperience indriving, under-developed higher-order cognitive and decision-making
skills and a greater propensity to take risks, especially among young
males. It is known that young drivers are most at risk of crashing in thefirst 6-12 months of gaining their licence.
• Research shows that raising the licensing age for young drivers to 18
would save young lives, but would also have an impact on the mobilityof 17 year olds, particularly in regional areas.
• National competency based licence testing and trainer qualification
standards for heavy vehicle drivers have recently been approved toensure consistency for heavy vehicle operators. However, any changes
to the graduated licensing process to attract and qualify heavy vehicle
drivers should address risks for road safety. As an example, drivers under
the age of 26 years hold only two per cent of NSW heavy truck licences
but are represented in four per cent of fatal and five per cent of injury
crashes. Although based on relatively low numbers of licenses, thoseunder 26 years have a higher fatal and injury crash involvement rate
than older heavy vehicle drivers.
• Evidence from studies examining brain maturation supports the notionthat driving may be affected by the lack of maturation until lateadolescence or beyond. In particular, physiological studies show thatthe brain areas responsible for response inhibition and emotional selfregulation continue to develop over adolescence and early adulthood[31, 32]. This evidence warrants particular concerns with heavy vehicle
licences for young drivers.
• Motorcyclists are highly vulnerable compared with other motorists dueto the lack of vehicle crash protection as well as the inherent difficultyof handling a vehicle with only two wheels.
• Australian children are safer than ever but the road death rate forchildren aged 0 to 14 years is still high compared with other OECD
countries, with Australia ranked 18th in 2006. Children are particularly
vulnerable as unrestrained or incorrectly restrained passengers andalso as pedestrians.
• Older drivers do not have a high level of crash involvement. However,their relative fragility makes them more likely to be seriously injured or
killed in a crash than younger people and their numbers are expected
to grow substantially as our population ages.

page 82

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1• Indigenous people have three times the rate of road death comparedwith non-Indigenous people. There is a complex range of factors
involved, including over-representation in crashes involving alcoholand non-wearing of seatbelts, in crashes on lower-standard remoteroads, and in vehicles that are often of a lower safety standard. Many
Indigenous people experience poor access to licensing services andsupport systems.
• Graduated licensing arrangements are intended to allow novice
drivers and riders to develop experience in reduced risk conditions in
the first few years of licensing. Research evidence supports a graduatedapproach with restrictions and sanctions that are progressively
reduced as experience is gained. Australian states and territories haveprogressively strengthened their graduated systems over recent years.
• While there is a lack of evidence that school road safety education
programs reduce road crashes, it is important that children and young
people are taught to use the roads safely as pedestrians, bicyclists andlater as riders and drivers. Programs designed to instil safe attitudes andbehaviours from an early age are strongly supported by parents andthe wider community.
• There is community support for driver education programs; however,
the research evidence on the effectiveness of such programs in
reducing serious crashes remains disappointing.
• It is often observed that there is more effort put into punishing bad
behaviour on the roads than rewarding good behaviour. While there
have been some attempts to encourage responsible road use throughincentive schemes, the effectiveness of this approach is unproven.

Fatigue
The effects of fatigue on serious road casualties are difficult to quantify, but
is recognised as a major and potentially growing problem area. Fatigue
is a contributing factor in crashes which involve long trips and extensive
periods of continuous driving, and also in short trips when the driver has
previously been deprived of sleep. Shift workers are particularly at risk.

page 83

Chapter 8

While infrastructure treatments are presently the main response to thefatigue problem, research on direct remedies (including technologicalsolutions) should be supported and evaluated.

Chapter 9

There is evidence that sleep deprivation can have similar hazardous
effects to alcohol consumption. Studies have found that people driving
after being awake 17 to 19 hours perform more poorly than those with a
BAC of 0.05, and after 21 hours their performance is about the same as
driving at 0.15 BAC [33, 34].

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Driver distraction
Driving is a complex task and sources of driver distraction, both within
the vehicle and in the general road environment, have increased
substantially in recent years. Modern vehicles can include on-board DVD,satellite navigation, complex sound systems, climate controls, and audible
and visual signals for an array of vehicle operations which compete fordriver attention. Although it is very difficult to quantify the effect of all ofthese and other sources of distraction on serious road casualties, they arerecognised as a major and potentially growing problem area.
Mobile phones are a widely recognised form of distraction (see section
below on ‘Irresponsible road use’). Other sources of distraction, both insideand outside vehicles, should be monitored. People will continue to be
distracted while driving, particularly by technology, and it is not possible
to eradicate or outlaw every form of distraction. A harm minimisation
approach would enable emerging problems to be addressed before
having fully effective management responses by:• supply reduction, through laws, technology design, planning guides
and infrastructure design;• demand reduction, using voluntary actions, technology design anddeterrence;• vehicle technologies that help drivers avoid the harmful consequencesof distraction; and• allowing more information to directly influence the vehicle (forexample, speed limiting) rather than bombarding the driver with more
information.

DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020
• Australia will have a best practice graduated licensing scheme fornovice drivers and riders.
• Increased use of effective protective equipment by motorcyclists.
• Substantially improved access to graduated licensing, and to vehicles
with higher safety ratings, for Indigenous people.
• A best practice framework for the assessment of older drivers’ fitness todrive will be available and all jurisdictions will have effective processes
for managing older driver licensing.
• Development of suitable technology to combat driver fatigue.
• Road safety education resources will be developed and available tothe pre-primary sector and all primary and high schools.

page 84

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

25. Improve driver and rider licensing arrangements:
a. Develop an evidence-based model of graduated driver licensing
for car drivers. Elements for examination include minimum
supervised driving hours, minimum provisional licence age,passenger restrictions, night driving restrictions, mobile phonebans, vehicle power restrictions, speed and alcohol restrictions,and more effective sanctions for speed and alcohol offences.
b. Review licensing arrangements for motorcycle riders. Elements
for examination include graduated restrictions for novice riders(including minimum period with a car licence before motorcycle
licensing) and education and training if proven to deliver roadsafety benefits.
c. Investigate licensing options to improve the safety of returning
motorcycle riders.
d. Review licensing arrangements for heavy vehicle drivers, including
options for the adoption of competency based standards.
26. Develop and implement a national helmet assessment and rating
program to stimulate market demand for the safest motorcycle
helmets — and examine options for other protective gear.

Chapter 1

FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years

27. Implement programs addressing the road safety needs of Indigenous
communities and disadvantaged groups:
a. Develop and implement programs to increase the opportunities
for driving practice for disadvantaged learner drivers, particularly
in Indigenous communities.
b. Implement locally relevant and culturally appropriate Indigenous
community education campaigns promoting key road safety
messages.
c. Implement education campaigns to meet the road safety needsof culturally and linguistically diverse groups.
28. Implement, and promote the use of, new Fitness to Drive guidelines toimprove the management of at-risk and medically-impaired drivers.

30. Mandate seatbelt wearing for taxi drivers.

32. Develop public information campaigns and education resources
about fatigue for all road users, with a particular focus on educating
novice drivers.
33. Expand the provision of rest areas, including in regional towns (‘rest
towns’), to help motorists manage fatigue.
page 85

Chapter 8

31. Pilot operational field trials of driver and vehicle devices that measure
drowsiness crash risk using metrics based on ocular dynamics or
carriageway position, including back-to-base monitoring of data.

Chapter 929. Pilot electronic work diaries for heavy vehicle drivers as an alternative
to paper-based diaries to improve fatigue management.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?
• Addressing the substantial increase in crash risk at the beginning of
the unrestricted licence period through more gradual relief from theprovisional licensing restrictions.
• Continuing to explore the case for a national post-licence driver
education program, taking account of evaluation results of driver
education interventions with proven road safety benefits.
• Promoting alternative mobility options for older drivers through local
government community transport programs.
• In partnership with agencies responsible for delivering school education,
developing road safety resources for parents of pre-school children,and for primary and secondary school students prior to licensing.
• Developing educational and regulatory interventions to minimise theeffects of driver distraction.
• Investigating the use of new technologies to minimise driver error andautomatically monitor driver performance.

How will progress be assessed?
Ongoing• Number of young driver and motorcycle rider deaths• Number of older driver and motorcycle rider deaths• Number of motorcyclist deaths• Number of bicyclist deaths• Number of pedestrian deaths• Number of deaths from crashes involving a heavy vehicle

By 2014• Report on delivery of action items 25 to 33.

page 86

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Effective deterrent and publicity measures, such as a combination ofpolice enforcement and public education campaigns, can motivate
road users to change their behaviour, if they are concerned with being‘caught’ and having to deal with the consequences. This concern isdriven by the perceived probability of being caught and the efficacy ofthe penalty. Because many drivers believe their risk of crashing is very low,
fear of penalties is often more effective than the fear of being involvedin a crash. However, measures to inform and educate road users aboutrisk factors and to motivate longer-lasting behaviour modification are also
required.

Chapter 1

Irresponsible road use

Emerging vehicle technologies also offer potential assistance in addressing
illegal behaviours (including drink driving, speeding, non-use of seatbelts,
driving fatigued or distracted) by the relatively small non-compliant
proportion of the driving population. This will be an important opportunity
for road safety improvement.
There are three key challenges over the life of this strategy:• To shift the social norm for speeding in the way it has been shifted for
drink driving and seatbelts.
• To further reduce the high risk behaviours of drink driving, not wearing
a seatbelt and drug driving by a minority of people. While thesebehaviours are now considered socially unacceptable, they still featuresignificantly in crashes causing serious injury and death.
• To respond to the well-established link between driving without alicence and involvement in serious crashes.

EVIDENCE — what is known
Speed compliance

Drink and drug driving
Alcohol continues to be a major factor in serious casualties, with more thana quarter of fatal crashes involving a driver over the legal Blood Alcohol
Concentration (BAC) limit. There is a large body of research evidence
showing that the risk of involvement in a casualty crash increases rapidly
page 87

Chapter 8• Specific objectives and measures to address this problem are coveredin the Safe Speeds Section.

Chapter 9

Speed is one of the key road user behaviour issues, with motorists frequently
travelling at illegal or inappropriate speeds, leading to increased crashrisk and increased severity of crashes. Illegal and inappropriate speed is amajor factor in 30 per cent of fatal crashes.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

with increasing BAC levels. This is true for all motorists; however, studies
have shown that the risks are significantly higher for younger drivers.

Figure 14: Risk of driver fatality by BAC level and age [35]Note: Chart reproduced from the OECD report Young Drivers: the Road to Safety [36].

In Victoria, those aged 18-25 represent only 13 per cent of licensed drivers, but 36
per cent of all drink drivers killed in road crashes. When the 18-25 age group is split
into groups aged 18-20 and 21-25, the over-representation of young drivers in drink
driving casualties increases for the older group.

Lower BAC limits
Under current Australian drink driving laws, it is an offence for any motorist
to drive with a BAC of 0.05 or greater; and in most jurisdictions, novice
drivers (learners and P-platers) and professional drivers are required tohave a BAC of zero. It has generally been accepted that these laws strikethe right balance between social values and public safety in relation toalcohol use.
The evidence would need to be examined in much greater detail todetermine whether or not there is a case for changing Australia’s longstanding BAC laws. Furthermore, any specific proposal to reduce existing
BAC limits would need to be developed in close consultation with thecommunity.
page 88

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

There is a body of community opinion that favours a more restrictive
approach to drinking and driving. It has been proposed, for example, thatthe present zero BAC requirements for certain licence categories should
be extended to a broader range of higher-risk groups — such as all young
drivers under the age of 26 years, or all motorcycle and scooter riders.
Some have further suggested that Australia should follow the example of
Sweden in reducing the general BAC offence threshold from 0.05 to 0.02.
Points made by those who advocate lower limits include:• Studies on the effects of Sweden’s lowering of the BAC limit havereported a 10 per cent reduction in fatal crashes related to drink driving
after the change [37].
• Previous Australian experience in lowering BAC limits suggests that theeffects on drink driving behaviour were quite far-reaching. For example,
when the ACT reduced the BAC limit from 0.08 to 0.05, random breath
testing (RBT) showed a 34 per cent reduction in the number of drivers
with a BAC between 0.15 and 0.20, and a 58 per cent reduction in thenumber with a BAC above 0.20 [38].
• The age-based risk evidence suggests that extending the current zero
BAC requirement for novices to all drivers under 26 years of age would
prevent a significant number of deaths and serious injuries per year
across Australia.
• A prescribed zero limit has the advantage of not relying on drivers’
perceptions of how much alcohol they can consume to stay under alegal limit.
• As well as providing motorists with greater certainty, adoption of ageneral zero (or 0.02) BAC limit would strongly reinforce the message
that drinking and driving should be separate activities.

Alcohol interlocks

The majority of the community ride or drive responsibly, but may lapse
occasionally. If the community supported the widespread implementationof alcohol interlocks, then in the next ten years drink driving could almost
be eliminated. Some countries are creating initial markets to support theeventual widespread uptake of alcohol interlocks through fleets, in buses,
page 89

Chapter 8

Alcohol interlock programs have had some success in changing the
behaviour of serious offenders. There is scope to extend the applicationof alcohol interlocks to cover a wider segment of the driver population,
initially focusing on offenders and other higher-risk groups such as novice
drivers.

Chapter 9

A substantial proportion of drink drivers — particularly recidivist offenders— are not responsive to mainstream deterrence measures due to serious
alcohol abuse and broader social problems.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

taxis and trucks as a quality assurance action by responsible companies
and employees.

Drug driving
There is a range of evidence linking certain illegal and prescription
drugs to elevated crash risk, though alcohol still makes a bigger overall
contribution to the number of serious casualties.
Roadside drug testing has been introduced in many jurisdictions inrecent years. There is scope to develop a consistent national approach
to roadside testing for illicit drugs, based on both evidence and recent
experience, as well as a national approach to improved managementof impaired driving due to medical conditions or use of prescription
medication.

Mobile phones
There is evidence from epidemiological studies and other researchsuggesting that mobile phone use produces a significant increasein casualty crash risk, regardless of whether the phone is hand-held or
hands-free [39]. The research indicates that using mobile phones to write
or read text messages while driving is particularly risky, and that the risks
of mobile phone use and other distracting activities are higher for novice
drivers than for more experienced drivers.
Several jurisdictions include restrictions on the use of hands-free phones aspart of their graduated licensing arrangements for P plate drivers, though
in some cases this applies to the ‘P1’ stage only.
National surveys show that many drivers still use hand-held mobile phones
while driving, despite it being illegal in all Australian jurisdictions. A recent
survey found that 61 per cent of drivers reported using mobile a phone
while driving, with 30 per cent admitting to reading text messages and16 per cent to sending them [27].
Emerging evidence from naturalistic driving studies reinforces concerns
about phone-related tasks such as dialling and text messaging, but
appears to suggest that the risks associated with talking or listening may
be comparable to other common driver activities [40].
Further investigation is required to fully understand the safety impacts ofmobile phones and other potentially distracting devices, and to informthe development of appropriate countermeasures. Any consideration ofchanges to existing mobile phone laws would require a thorough analysisof the potential safety benefits and other impacts on the community, as
well as the scope for effective detection and enforcement of offences
under the changed laws.

page 90

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

The majority of Australians always wear seatbelts when travelling in motor
vehicles. However, a significant minority sometimes do not wear seatbelts,
which is a very significant risk factor. Some 28 per cent of vehicle fatalities
are unbelted, where restraint use is known.

Chapter 1

Seatbelt use

There is evidence that seat belt reminders in vehicles can improveseatbelt wearing rates. Coordinated enforcement and publicity efforts
are also necessary to improve and maintain public understanding andacceptance of the importance of seatbelts, including properly fitted
child restraints.
The Safe Vehicles Chapter includes an action to examine the scope tointroduce an ADR requiring seatbelt reminders for the driver’s seat as an earlypriority and to later consider mandating reminders for all seating positions.
There is strong community demand for seatbelts in school buses,
particularly on higher speed roads and/or higher risk routes. Serious
crashes involving school buses are very infrequent in Australia. However,there is clearly potential for many children to be severely hurt or killed in a
major crash and jurisdictions have taken steps in recent years to increase
the availability of buses equipped with seatbelts. There is scope to do
more in this regard, and to encourage greater wearing of bus seatbelts
when they are available.

Unlicensed driving• Elimination of driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs as significant
contributors to road trauma.
• Elimination of illegal mobile phone use while driving.
• A substantial reduction in the rate of driving by those without a licence.
• All vehicle occupants are effectively restrained.
page 91

Chapter 8

DIRECTIONS — what the strategy aims to achieve by 2020

Chapter 9Unlicensed driving has been identified by police as a factor in about
16 per cent of fatal crashes. Of course, simply being unlicensed does
not imply that a driver is more likely to behave dangerously, but many
unlicensed drivers have had their licences removed for earlier dangerous
behaviour. Because unlicensed drivers are unlikely to be deterred by thenormal licensing sanctions (for example, loss of demerit points), there isa need to look at other detection and deterrence measures to target
this group. There has been some recent success in tackling this issue with
the introduction of vehicle sanctions and improved detection throughautomatic number plate recognition cameras. However, further workneeds to be undertaken to enhance these initiatives and apply them in amore strategic and coordinated manner at the national level.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FIRST STEPS — actions for the first three years
34. Work in partnership with police to strengthen the deterrence effectsof random breath testing programs (RBT) and random roadside drug
testing programs, and to improve public awareness of these programs.
35. Review, in consultation with stakeholders and the community,
the application of BAC limits currently applying to certain licence
categories.
36. In relation to alcohol interlocks:
a. Extend the application of alcohol interlocks to cover a wider
segment of drink driving offenders.
b. Undertake research on options to extend alcohol interlock
applications to other high-risk road user groups and potentially tothe broader driver population.
c. Encourage voluntary use of alcohol interlocks by corporate fleets
and other drivers.
d. Investigate the option of requiring demonstrated rehabilitationfrom alcohol-dependence before removal of interlock conditions.
37. Expand the use of vehicle sanctions for repeat drink and drug driving
offences.
38. Review (with liquor control commissions and the health and police
sectors) the adequacy of operating responsibilities applying to venues
for responsible alcohol serving.
39. In relation to mobile phones:a. Strengthen education and enforcement measures to improve
compliance with current laws.
b. Promote the safety benefits of phone-off policies (including handsfree) with all fleet operators.
c. Examine the case for extending the coverage of novice driverprohibitions on mobile phone use (including hands-free) to include,for example, all ‘P2’ drivers or all young drivers under 26 years ofage.
40. Address the risk associated with unlicensed drivers and unregisteredvehicles:a. Increase traffic surveillance to improve detection of unregisteredvehicles and unlicensed drivers.
b. Extend the use of vehicle sanctions to drivers of unregisteredvehicles, and unlicensed or suspended drivers.
41. Assess the risks on school bus routes and address risks throughinfrastructure improvements, vehicle safety features such as seatbelts
and road user awareness programs.
42. Review international best practice and identify cost-effective
interventions for dealing with high risk and repeat traffic offenders.
page 92

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• In consultation with stakeholders and the community, examining thescope to reduce the legal blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit for
all drivers.

Chapter 1

FUTURE STEPS — what else will be considered?

• Developing national workplace random drug testing standards forcommercial vehicle industry application. Companies with testing
regimes in place which meet this standard would have a defence
against chain of responsibility prosecutions for drug driving.
• Investigating the use of emerging roadside drug testing technology toapply to other illicit and licit drugs.
• Compulsory blood testing for drugs and alcohol for all drivers involved
in serious casualty crashes.
• Monitoring and assessing the evidence on driver distraction associatedwith mobile phones and other communication devices, for identificationof potential countermeasures (including for professional drivers).
• Examining the use of seatbelt interlocks and other regulatory means toincrease seatbelt wearing by heavy vehicle drivers.

How will progress be assessed?
Ongoing• Number of drivers and motorcycle riders killed who had a blood
alcohol concentration (BAC) above the legal limit• Number of deaths from crashes involving an unlicensed driver or
motorcycle rider• Number of vehicle occupants killed who were not wearing a restraint

By 2014• Report on delivery of action items 34 to 42.

Chapter 9
Chapter 8

page 93

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 9410. Making It Happen

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 96

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

This strategy has the potential to achieve large and lasting road safety
benefits for all Australians.

Chapter 1

10. Making It Happen
Realising that potential will require significant commitment by government
agencies to implementing the targeted actions in this strategy, and by
non-government agents to giving effect to the strategic directions in thisstrategy in those areas where they can influence road safety outcomes.
It will also demand ongoing attention to the following management
functions that will help to implement the evidence-based countermeasuresneeded to achieve the targets.

Results focus
Government responsibilities for road safety delivery are spread acrossmultiple jurisdictions and among different agencies within jurisdictions.
To achieve the best road safety outcomes, an overall management
framework is required in each jurisdiction with a clear results focus. Other
major participants within the community are encouraged to consider
how they will contribute to improved road safety in Australia.

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.
43. Examine the scope to improve institutional structures, capacities anddelivery arrangements at a national level to optimise road safety
efforts ahead of a scheduled review of this strategy in 2014.
44. If adopted by the International Standards Organisation, consider
adopting and promoting the new standard for road traffic safety
management systems (ISO 39001) — this is intended for all organisations
wishing to reduce death and serious injury related to road travel, andwill help them to define their contribution to this goal.

An integrated approach to road safety
This strategy provides a focus and direction for road safety policy andaction over the next ten years. It does not exist in isolation and recognises
page 97

Chapter 10

Linkages and Synergies

Chapter 9

A stronger results focus and improved performance assessment for roadsafety will help bring all elements together (a long term vision to eliminate
serious road trauma, interim targets over the next decade as a step
towards that vision, and a series of interventions to achieve those targets)
into a management approach that will ensure this strategy is delivered.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

that policy, decisions and action in many other areas can and do impact
on the achievement of road safety outcomes and outcomes in otherareas of society.
Road safety has close links with policies on transport, infrastructure,police, health, education, emergency services, energy, environment,
employment, youth, research, innovation and technology, justice,insurance, trade and foreign affairs, among others.
Most importantly it is vital that while this strategy focuses on reducing
the end result of injury or death on our roads, the roads and their use
are a reflection and a part of our broader societal values, culture andbehaviour.
There are many factors that will impact on road safety performance into
the future. Economic conditions, environmental priorities and a range ofother issues in society will bring many and varied transport challenges.
Based on Safe System principles, much of road safety activity can beconsidered as a means to support:• a more sustainable and active lifestyle• improved environmental outcomes, which will reduce energy
consumption and reduce greenhouse gas emissions• reduced pressure on health and hospital systems from trauma andsubstance abuse• improved workplace safety• improved land use planning and urban amenity• productive economic activity resulting from fewer crashes, reliable
travel times and associated effects.
Viewing and approaching road safety from a broader public healthperspective instead of just a transport perspective will allow for stronger
linkages and synergies with broader actions to reduce issues like alcoholrelated harm in our community. In this light road safety has strong links
with the work of the Australian Government in preventative health where
the National Health Preventative Task Force has established a vision ofAustralia: the healthiest country by 2020.
The health impacts of our road system include not only the deaths andinjuries from vehicle traffic crashes, but also the disease cases due toexposure to road transport: air pollution, traffic noise, lack of daily physicalactivity due to vehicle travel rather than active transport (walking or
cycling) and likely future health effects due to greenhouse emissions.
Major road safety linkages and synergies exist with the priority objectivesof the National Health Preventative taskforce in contributing to:• reducing the prevalence of harmful drinking for all Australians by 30%
page 98

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020• meeting the Closing the Gap target for Indigenous people, reducing
the 17-year life expectancy gap between Indigenous and nonIndigenous people.

Chapter 1• halting and reducing the rise in overweight and obesity

Road safety, environmental and other health considerations havetraditionally been dealt with individually or using a fragmented approach.
The integration demonstrated by the shift of focus in this strategy is a
substantial change compared with the present situation, and will allow
authorities to:• identify and address possible conflicts and inconsistencies at an earlystage, when various decision options are still open
• achieve more efficient use of resources• increase benefits when an action can contribute to addressing otherissues• achieve optimisation when an action contributes positively to one
aspect and negatively to another by solving this dilemma before final
decisions are made.
Increasing use of public transport is a good example of how this new
approach can generate greater synergies between road safety andother societal factors. Buses and trains are safer modes of travel thancars and motorcycles, and the fewer people using light vehicles on theroads, the fewer road deaths and serious injuries will occur. Increasing
the use of alternative modes of transport, as well as land use planningthat reduces the demand for travel, will improve safety for all road users,
improve health outcomes, reduce congestion and vehicle emissions, andsupport sustainable communities.
Government efforts to improve road safety benefit from strong partnerships
between transport agencies and agencies in other key sectors, particularly
health, police and education — recognising that road safety is, above all,a major public health issue.

• the National Railway Level Crossing Safety Strategy 2010–2020• the National Cycling Strategy

Coordination
Road safety progress depends on coordinating strong road safety
partnerships effectively across all sectors — government, industry, businessand community. Achieving the ambitions expressed in this strategy will
require key government agencies to be well-aligned with the strategy.
page 99

Chapter 10• state and territory road safety strategies.

Chapter 9This strategy is complemented by other national strategies and activities
that are addressing specific areas of road safety, including:National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

There will need to be engagement with those organisations that candirectly influence and build community support for road safety.

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.
45. Engage with organisations that can influence and build community
support for road safety:
a. Form a closer alliance between road, transport and police
agencies to support the enforcement elements of the strategy.
b. Work with and support local governments in improving the safetyof local roads and communities.
c. Work with the motor vehicle industry to advance the safety ofAustralia’s vehicle fleet.
d. Work with the National Road Safety Council to raise the profile
of road safety as a major public health issue across government,
industry, business and community sectors.
e. Work with the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator and the National
Rail Safety Regulator.
f. Engage with key stakeholders to exchange expertise, experiences
and research.

Legislation, regulation and standards
Legislation, regulation and standards will be needed to support somenew directions to improve the safety net for road users in Australia. Someinitiatives, such as nationwide improvements to driver licensing, will
require decisions at a national level in order for them to be implemented
effectively. Others will need to be left to individual jurisdictions to progress.

Funding and resource allocation
Sufficient resources will be required to meet these targets, fromgovernment, industry and the community. This will require additional
investment or reallocation or reprioritisation of resources throughout thelife of the strategy. Some interventions are significant and expensive, butthere is opportunity to develop, trial and implement alternative low-costmeasures.
Some initiatives are likely to require additional funding and options for this
could include:• Current funding being re-prioritised to activities which are deemed
more important• Additional funding being provided for specific initiatives• A partnership arrangement with stakeholders
page 100

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.

Chapter 1

In each case, funding at all jurisdictional levels needs to be considered.

46. Explore opportunities to secure alternative sources of funding or
shared funding arrangements for road safety activities, including
targeted infrastructure investment17.
47. Explore the allocation of monies collected for penalties imposed forcamera detected offences, in excess of the administrative cost, toroad safety education and awareness programs, injury rehabilitation
programs, and road funding to improve the safety of sections of state
and territory controlled roads.

Promotion and education
The ultimate success of the strategy will depend on the willingness of
individual community members and organisations to support the changes
that are needed to improve the safety of the road transport system.
They will also need to accept their share of responsibility for road safety
improvement. To this end, there is a need to promote public understandingof key policy directions in road safety and encourage public discussion
about new road safety proposals.

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.
48. Develop and maintain a National Road Safety Strategy website asa prime means of sharing road safety information and reporting on
progress.
49. Ensure public education campaigns and resources are aligned with
the Safe System objectives of this strategy.

Accountability

17 For example, with the injury insurance industry (which would potentially see a commercial
return on investment.

page 101

Chapter 10

The primary measure of success of this strategy will be the actual reductionin the number of serious casualties on the roads. This measure will be
used to monitor progress towards the 2020 targets. Governments are
responsible for planning, designing and managing the operation of a saferoad transport system. They are expected to contribute leadership andresources to improving road safety, including developing and enforcing

Chapter 9

Adopting a system-wide perspective on road safety places primary
responsibility on the ‘system managers’ — the organisations that design,build, maintain and regulate roads and vehicles — for ensuring safe
conditions for all who use the road transport system.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

laws, setting standards, providing safer roads, informing the public aboutroad safety issues and requiring improvements in vehicle safety.
The Australian Government is responsible for allocating agreed
infrastructure resources, including for safety, across the national highway
and the local road networks, and for regulating safety standards for new
vehicles.
State and territory governments are responsible for the funding, planning,
design and operation of the road network, managing vehicle registrationand driver licensing systems, and enforcing road user responsibilities.
Local governments are responsible for funding, planning, design andoperation of the road networks in their local areas.
A broader range of individuals and organisations also influence the way
the road transport system functions and the level of safety enjoyed byAustralians. Chief among these are vehicle suppliers, employers (who haveconsiderable power to ensure that their corporate policy and practicesupport a safety culture), freight companies, the vehicle marketing
industry (which is expected to display social responsibility in the way it
promotes vehicles for sale), automobile clubs and insurance groups (whohave an important role in encouraging safety among their members andpolicy holders, as well as acting as advocates for safety), and transportand land use planning authorities.
Road safety practitioners need to work with these decision-makers toachieve mutually beneficial partnerships and improvements. All of theseparties must work collaboratively towards the provision of a safe transportsystem.

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.
50. Work with local governments to promote the development andimplementation of local or regional road strategies.
51. From 2012 each Minister responsible for road safety (state, territory
and federal) to report annually to their parliament on the progress inroad safety, including safety performance indicators.
52. A review of the strategy will be undertaken before the end of 2014,
including an assessment of the implementation progress, a reviewof the strategy objectives and targets, and identification of priority
actions for the next three years.

Monitoring and evaluation
Progress towards the 10-year casualty reduction targets will depend on
many factors, some of which are beyond the control of governments.
page 102National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

However, a feature of this strategy is a commitment to public accountability
for its delivery. To this end, arrangements will be established to monitor
national road safety progress, report on performance in implementing
agreed actions, and periodically review the key elements of the strategy.

FIRST STEPS — actions within the first three years.
53. Publish and regularly update the key statistical measures of roadsafety progress.
54. Present an annual report to the Australian Transport Council
documenting progress in implementing this strategy.

Capacity development, research and knowledge transfer
Continued research and development effort is required to ensure thatroad safety risk factors, and the most effective safety measures, areunderstood by road safety professionals and the wider community. Safe
System thinking needs to be better understood and adopted in practiceby all parties involved in the development and management of the roadtransport system, including road agencies, traffic managers and regulators,
urban planners, the vehicle industry and transport operators. Australianroad safety policy has always been firmly based on robust evidence andcontinued investment in research and data. However, there are gaps innational data collections that need attention; and ongoing research,
analysis and evaluation activities will have an important role in informing
road safety actions.
International assessments of capacity to deliver road safety have identified
the need for lead agencies for road safety, with appropriate governancearrangements. Reviews of arrangements have allowed improvements,
even in well performing countries such as Sweden.

Chapter 9
Chapter 10

page 103National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

FIRST STEPS: Actions for the first three years
55. Work towards the adoption of nationally consistent road crashclassification definitions and the development of an improved
national serious injury database.
56. Work towards the creation of a national vehicle safety database toprovide real-time research data on the characteristics of the Australianvehicle fleet and crashes.
57. Ensure that jurisdictional and Austroads road safety research programs
adequately support the objectives of this strategy
58. Consider the scope for road safety management capacity reviews
within each jurisdiction.

Training and staff development
Road safety experts typically evolve and learn on the job rather thancoming into the field from degree courses in road safety. Typically roadsafety experts begin with qualifications and expertise in related fields
such as engineering, road design, psychology or behavioural sciences,
statistics, public health, health care, education or public policy. Moreformal training in road safety may help ensure best practice, evidencebased advice in road safety.

FIRST STEPS: Actions for the first three years
59. Review the training of road safety specialists and the value of offering
more formal training/education opportunities in road safety.

page 104

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Organisations that contributed to the development of thisstrategy

Chapter 1

Appendix 1

The following organisations contributed to the development of thestrategy, either via direct consultation or through lodging a submission:
AECOM
Alternative Technology Association
Amy Gillett Foundation, Bicycle NSW, Bicycle Transport Alliance WA, Cycling
Australia, Cycling Promotion Fund, Retail Cycle Traders Association
ANCAP Australasia Ltd
ARRB Group Ltd
Australasian College of Road Safety
Australasian Fleet Managers Association
Australasian Road Rescue Organisation
Australasian Sleep Association
Australian Automobile Association
Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association
Australian Council of State Schools Organisations
Australian Driver Trainers Association (Victoria)
Australian Driver Trainers Association (National)
Australian Driver Trainers Association (South Australia)
Australian Hotels Association
Australian Injury Prevention Network
Australian Logistics Council
Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association
Australian Motorcycle Council
Australian Road Safety Foundation
Australian Trucking Association
Bankstown City Council
Chapter 9Belt Up for Safety [B.U.S.] Action Group
Bicycle Institute of SA
Bicycle Queensland
Bicycle Transport AllianceBlue Mountains City Council
Bushwalking Australia
Bus Industry Confederation
Cairns Regional Council
Camden Council
Canberra Pedestrian ForumThe CarKit Company
Caulfield Community Health Service

page 105National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020
Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety - Queensland
Centre for Automotive Safety Research
City of Unley
Clarence City Council
Council on the Ageing (NSW)
Curtin-Monash Accident Research Centre
CycleSafe, Armidale
Dalgarno InstituteDarebin City Council
The Drive 1 Team
Engineers Australia
Fairfield City Council
Fatality Free Friday Road Safety Foundation
Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries
Freight Metrics Pty Ltd
The George Institute for Global HealthHonda Australia Motorcycles & Power Equipment
Injury Risk Management Research Centre
Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (NSW)
Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (QLD)
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Australia & New Zealand Section
International Road Assessment Programme (iRAP)
Isolated Children’s Parents’ Association of NSW
Kids and Traffic — Early Childhood Road Safety Education Program,
Macquarie University
Kidsafe — The Child Accident Protection Foundation of Australia
Liberal Democratic Party
Liverpool City Council
Local Government Association of NSW
Local Government Association of South Australia
Monash University Accident Research Centre
Motor Accident Commission SA
Motorcycle Council of NSW
Motorcycle Riders Association of Queensland
Motorcycling Australia
National Heart Foundation
National Infrastructure Coordinator
National Motorists Association
National Road Safety Council
National Transport Commission
Native Vegetation Council
NRMA Insurance, SGIO, SGICNSW Department of Health
NSW Driver Trainers Association

page 106National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1

NSW Police ForceNSW Roads & Traffic Authority
Older People Speak Out
Pedestrian Council of Australia
People for Ecologically Sustainable Transport
Public Health Association of Australia, NT Branch
Public Transport Users Association
Queensland Road Safety Advisory Group and Queensland Motorcycle Safety
Advisory GroupRACQ
Regional Development Australia — Townsville and North West Queensland
Research on Alcohol Drugs and Driving (RoADD) GroupRoyal Australasian College of Surgeons
Safe Speed Interest Group
School Drug Education and Road Aware
Shire of Plantagenet
South Australian Farmers Federation
South Australian Freight Council
South Australia Police
Suncorp3M Traffic Safety Systems Division
Townsville and Districts Motorcycle Riders’ Association
Transport Workers Union (Victorian/Tasmanian Branch)
Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
Transurban
Truck Industry Council
Ulysses Club
Victoria Police
Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce
Victorian Freight and Logistics Council
Victorian Transport Association
WA Department of Education

Chapter 9

WA Local Government Association
WA Minister for Police, Emergency Services, and Road Safety
Women’s Christian Temperance Union
Willoughby City Council
Working Against Culpable Driving
Youth Affairs Council of South Australia

page 107

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

References
1.

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE),
2009. Cost of road crashes in Australia 2006, Report 118, Canberra.

2.

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE),
2010. Effectiveness of measures to reduce road fatality rates,
Information sheet 39, Canberra.

3.

Newstead S, Hoareau E and Cameron M, 2002. Evaluation of 50 km/h
speed limits in Victoria, MUARC, Clayton, Victoria.

4.

Hoareau E and Newstead S, 2004. An evaluation of the default 50
km/h speed limits in Western Australia, report 230, MUARC, Clayton,
Victoria.

5.

Kloeden C, Woolley J and McLean J, 2004. Evaluation of the 50km/h
default urban speed limit in South Australia, report CASR005, Centre
for Automotive Safety Research, Adelaide.

6.

Pennay D, 2004. Community Attitudes to Road Safety: Community
Attitudes Survey Wave 16, 2003, report CR 221, Australian Transport
Safety Bureau, Canberra.

7.

VicRoads, 2011. Unpublished data.

8.

Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE),
2011. Evaluation of the National Black Spot Program, Volume 1, BITRE
Report, Canberra.

9.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/
International Transport Forum (ITF), 2008. Towards Zero: Ambitious
Road Safety Targets and the Safe System Approach, OECD, Paris.

10. Safe Work Australia, 2009 Work-related traumatic injury fatalities
Australia, 2006-07, Canberra
11. World Health Organization (WHO), 2010. Global Plan for the Decadeof Action for Road Safety 2011-2020, WHO, Geneva.
12. Oxley J, Corben B, Koppel S, Fildes B, Jacques N, Symnons M andJohnston I, 2004. Cost-effective infrastructure measures on rural roads,
report 217, MUARC, Clayton, Victoria.
13. Austroads, 2010. Safe intersection approach treatments and safer
speeds through intersection: final report, phase 1, report AP-R363/10,
Austroads, Sydney.
14. Levett SP, Job RFS and Tang J, 2009. Centreline treatment
countermeasures to address crossover crashes, Proceedings of the2009 Australasian Road Safety research, Policing and Education
Conference, Sydney, NSW.
15. Kloeden CN, McLean AJ and Glonek G, 2002. Reanalysis of travelling
speed and the risk of crash involvement in Adelaide South Australia,
report CR 207, Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Canberra.
page 108

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

17. Nilsson G, 2004. Traffic safety dimensions and the Power Model todescribe the effect of speed on safety, Lund Institute of Technology
and Society, Traffic Engineering.

Chapter 1

16. Kloeden CN, Ponte G and McLean AJ, 2001. Travelling speed andthe risk of crash involvement on rural roads, report CR 204, AustralianTransport Safety Bureau, Canberra.

18. Austroads, 2005. Balance between harm reduction and mobility insetting speed limits: a feasibility study, report AP-R272/05, Austroads,
Sydney.
19. D’Elia A, Newstead S and Cameron M, 2007. Overall impact during
2001–2004 of Victorian speed-related package, report 267, MUARC,
Clayton, Victoria.
20. Soole DW and Watson B, 2009. Point-to-point speed enforcement:a review of the literature, Centre for Accident Research and Road
Safety — Queensland.
21. Simcic, G, 2009. Section control: towards a more efficient and better
accepted enforcement of speed limits? Speed fact sheet 5, European
Transport Safety Council Brussels.
22. Keenan, D, 2004. Speed cameras — how do drivers respond? Traffic
Engineering and Control, 45, 104-111.
23. ARRB Group (2005) Evaluation of the Fixed Digital Speed Camera
Program in NSW Roads & Traffic Authority, NSW RC2416 — May 2005
24. Jurewicz C and Bennett P, 2010. Road safety engineering risk
assessment. Part 7: Crash rates database, report AP-T152/10,
Austroads, Sydney.
25. Sliogeris, J, 1992. 110 kilometre per hour speed limit: evaluation of roadsafety effects, report GR92-8, VicRoads, Melbourne.
26. Long AD, Kloeden CN and Hutchinson TP, 2006. Reduction of speed
limit from 110 km/h to 100 km/h on certain roads in South Australia: apreliminary evaluation, report CASR024, Centre for Automotive Safety
Research, The University of Adelaide.

28. Newstead S, Watson L and Cameron M, 2009. Vehicle safety ratings
estimated from police reported crash data: 2009 update, report 287,
MUARC, Clayton, Victoria.
29. Newstead S, Delaney A, Watson L and Cameron M, 2004. A model
for considering the ‘total safety’ of the light passenger vehicle fleet,report 228, MUARC, Clayton, Victoria.
30. Job RFS et al, 1997. The long term benefits of random breath testingin NSW (Australia): deterrence and social disapproval of drink driving,
page 109

Chapter 927. Petroulias, T, 2009. Community Attitudes to Road Safety: 2009 Survey
report, Road Safety Report 4, Department of Infrastructure, Transport,
Regional Development and Local Government, Canberra.

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Alcohol, Drugs
and Traffic Safety, Annecy, France.
31. Luna B, Garver KE, Urban TA, Lazar NA and Sweeney JA, 2004.
Maturation of cognitive processes from late childhood to adulthood.
Child Development, 75 No. 5, 1357–1372.
32. Dahl R, 2008. Biological, developmental, and neurobehavioral factors
relevant to adolescent driving risks. American Journal of Preventative
Medicine, 35 (3S):S278-284.
33. Williamson AM and Feyer A-M, 2000. Moderate sleep deprivation
produces comprehensive cognitive and motor performance
impairments equivalent to legally prescribed levels of alcohol
intoxication, Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 57, pp.
649-655.
34. Dawson D and Reid K, 1997. Fatigue, alcohol and performance
impairment, Nature, 388 (6639): 235.
35. Keall MD, Frith WJ and Patterson TL, 2004. The influence of alcohol,
age and the number of passengers on the night-time risk of driverinjury in New Zealand, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 36(1), 49-61.
36. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)/
European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 2006. Young Drivers:
The Road to Safety, OECD, Paris.
37. Borschos B, 2000. An Evaluation of the Swedish Drunken Driving
Legislation Implemented on February 1, 1994, in Laurell H and Schlyter
F (eds) CD-ROM: Proceedings of the 15th International Conferenceon Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, Stockholm.
38. Brooks C and Zaal D, 1992. Effects of a reduced alcohol limit for driving,Federal Office of Road Safety, Canberra.
39. McEvoy SP, Stevenson MR, McCartt AT, Woodward M, Haworth C,
Palamara P and Cercarelli R, 2005. Role of mobile phones in motor
vehicle crashes resulting in hospital attendance: a case-crossoverstudy, British Medical Journal, 331, pp 428-432.
40. VirginiaTech Transportation Institute 2009, New Data from VTTI Provides
Insight into Cell Phone Use and Driving Distraction, media release,accessed 22 March 2011, <http://www.vtti.vt.edu/PDF/7-22-09-VTTIPress_Release_Cell_phones_and_Driver_Distraction.pdf>

page 110

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

Chapter 1
Chapter 9

page 111

National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020

page 112