1

THE NETHERLANDSThe Netherlands recorded 661 road fatalities in 2019, representing a 2.5% decrease whencompared to 2018. The safety of the elderly population is a growing concern, as people
over 70 years have a mortality rate three times higher than the general population. Road
safety policy in the Netherlands is guided by a Safe System approach. The current strategicroad safety plan has the ambition of achieving zero road casualties by 2050. To contributeto that ambition, the government will release EUR 50 million per year to support municipal
and provincial road authorities in taking effective road safety measures.
Note: Statistics in the Netherlands distinguish between reported and real numbers ofcasualties. The former category covers casualties reported by the police. Real numbers arehigher, as they take into account data available from sources such as court files and deathcertificates. This report uses the real number of fatalities, unless there is a specificreference to the reported numbers.

Impact of Covid-19
The Netherlands did not introduce full lockdown measures in 2020 in response to the Covid19 pandemic. The measures implemented varied over time.
According to preliminary data, traffic on the main road network decreased by 17% in thefirst three quarters of 2020 compared to 2019 (KiM, 2020). People used public transportless often, while the share of walking and cycling increased. In the first three quarters of
2020, the number of registered road deaths decreased by 4% compared to the averagefor the first three quarters of 2017-19.

2

Table 1. Road fatalities by month
Average 2017-19

2020% change

January

42

37

-11.9

February

36

34

-5.6

March

45

43

-4.4

April

46

51

10.9

May

44

49

11.4

June

51

47

-7.8

July

53

48

-9.4

August

44

45

2.3

September

52

41

-21.2

October

53

27

-49.1

November

45

43

-4.4

December

45

36

-20.0

Total

555

501

-9.9

Source: STAR-data, retrieved on 3 February 2021.

TrendsThe Netherlands registered an overall
small decrease in the number ofroad deaths in 2019. According to 
the latest available data, 661 persons lost their lives in traffic crashes in the Netherlands in 2019. This represents 
a 2.5% decline on 2018. In 2018,
678 road deaths were reported, a
10.6% increase on 2017.
Country Profile
Population in 2020: 17.4 million
GDP per capita in 2019: USD 52 602
Cost of road crashes: 2% of GDP (2018)
Road network in 2020: 141 000 kilometres(motorways 4%)
Registered motor vehicles in 2020: 11.7 million(cars 74%; goods vehicles 9%, motorcycles 6%;
mopeds 11%)
Volume of traffic: +18% between 2000 and

The longer-term trend for road2019
deaths in the Netherlands has been  Speed limits: urban roads 30/50 km/h; ruralroads 60/80 km/h; motorways 100/130 km/h
downwards trending. Between 2000
and 2019, the number of annual road  Limits on Blood Alcohol Content (BAC): 0.5 g/l(including cyclists); novice drivers (first fivefatalities fell by 43%. However, theyears) 0.2 g/l
reduction in the number of road
casualties significantly slowed in the most recent years, with the number of road deaths
actually increasing by 3% during the 2010-19 period.
The number of traffic deaths per 100 000 inhabitants in the Netherlands has fallen by
48% between 2000 and 2019. In 2019, 3.8 traffic deaths per 100 000 inhabitants wererecorded, compared to 7.3 in 2000. By way of comparison, the EU average in 2019 was
5.1.

3

The Netherlands recorded 0.6 road fatalities per 10 000 registered vehicles in 2019.
This represents a decrease of 63% compared to 2000, when the rate of deaths to registeredvehicles stood at 1.5. In the 2010-19 period, the rate of deaths to registered vehicles
increased by 8%.
Figure 1. Road safety, vehicle stock, traffic and GDP trends (real numbers),
2000-19
Index 2000 = 100

Note: Between 2010 and 2014 there were significant reporting problems for injury crashes.

Data for fatalities by road user groups shows that vulnerable road users (pedestrians,
cyclists and motorcyclists) account for more than half of all road deaths. In 2019, cyclists
accounted for 31% of road deaths, motorcyclists 14% and pedestrians 7%. Occupants ofpassenger cars and vans represented 36% of road fatalities.
The largest decreases in 2019 were among cyclists, with 11% fewer deaths compared to2018, and pedestrians with a 9% decrease. In 2019, road deaths increased among moped
riders by 15%, motorcyclists 9% and occupants of passenger cars 2%, compared to 2018.
Long-term trends shows that traffic in the Netherlands has become safer for all road usergroups. The strongest decline in fatalities was registered among occupants of passenger
cars, moped riders and pedestrians, with a decrease of 57% between 2000 and 2019. The
user group that has benefited least is motorcyclists, registering a decrease in fatalities of
only 7% between 2000 and 2019. It has to be noted, however, that the increase in safety
was particularly the case in the early part of this period. In the last ten years, only an
improvement in the safety of pedestrians was registered.
Since 2010, while the number of road deaths saw a general increase of 3%, the numberof cyclists killed increased by 25% and the number of motorcyclists killed by 11% (Figure
5).

4Figure 2. Road fatalities by road user group (real numbers), 2019

Road deaths by age group in 2019 showed a decrease in road deaths among people
aged 0-14 (8 fewer deaths compared to 2018), 30-69 (13 fewer deaths), 70-79 (6 fewer
deaths) and over 80 (17 fewer deaths). The number of road deaths increased for the otherage groups, with the largest increase for the 20-29 age group (from 87 deaths in 2018 to
112 in 2019).
Since 2000, the number of road deaths declined for all age groups, except for people above
the age of 70, who saw an increase in road deaths of 18% between 2000 and 2019. Morerecently, since 2010, against a general increase of 3% in the number of road deaths,
fatalities decreased for all age groups up to 69 years, but increased for the older age groups(Figure 5).
Historically, young people represent a high-risk group in road safety. However, in the
Netherlands in 2019, the age group the most at risk in traffic was those over 80, with amortality rate of 15.8 deaths per 100 000 inhabitants: more than four times that of thegeneral population.

5

Figure 3. Road fatality rates by age group (real numbers), 2010-19
Deaths per 100 000 inhabitants in a given age group

Figure 4. Road fatality rate by age and road user group (real numbers),
2019
Deaths per 100 000 inhabitants

6

Figure 5. Evolution of road deaths by user category and age group, 2010-19

Road users

≥ 80

70-79

30-69

20-29

15-19

0-14

PTW

Passenger cars

Cyclists

Total number of road deaths

Pedestrians

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50

Age groups

Fatality data are essential for understanding road safety issues but represent only a partof the picture. Information on serious injuries from crashes is also critically important.
However, injury data are much more difficult to obtain, validate and compare. In 2019, an
estimated 21 400 people were seriously injured in traffic in the Netherlands (defined here
as a person admitted to hospital after a road crash for an injury with a Maximum
Abbreviated Injury Scale score of two or more [MAIS2+] who has not died within 30 daysof the crash), a similar number as in 2018. With regard to the European definition thatuses MAIS3+ as the measure for serious injuries, 6 900 people were estimated to havebeen seriously injured in 2019, which was again similar to the number in 2018. Nearly
two-thirds of the serious road injuries relate to cyclists, the majority of whom are injuredin crashes not involving a motor vehicle.

Economic costs of road crashes
Road crashes represent a significant cost for society, estimated in 2018 at around EUR 17.1
billion, equivalent to more than 2% of the Dutch GDP (KiM, 2019). Medical costs (2%),
production loss (6%), loss of quality of life (based on a willingness-to-pay approach)(56%), property damage (26%), settlement costs (8%) and congestion costs (2%) havebeen included in the estimate.
The economic costs of traffic crashes in 2018 were 5% higher than in 2010. Two-thirds ofthis increase (around EUR 0.5 billion) is caused by a higher number of seriously injured
traffic victims compared to 2010 (KiM, 2019).

7

Table 2. Costs of road crashes, 2018
Unit cost (EUR)

Total (EUR)

2.85 million

1.9 billion

Serious injuries (MAIS2+)

310 000

6.3 billion

Slight injuries

37 000

4.8 billion

Property damage costs

4 000

4.1 billion

Fatalities

Total

17.1 billion

Total as % of GDP

2.0%

Behaviour
The table below summarises the main speed limits in the Netherlands.
Table 3. Passenger car speed limits by road type, 2020
General speed limit
Urban access roads

30 km/hUrban distributor roads

50 km/hRural access roads

60 km/hRural distributor roads

80 km/hRegional through roads

100 km/h

National through roads(motorways)

130 km/h

Note: The maximum speed differs between motorways, some have a lower speed limit of 120 km/h, 100 km/h
or even 80 km/h. Since March 2020, the speed limit on all motorways is 100 km/h between 6:00 a.m. and7:00 p.m., unless a lower speed limit is put in place. This is a measure to reduce NOx. For an explanation onroad categorisations, see Advancing Sustainable Safety at www.sustainablesafety.nl.

The behaviour of road users is an important determinant of a country’s road safety
performance. Driving under the influence of alcohol is a major cause of road crashes
in the Netherlands, as in most IRTAD countries. Until 2006, the maximum authorised BAC
was 0.5 g/l for all drivers of motor vehicles, but in 2006 a lower limit of 0.2 g/l was applied
for novice drivers during their first five years. For cyclists the legal limit is also 0.5 g/l.
Alcohol-related fatalities are defined according to the SafetyNet definition: any deathoccurring within 30 days as a result of a fatal crash in which any active participant was
found with a blood alcohol level above the legal limit.
In 2015, driving under the influence of alcohol accounted for approximately 75 to 140(12% to 23%) road deaths in the Netherlands. Around two-thirds of all severe crashes
involving alcohol are caused by a relatively small group of “heavy alcohol offenders”(offenders with a BAC of 1.3 g/l or higher). In 2016, the social costs due to this group were
estimated to be between EUR 0.8 to 1.8 billion per year (Goldenbeld, Blom and Houwing,2016).

8

Another way to look at drink-driving is to measure how often people drive on the roadwhilst under the influence of alcohol. This can be measured in roadside surveys, as isdone regularly in the Netherlands. Drink-driving on weekend nights increased from 1.4%
in 2017 to 2.3% in 2019 (I&O Research, 2020). The percentage of heavy alcohol
offenders (BAC equal to or greater than 1.3%) is approximately 0.3%. Research
conducted in 2007-09 shows that in the Netherlands 3.4% of drivers are in control of avehicle under the influence of drugs and/or medicines. The exact number of roadtraffic casualties due to drug use in traffic is unknown, partly because Dutch legislationprohibits post-mortem drug testing. A hospital study conducted in 2007-09 indicated thatapproximately 10% of seriously injured drivers tested positive for drugs (SWOV, 2020a).
Since 1 July 2017, legal limits for drug use in traffic have been operational in the
Netherlands.
There have been no recent measurements of the prevalence of drug use in Dutch traffic.
According to the international ESRA survey (E-Survey Road safety Attitudes), 5% of Dutch
car drivers reported having driven within 1 hour of using illegal drugs (Goldenbeld andButtler, 2020).
Dutch drug experts are worried about the influx of new types of drugs in society in general,
as well as their use by road users. For example, the number of traffic incidents reportedby the Dutch police involving the recreational use of nitrous oxide (i.e. laughing gas) had
increased to 1 000 in the first half of 2019, compared to 400 in the same period in 2018
and less than 200 in 2016 and 2017 (CAM, 2019).
Holding a phone while driving has been illegal in the Netherlands since April 2002.
Additional legislation relevant to distracted driving is applicable in cases where behaviour
that explicitly endangers road safety is observed. In July 2019, further legislation was
introduced to forbid handheld phone use while cycling. In 2019, more than 121 000 road
users in the Netherlands were fined for handheld phone use, an increase compared to2018, when just over 80 000 were fined for this offence. In the period July-December
2019, more than 21 000 fines for handheld phone use were given to cyclists in the
Netherlands. In 2019 and 2020 the fine for handheld phone use while driving was EUR 240
and the fine for handheld phone use while cycling was EUR 95.
An observational study, conducted in September 2020, indicated that 91% of observed
drivers of personal cars, vans and trucks were not actively involved with an electronic
communication device (calling or touching a screen) whilst driving (NDC Nederland,
Goudappel Coffeng, 2020). This shows a decrease compared to an earlier study in 2018,
when the share of drivers not actively using a communication device whilst driving was
85%. In 2019, over one-quarter of Dutch cyclists (28%) used a communication device
while cycling, with such devices mostly used for listening to music (22% of cyclists) (Broeks
and Bijlsma-Boxum, 2019).
In 2018, the international ESRA2 was conducted among Dutch drivers. One section of thesurvey asked about fatigue and 21.6% of Dutch car drivers reported that they had been
driving in the past 30 days while having trouble keeping their eyes open, slightly above
the European average of 19.7% (Goldenbeld and Nikolaou, 2019).

9

Seat belt use has been compulsory in the Netherlands in front seats since 1975 and inrear seats since 1992. In 2020, the rate of seat belt use was on average 97%, based on
observations of 11 429 vehicle occupants travelling on motorways and urban throughroads. For vans and trucks, the wearing rate was lower (88%) than for car occupants(99%) (NDC Nederland, Goudappel Coffeng, 2020).
Helmet wearing has been compulsory on a motorcycle since 1972 and on mopeds (upto 50 cc, maximum speed 45 km/h) since 1975. A helmet is not compulsory on light
mopeds (up to 50 cc, maximum speed 25 km/h) and bicycles. The light moped category
constitutes a major road safety problem, as these are regularly modified to much higher
speeds. Since 1 January 2017, the speed pedelec (an electric bicycle with a higherpowered motor and capable of higher speeds than a normal pedelec) is categorised as a
moped – helmet use on them is therefore mandatory. The speed pedelec helmet can be
an ordinary moped helmet that complies with the ECE22.05 standard, or it can be ahelmet that meets the NTA8776:2016 standard, which has been developed specificallyfor speed pedelecs (SWOV, 2017). In 2020, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water
Management proposed a law to make helmet wearing mandatory for users of light
mopeds.

Road safety management and strategies
There are several factors of influence on the Netherlands’ road safety performanceas captured by the above indicators.
The traffic system changed considerably around the year 2000. The design of theunderlying road network improved and enforcement of policing risk-taking behaviours(speeding, drink-driving, failing to use seat belts and helmets) was intensified, although inmore recent years there has been a decrease in police enforcement. Educational
programmes were developed for all age groups and types of road user. A decentralisedorganisation of road safety with provinces and municipalities as the main parties was key
to the success of this strategy.
The European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) for passenger cars has playeda major role in stimulating the production of safer vehicles. Passive vehicle safety systems,
such as airbags and seat belts, have helped reduce injuries to passengers, and active safetysystems, such as improved car bonnets and exterior airbags, have helped protect
pedestrians and cyclists in the event of a crash.
Improvements in medical care, including regional organisation, mobile medical teams andair ambulances, have further contributed to the decrease in fatalities. The national roadsafety policy emphasis has shifted to vulnerable road users (Weijermars et al., 2014).
Responsibility for the organisation of road safety in the Netherlands lies with the
Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, Directorate-General Mobility - Roads
and Traffic Safety section. It is responsible for co-ordinating intergovernmental working
processes and road safety decision making at central governmental level, as well as co-

10

ordinating national mass media campaigns. Regional and local governments haveauthority over their own roads and the safety of their infrastructure. The Ministry is
responsible for road safety policy and, together with decentralised governments, sets
policy targets.
The Ministry also carries out periodic reviews of legislation, rules and standards against
best practice. It makes recommendations for improvement, monitoring and evaluation by
establishing and supporting data systems for monitoring road safety. Co-operation
between the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, Statistics Netherlands and
SWOV allows the compilation and dissemination of national statistics relating to roadsafety.
Road safety policy in the Netherlands is guided by the philosophy of a Safe System
Approach (OECD/ITF, 2008), which is known as sustainable safety. It is based on
several key concepts, including that the human being is the reference point for
countermeasures that are taken, and that prevention is preferable to a curative
approach. The policy follows three safe design principles. The first addresses thefunctionality of roads, meaning that all roads should serve one function and have theirplace in a hierarchical network. The second applies to (bio)mechanical principles, whichstate that there should be homogeneity of mass, speed and direction. Roads sides andvehicles should be designed to be physically forgiving, and that the design of roads
should also accommodate the safety of two-wheelers. Finally, the principles look at thepsychology of the road user.
This is not only done by making road alignment predictable, but also by ensuring that allelements of the road design are easy to understand, especially at speed, and encourage
safe decision making while driving. Ideally, this should be tuned to the older road user, as
this is a growing sector of the population requiring particular support to move safely intraffic. Besides the three design principles, two organisational principles are put in place:firstly, road safety as a shared responsibility of all stakeholders, particularly when looking
at vulnerabilities that may make certain road users more inclined to crash or suffer serious
injury; and secondly, the organisational principle of “learning and innovation”, which
recognises the importance of getting accurate information about how the system isfunctioning and how it should be adapted to new developments or persistentmalfunctioning.
In 2008, the Road Safety Strategic Plan 2008-20 (SPV) was developed by the Ministry
and the decentralised authorities, and received support in parliament. The SPV is based on
three cornerstones: co-operation, an integral approach and sustainable safety. In 2012,
the strategic plan was revised following its four-yearly evaluation conducted by SWOV.
This led to a Policy Stimulus Road Safety Initiative that contained extra measures aimed
at road safety improvement for cyclists, older road users, infrastructure, and road users ingeneral.
In 2017, a broad collaboration between 32 organisations called on the House ofRepresentatives and the new government to make road safety a national priority. The
parties created a manifesto, “Road safety: A national priority”, in which they express

11

ambitions and proposals for safer traffic and fewer casualties. The incoming government
will get to work with the recommendations of the manifesto.
In the same year, the ministry started the development of a new strategic plan for theperiod 2020-30. Regional and local governments and other key stakeholders involved inroad safety participated in the process. In the new strategic plan, the ambition is to achieve
zero traffic casualties by 2050. The plan describes the path to concrete measures withineach of nine major policy themes (Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management et al.,2019): safe infrastructure; heterogeneity in traffic; technological developments;
vulnerable road users; inexperienced road users; driving under the influence; speeding;
distraction in traffic; and traffic offenders.
A knowledge centre SPV and a data task force have been put in place to support the needfor knowledge, the definition of indicators and collection of data.
The road safety targets for 2020 included reducing road fatalities to 500 and MAIS2+ roadinjuries to 10 600. In 2015, SWOV predicted that if ongoing developments and efforts
continued, the targets for 2020 with respect to fatalities could be feasible (Weijermars etal., 2015). However, without additional safety measures, it would be near impossible toachieve the target for serious road injuries. In view of the observed increase in road
fatalities since 2015, it is now nearly certain that the target of a maximum of 500 fatalities
in 2020 will not have been met (Aarts et al., 2020).
Figure 6. Trends in road fatalities towards the national target, 2006-20

12

Measures
Various measures have been developed to make roads safer in recent years. These
measures focus particularly on road users, vehicles and infrastructure but also giveconsideration to technological advances, both in enforcement and vehicle design.
Road users: Partly as an alternative for the alcohol lock (a breathalyser device thatprevents the car from starting if the driver is over the legal BAC, but that in 2018 was
no longer permitted to be used under Dutch administrative law), a new sanction foralcohol offenders was trialled in the Netherlands, the alcoholmeter. The alcoholmeter isan electronic ankle bracelet that monitors alcohol intake during a period of a temporary
alcohol ban. The probation officer receives daily measurement results. The device isintended for alcohol offenders who have been placed under supervision by the probation
office.
Since 1 July 2019, using communication devices while driving a vehicle has been extended
from car drivers to other groups of road users including cyclists.
Since January 2020, the maximum punishment for impaired driving was increased from 3
months to 1-year of imprisonment.
In 2019, driving exams in the Netherlands were revised: the use of navigation systems
have been made part of the practical exam, the skill of danger recognition has been added
to the theoretical exam, the requirements for driving schools have been updated andeducation about the driving exam has received a much stronger visual component.
In 2020, section control on speeding was introduced on then rural road sections; anotherten sections will follow in the course of 2021.
Vehicles: Since January 2021, a new law prescribes that agricultural vehicles have to beformally registered and equipped with a licence plate.
New types of light motorised vehicles, such as electric steps, e-scooters or stand-up
tricycles, do not fall within the scope of European regulations authorising them for road
use and they are therefore not legally allowed on Dutch public roads. To accommodate
these kinds of innovations for possible future use on public roads, the Minister ofInfrastructure and Water Management may designate these vehicles as “special mopeds”
which would, subject to certain conditions very similar to those applying to light mopeds,
have access to public roads.
Roads: In December 2019, the ministry and the decentralised authorities together decided
to make EUR 500 million available over the period 2020-30 as an impetus for safer roads.
This budget is meant as a contribution of 50% of the investment needed by provinces andmunicipalities. Besides this investment, the national government has made EUR 50 million
available for improving the safety of dangerous main rural roads (regional through roads

13and rural distributor roads). Half of this budget is for national roads and the focus is on
making roadsides safer.

Definitions, methodology, data collection
A road crash is defined as a crash on a public road involving at least one moving vehicle
and which leads to property damage or injury of persons involved.
A road fatality describes any person who dies immediately or within 30 days of a road crash
and as a result of an injury sustained in that crash.
Someone who is seriously injured is defined as a person admitted to hospital after a roadcrash for an injury with a Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale score of two or more
(MAIS2+) and who has not died within 30 days. By contrast, a slightly injured person is aperson, whether admitted to hospital or not after a road crash, with an injury with a
Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale score of one (MAIS1), or an injury that could not be
scored against the AIS-scale.
In the Netherlands, Statistics Netherlands (CBS) works together with the Ministry of
Infrastructure and Water Management (Rijkswaterstaat) to match police-reported fatalities
with other records, including court files and death certificates, to determine the real
number of road traffic fatalities. Both the police-reported number and the real number
have been published annually since 1996. This report uses the real number of fatalities,
unless there is a specific reference to “reported” numbers. In 2019, the percentage ofpolice-reported fatalities was 89% of the real number.
A national information system for the police implemented in 2009 led to lower data quality
and a smaller number of reported crashes. New procedures are intended to improve thepolice data in both quality and quantity. So far, however, only the number of reported
crashes (injury and property damage) has increased since 2014, with the quality of thecharacteristics reported lagging behind.
Research on serious traffic injuries shows that the number of police-reported hospitalised
casualties is not a good indicator for serious injuries due to miscoding of injury severity,
underreporting and bias. SWOV matches the Dutch police data to hospital discharge
records and the MAIS score is attributed based on the AIS scores derived from theInternational Classification of Diseases (ICD) of patients whose injuries were coded in
ICD10. The estimated real number of serious injuries is now based on the linkage between
data from both police and hospital databases. The definition of a serious injury is based on
the MAIS score, not the police reported injury severity. Based on this method, theNetherlands is also able to report on MAIS2 or MAIS3+ injuries. Since 2019 the AIS-version
used is AIS2005/08©, leading to a lower number of MAIS3+ casualties than in the previous
version (AIS1990). The number of MAIS2+ cases is comparable (SWOV, 2020b).
In March 2016, a smartphone app was launched, enabling road crash reporting by
individuals, supported and (partly) verified by police or an insurance company. Crashes
can also be reported via the online tool, www.mobielschademelden.nl. In 2020, around14

7 000 additional crashes were reported this way, all relating to property damage only.
Hopes are that serious crashes with bicycles and without motor vehicles involved can bereported more frequently with this app. Currently, less than 5% of these crashes arereported to the police, whereas they comprise more than half of all serious road injuries in
the Netherlands, as is shown by hospital discharge records.

Resources
Recent researchGoldenbeld, C., K. Torfs, W. Vlakveld and S. Houwing (2020), “Impaired driving due toalcohol or drugs: International differences and determinants based on E-Survey of Road
Users' Attitudes first-wave results in 32 countries”, IATSS Research, Vol. 44, pp. 188-196.
Hermens, F. (2020), Fatigue and distraction detection. A review of commercially available
devices to detect fatigue and distraction in drivers, R-2020-6, The Hague, SWOV,
www.swov.nl/publicatie/fatigue-and-distraction-detection.
Methorst, R. (2021), “Exploring the Pedestrians Realm: An overview of insights needed fordeveloping a generative system approach to walkability”, TRAIL Thesis Series,
No. T2021/6, Netherlands Research School, https://doi.org/10.4233/uuid:18d0a6d1dbf6-4baa-8197-855ea42a85fe.
SWOV (2020), Distraction in traffic, SWOV Fact sheet, July 2020, The Hague,
www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/distraction-traffic.
Varotto, S., R. Jansen, F. Bijleveld, N. van Nes (2021), “Driver speed compliance following
automatic incident detection: Insights from a naturalistic driving study”, Accident Analysis& Prevention, Vol. 150, 105939, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105939.
Vlakveld, W., M. Doumen, S. van der Kint (2021), “Driving and gaze behavior while texting
when the smartphone is placed in a mount: A simulator study”, Transportation Research
PartF:
Traffic
Psychology
andBehaviour,
Vol. 76,
pp. 26-37,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.10.014.
Websites
SWOV - Dutch Institute for Road Safety Research: www.swov.nl/.
Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management:www.government.nl/ministries/ministry-of-infrastructure-and-water-management.
Statistics Netherlands: www.cbs.nl/.

15

References
Aarts, L. et al. (2020), De Staat van de Verkeersveiligheid 2020 Doelstellingen 2020
worden niet gehaald [The State of Road Safety 2020 Objectives for 2020 will not be
achieved], R-2020-27. SWOV, The Hague, www.swov.nl/en/publication/de-staat-van-deverkeersveiligheid-2020.
Broeks, J and J. Bijlsma-Boxum (2019), Vervolgmeting apparatuurgebruik fietsers [Followup measurement of equipment use for cyclists], Spring 2019, Rijkswaterstaat, Ministry of
Infrastructure and Water Management, The Hague.
CAM (2019), Risicobeoordeling Lachgas. Coördinatiepunt Assessment en Monitoring
nieuwe drugs [Risk assessment Nitrous oxide. Coordination point Assessment andMonitoring new drugs], Bilthoven, consulted on 23 June 2020 via:
www.rivm.nl/documenten/cam-rapport-risicobeoordeling-lachgas.
Goldenbeld, C., Blom M. and S. Houwing (2016), Zware alcoholovertreders in het verkeer.
Omvang van het probleem en kenmerken van de overtreders [Heavy alcohol offenders intraffic. Scope of the problem and characteristics of the offenders], R-2016-12, SWOV
InstituteforRoad
safetyResearch,
The
Hague,
www.swov.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/rapport/r-2016-12.pdf.
Goldenbeld, C. and I. Buttler (2020), “Enforcement and traffic violations”, ESRA2 Thematic
reports, No. 6 E-Survey of Road users’ Attitudes project, SWOV Institute for Road Safety
Research, The Hague, www.esranet.eu/en/publications/.
Goldenbeld, C. and D. Nikolaou (2019), “Driver fatigue”, ESRA2 Thematic reports, No. 4,
E-Survey of Road users’ Attitudes project, SWOV Institute for Road safety Research, The
Hague, www.esranet.eu/en/publications/.
I&O Research (2020), Rijden onder invloed in Nederland in 2006-2019. Ontwikkeling van
het alcoholgebruik van automobilisten in weekendnachten [Drinking and driving in the
Netherlands in 2006-2019. Development of the alcohol consumption of motorists during
weekend nights], Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, Water, Traffic and
Living Environment WVL, The Hague.
KiM (2019), Mobiliteitsbeeld 2019 [Mobility Report 2020], Knowledge Institute for Mobility
Policy, The Hague, www.kimnet.nl/publicaties/rapporten/2019/11/12/mobiliteitsbeeld2019-vooral-het-gebruik-van-de-trein-neemt-toe.
KiM (2020), Kerncijfers mobiliteit 2020 [Key Figures Mobility 2020], Knowledge Institutefor Mobility Policy, The Hague,
www.kimnet.nl/mobiliteitsbeeld/publicaties/rapporten/2020/10/28/kerncijfers-mobiliteit2020.

16

Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management et al. (2019), Door to door safety Road
Safety Strategic Plan 2030: A joint vision on the approach to road safety policy, Ministryof Infrastructure and Water Management, The Hague,
www.kennisnetwerkspv.nl/getmedia/ce0099b7-ce77-4ce2-98c8-a7810662ef10/19-093RO-SPV-Engels_v2.pdf.aspx.
NDC Nederland, Goudappel Coffeng (2020), Apparatuurgebruik, gordeldracht en gebruik
kinderzitjes door automobilisten en chauffeurs. In auto’s, bestelwagens en vrachtwagens[Use of equipment, seat belts and use of child seats by motorists and drivers. In cars, vans
and trucks], Second concept, Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, The
Hague.
OECD/ITF (2008), Towards zero: Ambitious road safety targets and the safe systemapproach, OECD/ITF, Paris, https://fevr.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Towards-ZeroOECD-PDF-57-MB.pdf.
SWOV (2017), Pedelecs and speed pedelecs, SWOV Fact sheet, September 2017, The
Hague, www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/pedelecs-and-speed-pedelecs.
SWOV (2020a), Drugs and medicines, SWOV Fact sheet, March 2020, The Hague,
www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/drugs-and-medicines.
SWOV (2020b), Serious injuries in the Netherlands, SWOV Fact Sheet, December 2020,
The Hague, www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/serious-road-injuries-netherlands.
Weijermars, W. et al. (2014), Monitor Policy Stimulus Road Safety 2014 - Researchjustification, R-2014-36A, SWOV, The Hague, www.swov.nl/rapport/r-2014-36a.pdf.
Weijermars, W. et al. (2015), Road safety forecasts for 2020 and 2030: Estimate of the
expected numbers of fatalities and serious road injuries, R-2015-17A, SWOV, The Hague,
www.swov.nl/rapport/r-2015-17a.pdf.

17