Sponsored by

In cooperation with

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

October 2008

Improving Safety and 

Mobility for Older

Road Users in

Australia and Japan

International Technology Scanning Program
NOTICE

The Federal Highway Administration provides 

high-quality information to serve Government, 

industry, and the public in a manner that 

promotes public understanding. Standards and 

policies are used to ensure and maximize the 

quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its 

information. FHWA periodically reviews quality 

issues and adjusts its programs and processes 

to ensure continuous quality improvement.
1. Report No.

FHWA-PL-09-001

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users 

in Australia and Japan

5. Report Date

October 2008

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 

Elizabeth Alicandri, Pamela Hutton, 

Dr. Susan Chrysler, Dr. Leanna Depue, 

Howard Glassman, Dr. ThomasGranda, 

David Harkey, Thomas Smith, Barry Warhoftig

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

American Trade Initiatives

P.O. Box 8228

Alexandria, VA 22306-8228

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-99-C-005

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Office of International Programs

Office of Policy

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA COTR: Hana Maier, Office of International Programs

16. Abstract

Age-related declines in vision, cognition, and physical ability affect how older road users drive and use 

other transportation modes. The Federal Highway Administration, American Association of State Highway 

and Transportation Officials, and National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a scanning 

study to assess infrastructure improvements designed to aid older road users in Australia and Japan. 

The scan team found that using a systems approach provides for integration of safety of older roads users 

and that enhancing safety for older road users improves safety for all. The team also observed engineering, 

policy, and educational programs that can improve the safety and mobility of older road users.

Team recommendations for U.S. implementation include integrating information from the scan on infrastructure improvements benefiting older road users into relevant U.S. documents, encouraging partnerships 

between government and nongovernment organizations to address older road users’ needs, and developing 

a research program on policies and interventions targeted to older road users.

17. Key Words

mobility, older road user, safety, systems approach, 

transportation infrastructure

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public from the:

Office of International Programs,

FHWA-HPIP, Room 3325, U.S. Department of Transportation,

Washington, DC 20590

international@fhwa.dot.gov

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

19. Security Classify. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classify. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

52

22. Price

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Technical Report Documentation Page

Prepared by the International Scanning Study Team:

Elizabeth Alicandri (cochair)

FHWA

Pamela Hutton (cochair)

Colorado DOT

Dr. Susan T. Chrysler 

(report facilitator)

Texas Transportation Institute 

Dr. Leanna Depue

Missouri DOT

Howard M. Glassman

Florida Metropolitan Planning 

Organization Advisory Council

Dr. Thomas M. Granda

FHWA

David L. Harkey

University of North Carolina 

Highway Safety Research Center

Thomas J. Smith

FHWA

Barry I. Warhoftig

West Virginia DOT

for

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway 

Research Program

October 2008

Improving Safety and 

Mobility for Older 

Road Users in

Australia and Japan
iv

The International Technology Scanning 

Program, sponsored by the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), the American 

Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and the National Cooperative 

Highway Research Program (NCHRP), evaluates 

innovative foreign technologies and practices that could 

significantly benefit U.S. highway transportation systems. 

This approach allows for advanced technology to be 

adapted and put into practice much more efficiently 

without spending scarce research funds to re-create 

advances already developed by other countries.

FHWA and AASHTO, with recommendations from 

NCHRP, jointly determine priority topics for teams of 

U.S. experts to study. Teams in the specific areas being 

investigated are formed and sent to countries where 

significant advances and innovations have been made 

in technology, management practices, organizational 

structure, program delivery, and financing. Scan teams 

usually include representatives from FHWA, State 

departments of transportation, local governments, 

transportation trade and research groups, the private 

sector, and academia. 

After a scan is completed, team members evaluate findings 

and develop comprehensive reports, including recommendations for further research and pilot projects to verify the 

value of adapting innovations for U.S. use. Scan reports, 

as well as the results of pilot programs and research, are 

circulated throughout the country to State and local 

transportation officials and the private sector. Since 1990, 

more than 75 international scans have been organized on 

topics such as pavements, bridge construction and maintenance, contracting, intermodal transport, organizational 

management, winter road maintenance, safety, intelligent 

transportation systems, planning, and policy. 

The International Technology Scanning Program has 

resulted in significant improvements and savings in road 

program technologies and practices throughout the 

United States. In some cases, scan studies have facilitated 

joint research and technology-sharing projects with 

international counterparts, further conserving resources 

and advancing the state of the art. Scan studies have also 

exposed transportation professionals to remarkable 

advancements and inspired implementation of hundreds 

of innovations. The result: large savings of research dollars 

and time, as well as significant improvements in the 

Nation’s transportation system.

Scan reports can be obtained through FHWA free of 

charge by e-mailing international@dot.gov. Scan reports 

are also available electronically and can be accessed on 

the FHWA’s Office of International Programs Web site 

at www.international.fhwa.dot.gov.

International Technology

Scanning Program
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan v

Safety 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in 

Australia and Japan (2008)

Safety Applications of Intelligent Transportation Systems 

in Europe and Japan (2006)

Traffic Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: Safety, 

Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Roadway Human Factors and Behavioral Safety in Europe 

(2005)

Traffic Safety Information Systems in Europe and 

Australia (2004) 

Signalized Intersection Safety in Europe (2003)

Managing and Organizing Comprehensive Highway 

Safety in Europe (2003) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001)

Commercial Vehicle Safety, Technology, and Practice in 

Europe (2000)

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays in 

European Work Zones (2000) 

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in 

Europe (1999)

Road Safety Audits—Final Report and Case Studies (1997) 

Speed Management and Enforcement Technology: Europe 

and Australia (1996) 

Safety Management Practices in Japan, Australia, and 

New Zealand (1995) 

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety in England, Germany, and 

the Netherlands (1994) 

Planning and Environment 

Active Travel Management: The Next Step in 

Congestion Management (2007)

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European 

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Transportation Asset Management in Australia, Canada, 

England, and New Zealand (2005)

Transportation Performance Measures in Australia, 

Canada, Japan, and New Zealand (2004)

European Right-of-Way and Utilities Best Practices (2002) 

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads (2002) 

Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European 

Highways (2002) 

Sustainable Transportation Practices in Europe (2001) 

Recycled Materials in European Highway Environments 

(1999)

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, and 

Technology (1999) 

National Travel Surveys (1994) 

Policy and Information 

European Practices in Transportation Workforce 

Development (2003)

Intelligent Transportation Systems and Winter 

Operations in Japan (2003) 

Emerging Models for Delivering Transportation Programs 

and Services (1999) 

National Travel Surveys (1994) 

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information From 

Abroad (1994) 

International Guide to Highway Transportation 

Information (1994)

International Contract Administration Techniques for 

Quality Enhancement (1994) 

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, and 

Technology (1994) 

Operations 

Freight Mobility and Intermodal Connectivity in China 

(2008)

Commercial Motor Vehicle Size and Weight Enforcement 

in Europe (2007)

Active Travel Management: The Next Step in Congestion 

Management (2007)

International Technology 

Scan Reports

International Technology 

Scanning Program:

Bringing Global Innovations 

to U.S. Highways
vi INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SCAN REPORTS

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European 

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Traffic Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: Safety, 

Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Superior Materials, Advanced Test Methods, and 

Specifications in Europe (2004) 

Freight Transportation: The Latin American Market 

(2003) 

Meeting 21st Century Challenges of System 

Performance Through Better Operations (2003)

Traveler Information Systems in Europe (2003) 

Freight Transportation: The European Market (2002) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001) 

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays in 

European Work Zones (2000) 

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in 

Europe (1999) 

European Winter Service Technology (1998) 

Traffic Management and Traveler Information Systems 

(1997) 

European Traffic Monitoring (1997) 

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996) 

Winter Maintenance Technology and Practices—

Learning from Abroad (1995) 

Advanced Transportation Technology (1994) 

Snowbreak Forest Book—Highway Snowstorm 

Countermeasure Manual (1990) 

Infrastructure—General 

Audit Stewardship and Oversight of Large and 

Innovatively Funded Projects in Europe (2006)

Construction Management Practices in Canada and 

Europe (2005) 

European Practices in Transportation Workforce 

Development (2003) 

Contract Administration: Technology and Practice 

in Europe (2002) 

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001) 

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads (2001) 

Geotechnical Engineering Practices in Canada 

and Europe (1999) 

Geotechnology—Soil Nailing (1993) 

Infrastructure—Pavements 

Warm-Mix Asphalt: European Practice (2007)

Long-Life Concrete Pavements in Europe and Canada 

(2007)

Quiet Pavement Systems in Europe (2005)

Pavement Preservation Technology in France, South 

Africa, and Australia (2003) 

Recycled Materials in European Highway 

Environments (1999) 

South African Pavement and Other Highway 

Technologies and Practices (1997) 

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996) 

European Concrete Highways (1992) 

European Asphalt Technology (1990) 

Infrastructure—Bridges 

Bridge Evaluation Quality Assurance in Europe (2008)

Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems in Japan and 

Europe (2005) 

Bridge Preservation and Maintenance in Europe and 

South Africa (2005)

Performance of Concrete Segmental and Cable-Stayed 

Bridges in Europe (2001) 

Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies in Europe and Japan 

(2001) 

European Practices for Bridge Scour and Stream Instability 

Countermeasures (1999) 

Advanced Composites in Bridges in Europe and Japan 

(1997) 

Asian Bridge Structures (1997)

Bridge Maintenance Coatings (1997) 

Northumberland Strait Crossing Project (1996) 

European Bridge Structures (1995) 

All publications are available on the Internet at 

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov.
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan vii

Executive Summary......................................................... 1

Chapter 1: Background.................................................. 3

Purpose .................................................................................... 3

Organization of Report.......................................................... 4

Scan Team Members.............................................................. 4

Issues of Interest...................................................................... 5

Host Delegations .................................................................... 5

Travel Itinerary........................................................................ 5

Chapter 2: A Systems Approach to 

Safety Benefits Older Road Users..............................7

Strategic Safety Plans.............................................................. 9

Strategic Partnering..............................................................11

 Local Governments.........................................................11

 Motoring Clubs................................................................12

 Health Service Providers, Insurance Companies, 

 and Retirement Planners................................................12

Chapter 3: Policy and Planning for 

Older Road User Safety.................................................13

Examples of Evidence-Based Planning and 

 Policy Development for Older Road Users.................13

 Personal Travel Surveys..................................................14

 Long-Range Land-Use and Development Plans........14

 Local Government Safety Planning..............................14

 Roadway Infrastructure Inventory ...............................14

 Surveys of Transport System Users and Citizens.......14

Chapter 4: Infrastructure Improvements for 

Older Road Users..............................................................17

Standards and Guidelines ...................................................17

Institutional Issues in Implementing Infrastructure 

Changes..................................................................................17

 Jurisdictional Funding Priorities ..................................17

 Regional Coordination and Partnerships....................18

 Design Flexibility.............................................................18

Implementation Examples..................................................18

 Intersection Operations and Design ............................18

 Traffic Control Devices...................................................19

 Pedestrian Facilities.........................................................19

 Colored Pavements.........................................................21

Chapter 5: Driving Reduction and Cessation 

Issues for Older Road Users........................................23

Licensing and Assessment ..................................................23

Training and Education.......................................................23

Community-Based Mobility Options...............................24

Chapter 6: Future Trends and Research 

Initiatives................................................................................25

Future Trends........................................................................25

 Societal Change Toward Aging in Place......................25

 Transport Mode Changes: Mobility Scooters, 

 Motorcycles, and Recreational Vehicles.......................25

Research Initiatives ..............................................................26

Chapter 7: Major Findings and Implementation 

Plan...........................................................................................27

Findings .................................................................................27

Implementation Plan ...........................................................27

 Enhancement of U.S. Roadway Design and 

 Operations Practice.........................................................27

 Outreach to Nontraditional Partners...........................27

 Targeted Research Program...........................................28

 Establishment of Development Guidelines.................28

 Professional Training for Transportation 

 Professionals..................................................................28

Endnotes ..............................................................................29

Appendix A: Amplifying Questions ......................33

Appendix B: Itinerary and Meeting Schedule ....35

Appendix C: Host Country Contacts ....................37

Appendix D: Scan Team Members........................41

Figures

Figure 1. Older road users scan team in Tokyo, Japan 

(from left to right, Barry Warhoftig, Susan Chrysler, 

Thomas Granda, Pamela Hutton, Thomas Smith, Leanna 

DePue, Howard Glassman, Elizabeth Alicandri, and 

David Harkey)......................................................................... 4

Figure 2. Illustration of a systems approach to safety 

from VicRoads’ Arrive Alive! .............................................. 7

Contents
viii CONTENTS

Figure 3. Automated speed enforcement warning sign in 

Sydney, Australia. ................................................................... 8

Figure 4. Reduced speed zone in high-pedestrian traffic 

area in Brisbane, Australia. ................................................... 8

Figure 5. Examples of state strategic road safety plans in 

Australia.................................................................................10

Figure 6. Logo for community RoadSafe program 

sponsored by VicRoads in Victoria, Australia.................11

Figure 7. Local Government Association of Queensland 

Community-Based Transport Toolbox.............................12

Figure 8. Protected right-turn signals in dedicated 

right-turn lanes in Melbourne (equivalent to left 

turn in the United States)....................................................18

Figure 9. Median barrier treatments and pavement 

marking text in Tokyo..........................................................19

Figure 10. Underground pedestrian walkway under a 

busy urban intersection in Tokyo. .....................................20

Figure 11. A crosswalk in Tokyo with separate lanes for 

bicycles and pedestrians......................................................20

Figure 12. Raised crosswalk with curb extensions in 

Sydney, Australia. .................................................................20

Figure 13. A pedestrian crossing with refuge islands 

and gates in Sydney, Australia. ...........................................20

Figure 14. Midblock pedestrian-actuated crossing with 

pedestrian fencing in Melbourne, Australia. ...................21

Figure 15. Tram-bus transfer station in Melbourne. .....21

Figure 16. Red-colored pavement used to mark a bus 

queue-jump lane at a signalized intersection in 

Melbourne, Australia. ..........................................................21

Figure 17. Green-colored pavement used to highlight a 

bicycle lane as it crosses an unsignalized intersection in 

Sydney, Australia. .................................................................22

Figure 18. Bus lane with red pavement on the Sydney 

Harbor Bridge. ......................................................................22

Figure 19. An elderly shopper using a mobility scooter in 

Tokyo, Japan. .........................................................................25

Figure 20. Scan team members test the Monash 

University Accident Research Centre driving 

simulator. ...............................................................................26

Figure 21. Example of a road train heavy vehicle used 

in rural Australia. .................................................................26
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 1

I

n March 2008, a scan team of nine transportation 

safety, traffic engineering, and human factors experts 

from the United States visited Australia and Japan to 

assess and evaluate infrastructure improvements 

designed to aid older road users. The team met with state 

and federal government transportation officials, university 

research centers, and staff from motorists’ clubs and other 

nongovernmental organizations interested in the mobility 

of older people. The team selected these countries to visit 

because they have demographics and aging trends similar 

to those in the United States and strong traffic safety 

records. From the information the team obtained during 

the scanning study, it identified several planning, design, 

and operational changes that could be implemented in the 

United States to improve the mobility and safety of older 

road users.

The team highlighted the following findings from the 

scanning study:

`The aging of society is a global issue. Transportation 

providers in developed countries worldwide will 

face a common set of issues because of the aging of 

transportation system users.

`Highway safety must be emphasized at the highest levels 

of government to build political will to implement system 

changes that benefit older road users.

`Local government involvement in implementing safety 

plans is critical for success.

`A systems approach to highway safety is most effective. 

This involves engineering, education, enforcement, and 

evaluation.

`Infrastructure and operational changes hold great 

promise for improving safety for older road users.

`Historical safety data are used in the countries studied, 

particularly Australia, for planning, policy development, 

and program evaluation.

`Improving safety for older road users improves safety for 

all and vice versa.

`Removing driving privileges prematurely has unintended 

consequences, such as forcing users to less safe modes of 

transport.

`Mobility options are critical for continued quality of life 

in terms of physical and mental health outcomes.

A subgroup of the scan team was tasked with identifying 

items that could be implemented in the United States. 

The findings of this scanning study will be implemented 

through the following activities:

`Enhancement of U.S. roadway design and operations 

practice through incorporation of best practices and 

research findings into standards, guidelines, and 

handbooks used by transportation professionals

`Outreach to nontraditional partners, such as motoring 

clubs, health-care providers, and seniors’ organizations, to 

promote self-assessment for drivers and education about 

mobility alternatives to driving

`Encouragement of a targeted research program to 

evaluate specific infrastructure improvements observed 

in these countries that show promise to aid older road 

users

`Establishment of development guidelines for use by local 

government and real estate developers to promote best 

practices for access and use by older residents

Executive Summary
2
I

n March 2008, a team of nine transportation safety, 

traffic engineering, and human factors experts from 

the United States visited Australia and Japan to assess 

and evaluate infrastructure improvements designed 

to aid older road users. The scan team members sought 

policy options and initiatives on transportation system 

planning, operations, and design as they relate to older 

road users. The group met with state and federal government transportation officials, university research centers, 

and staff from motorists’ clubs and other nongovernment 

organizations interested in the mobility of older people. 

Although the scan focused on infrastructure improvements, the team also learned about policies for older road 

user training, assessment, and licensing. In addition, 

general road safety programs were discussed with all 

agencies visited. The majority of these programs provided 

a benefit to older road users, although they may not have 

been designed specifically with this user group in mind. 

The converse of this is true as well; programs and policies 

developed for older road user safety and mobility will 

improve transportation for all users. From the information 

the team obtained during the study, it identified several 

planning, design, and operational changes that could be 

implemented in the United States to improve the mobility 

and safety of older road users.

This scanning study was conducted under the auspices of 

the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office 

of International Programs, which focuses on meeting the 

growing demands of its partners at the Federal, State, and 

local levels for access to information on state-of-the-art 

technology and best practices used worldwide. As part of 

this office, the Technology Exchange Program accesses 

and evaluates innovative foreign technologies and 

practices that could significantly benefit U.S. highway 

transportation systems.(1) The main avenue for accessing 

foreign innovations is the International Technology 

Scanning Program. The program is undertaken jointly 

with the American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and its Special 

Committee on International Activity Coordination in 

cooperation with the Transportation Research Board’s 

NCHRP Project 20-36 on “Highway Research and 

Technology—International Information Sharing,” the 

private sector, and academia. 

The older road user scan team began its planning effort in 

September 2007 with the completion of a desk scan that 

recommended Australia and Japan as the two countries to 

visit during the trip. The initial team meeting occurred in 

October 2007 in Washington, DC, and the trip took place 

February 28 through March 16, 2008. 

Purpose

By the year 2020 more than 50 million Americans will be 

age 65 and older, and by the year 2050 roughly 80 million 

adults will be in this age category.(2) Throughout the 

presentations and discussions with the host countries, it 

was clear that the graying of the population is not a demographic phenomenon limited to the United States. The scan 

team chose to visit Australia and Japan because of similar 

demographics, strong safety records, and coordinated 

safety implementation programs. In particular, Australia 

uses strategic safety plans across all levels of government. 

And in Japan the preparatory research showed pedestrian 

and transit infrastructure aimed at improving mobility for 

older users.

In Japan, the growth rate in the proportion of population 

over age 65 is much higher than in the United States. By 

2030, 30 percent will be over 65, compared to 20 percent in 

the United States.(3,4) In Australia in 2030, demographers 

predict that 21.5 percent of the population will be over age 

65.(5) Australia has seen a remarkable reduction in fatalities 

over the previous three decades from a start point of 30.4 

fatalities per 100,000 in 1970 to 7.77 per 100,000 in 2006.(6)

Japan’s traffic fatality rate is also a relatively low 6.7 per 

100,000 people. These numbers compare to the U.S. traffic 

fatality rate of 14.24 per 100,000 people.(7)

It is well established that age-related declines in vision, 

cognition, and physical abilities affect how older road 

users drive and use other transportation modes. As former 

U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta wrote in a 

Public Roads magazine editorial, “Without additional 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 3

C H A PTER

1 Background
4 BACKGROUND

attention to the needs of older citizens, the United States 

faces critical national impacts not only in terms of transportation safety, but also for the independence and mobility of the senior population. The specialized needs of older 

road and transit users will place new demands and strains 

on America’s transportation system.”(8) Engineering-based 

countermeasures are being developed and implemented in 

the United States and abroad to minimize the impact of 

these ability changes.(9)

The U.S. Department of Transportation has a multitude 

of programs devoted to the integration of older road user 

needs involving the full spectrum of transportation 

systems.(10) However, the focus of this scan was on the 

implementation of infrastructure improvements for older 

road users. Many countries, including the United States 

and Australia, have published documents detailing how 

the physical, perceptual, and cognitive changes associated 

with aging affect a person’s ability to use the existing 

transportation system.(11,12,13) These documents include 

recommendations for improvements to infrastructure and 

operations to address the needs of older road users, but few 

have reported on the successful implementation of these 

recommendations. 

The scan team also investigated policy initiatives on 

transportation system planning, operations, and design as 

they relate to older road users. The role of older road users 

in road safety programming, funding, prioritization, and 

evaluation was also discussed with all of the government 

agencies. The scope of this project specifically excluded 

driver licensing and remedial training programs, but the 

team took the opportunity to learn about innovative 

policies in these areas used in Australia. As a recent U.S. 

Government Accountability Office report notes, knowledge 

sharing between the United States and other countries can 

help the United States prepare for the increase in the 

proportion of older road users as the baby boom 

demographic bubble moves toward retirement in the 

coming years.(2)

Organization of Report

The scan report is organized by topic, rather than by 

itinerary. One key theme is that improvements made to 

transportation infrastructure, policy, and services to aid 

older users results in improvements for all users. For this 

reason, the first section of the report focuses on general 

strategic safety planning and evaluation in Australia

and Japan. A systems approach to improving safety 

benefits all users. This systems approach is present in both 

policy and engineering. The report continues with specific 

examples of infrastructure improvements to roadways, 

walkways, and transit systems aimed at older road 

users. Later sections present information on licensing, 

evaluation, and mobility options for citizens after 

they have ceased driving. The report concludes with 

recommendations for short- and long-term implementation in the United States.

Scan Team Members

The nine team members included transportation agency 

personnel from three States, university researchers, and 

representatives of an association of metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPOs) and FHWA. The following were on 

the team:

`Elizabeth Alicandri (FHWA cochair), director, Office of 

Safety Programs, FHWA

`Pamela Hutton (AASHTO cochair), chief engineer, 

Colorado Department of Transportation (DOT)

`Dr. Susan T. Chrysler (report facilitator), senior 

research scientist, Texas Transportation Institute 

`Dr. Leanna Depue, director, Highway Safety Division, 

Missouri DOT

`Howard M. Glassman, executive director, Florida 

Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council

`Dr. Thomas M. Granda, team leader, Human Centered 

Systems Team, FHWA

`David L. Harkey, director, University of North Carolina 

Highway Safety Research Center

Figure 1. Older road users scan team in Tokyo, Japan 

(from left to right, Barry Warhoftig, Susan Chrysler, 

Thomas Granda, Pamela Hutton, Thomas Smith, 

Leanna DePue, Howard Glassman, Elizabeth Alicandri, 

and David Harkey).
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 5

`Thomas J. Smith, administrator, West Virginia Division, 

FHWA

`Barry I. Warhoftig, director, Traffic Engineering, 

West Virginia DOT

Issues of Interest

The purpose of this scan was to collect information from 

abroad with the potential to improve roadway safety and 

mobility for older road users in the United States. 

Improvements made to benefit this user group will result 

in safety and mobility benefits for the general population. 

Major issues of interest included the following:

`Safety planning and evaluation programs

`Policy approaches to improving infrastructure to better 

meet the needs and capabilities of older road users

`Transportation planning policy initiatives to address 

mobility of older citizens in terms of land use, transit, 

and other alternatives to driving

`Infrastructure-based international best practices that 

improve safety and mobility for older road users that 

could be applied in the near term on U.S. roadways

`Policy approaches to improving older driver assessment, 

licensing, and training

`Safety research collaboration opportunities between 

international and U.S. transportation research centers

`Ways to improve U.S. and international practices for 

long-term transportation planning for older road users.

To help the host countries address the team’s concerns, a set 

of amplifying questions (see Appendix A) was provided to 

the hosts several months before the trip. 

Host Delegations

During the 2-week trip, the team members met with 

representatives from the various national and regional 

transportation agencies in the host countries. A complete 

list of agencies and topics addressed is in Appendix B.

Travel Itinerar y

During the 2-week trip, the team visited 

representatives in two countries: Australia and 

Japan. The team visited three states in Australia—

New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland—

and the capital city—Tokyo—in Japan. 

The itinerary is listed below:

March 2: Sydney, New South Wales, 

Australia—team meeting

March 3–4: Sydney, New South Wales, 

Australia—meetings with hosts

March 5–7: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia—

meetings with hosts

March 8: Travel day

March 9: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia—

team meeting

March 10–11: Brisbane, Queensland, 

Australia—meetings with hosts

March 12: Travel day

March 13–14: Tokyo, Japan—

meetings with hosts

March 15: Tokyo, Japan—team meeting

March 16: Return to United States
6
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 7

A systems approach to safety involves users, 

roads and roadsides, and vehicles. This 

philosophy aims to improve safety by 

addressing each of these components of the 

transportation system. Figure 2 illustrates the systems 

approach adopted by VicRoads in Australia. This multiple-perspective approach has been successful because it 

reduces driver error through education, enforcement, and 

road design while at the same time reducing the health 

impacts of crashes when they do occur by improving 

vehicle safety and building more forgivable roadsides.

As mentioned earlier, the ages of road users in Australia 

and Japan are similar to those in the United States. Both 

countries focus on the frailty of older road users. Nearly all 

of the agencies visited had a general aim of keeping older 

people in vehicles as long as possible to prevent them from 

moving to a much more vulnerable class of road user—

pedestrian. This guiding principle could be viewed as being 

at odds with concerns about the risk older drivers pose to 

themselves and other road users of all ages because of 

diminishing perceptual, physical, and cognitive abilities. In 

many sessions, however, the scan team’s hosts presented the 

argument that the older road user’s risk of injury and death 

is much greater as a pedestrian than as the operator of or as 

a passenger in a vehicle. For this public health benefit, 

officials in Australia and Japan try to keep older people 

driving as long as they can safely do so. This attitude leads 

to programs to help drivers, their families, and medical 

professionals assess fitness to drive and policies that favor 

license limitations based on driving needs and ability 

before complete license revocation. A lack of transit 

alternatives and capacity will also cause people to stay 

in their cars longer.

C H A PTER

2 A Systems Approach to Safety 

Benefits Older Road Users

Figure 2. Illustration of a systems approach to safety from VicRoads’ Arrive Alive!(19)

Safer

users

• Comply with speed limits

• Comply with road rules

• Wearing seatbelts/helmets

• Not affected by alchohol, 

drugs or fatigue

ARRIVE ALIVE 2008-2007

Reduce road trauma by 30%

SAFE SYSTEM

Aims to reduce the number of crashes, and should a crash 

occur, reduce the severity of injury by the management of 

crash forces to survivable levels through the interaction of 

safer speeds, safer roads and roadsides and safer vehicles.

Co-ordinated delivery approach

Reduced risk of being killed or seriously injured

Action plans



Safer

roads and 

roadsides

• Speed limits to match 

infrastructure

• Roads and roadsides 

designed to highest safety 

standards practicable

Safer

vehicles

• Vehicles manufactured 

featuring high standard 

safety features





Admittance

to system 

(driver 

licensing)

Education and 

information 

supporting 

road users





Understanding 

crashes and 

risks

Enforcement 

of road rules








8 A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO SAFETY BENEFITS OLDER ROAD USERS

Another consequence of this focus on frailty is an emphasis 

on reducing crash severity, not just crash frequency. The 

performance metrics the Australian agencies use combine 

fatal and severe injury crashes into a single “road tolls” 

category. These agencies recognize that reducing severity 

includes making changes in vehicle and roadside safety, in 

addition to roadway design and operations. The focus of 

crash reduction is not just eliminating fatalities, but rather 

reducing the severity of all crashes. The main operational 

change used to reduce crash severity is lowering vehicle 

speeds. Reducing speed especially benefits older road users 

because of their frailty. Throughout Australia, the general 

focus was on speed reduction to improve outcomes for 

both vehicle-vehicle crashes and vehicle-pedestrian crashes. 

Both New South Wales and Victoria widely use automated 

speed enforcement (i.e., speed cameras) in an effort to 

curtail speed-related injuries (see figure 3). In addition to 

automated enforcement, legislatively mandated speed 

limits are imposed in areas with high pedestrian traffic. 

These include schools, shopping districts, and entertainment precincts (see figure 4). Reducing speeds also allows 

more time for older drivers and pedestrians to react to 

events. This is important for older road users because 

response times, on average, tend to increase with age.

A theme running through road safety programs in each 

Australian state was that addressing fragility involves more 

than focusing exclusively on driver and pedestrian behavior. The focus needs to be on vehicle and roadside safety as 

well. The rationale for this perspective is that since road 

users will continue to make errors, road safety programs 

should attempt to minimize the consequences of those 

errors. One way to minimize the consequences of driver 

error is to provide more forgiving roadsides by eliminating 

pavement edge dropoffs, providing flatter cross-slopes, and 

installing roadside safety devices such as guardrails. 

Roadside safety approaches such as these were observed 

in both countries the scan team visited. 

On the vehicle safety side, one example of this systems 

approach is the current evaluation of vehicle crashworthiness standards in the state of Victoria and a consideration 

of test parameters specific to older occupant injury types. 

Other vehicle safety programs are aimed specifically at 

older drivers. Transportation agencies, as well as other 

community groups, have developed educational materials 

to explain optional vehicle safety equipment to a mature 

audience.

The systems approach allows agencies to address safety 

issues with a multidisciplinary approach. This allows 

Figure 4. Reduced speed zone in high-pedestrian traffic 

area in Brisbane, Australia. Similar speed zones exist in 

other Australian states for shopping districts and school 

zones.

Figure 3. Automated speed enforcement warning sign in 

Sydney, Australia.
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 9

comparisons of the effectiveness of these different 

approaches. One opinion the team heard repeatedly 

in Australia was that engineering solutions hold more 

promise than education for improving safety. This tenet 

was expressed at every agency and university the team 

visited in Australia. Research at Queensland University of 

Technology showed that errors made by older drivers in 

at-fault crashes were errors in judgment, not errors of risk 

estimation as seen with younger drivers. For instance, older 

drivers are more likely to judge inaccurately the speed of 

oncoming vehicles while turning at intersections, leading to 

poor gap selections, while younger drivers are able to judge 

the speed accurately but take higher risk gaps because they 

believe they can make it through the intersection in time.(14)

Engineering solutions to common errors of older road 

users include protected turn phases at signalized intersections and curbside fencing to route pedestrians to actuated 

midblock crosswalks. What these engineering treatments 

have in common is that they remove the go/no-go decision 

from the driver or pedestrian. The infrastructure tells the 

user when it is safe to proceed into a dangerous conflict 

point, such as an intersection.

Both countries used research, conducted in their own 

countries or abroad, to support their policy decisions. The 

research was often used to quantify the safety or mobility 

benefit of a program or policy. The implementing agencies 

then calculated the costs associated with the programs 

and used this benefit-cost ratio to set priorities and policy. 

All agencies visited also used the research as support 

against political or popular pressure to change policies 

and practices.

Strategic Safety Plans

Initiatives for older road users must be viewed in the 

context of the agency’s overall road safety plan. The 

Australian states the scan team visited, in particular, had 

clearly articulated strategic road safety plans. These plans 

were comprehensive and included measurable goals and 

evaluation plans. Each plan touched on issues specific to 

older road user safety, but recognized that overall road 

safety improvements would benefit all users. Figure 5 

illustrates two of the documents pertaining to the 

strategic safety plans. A previous FHWA/AASHTO 

scanning study examined the state of Victoria’s safety 

plan in detail.(15)

On a national level, the Australian Transport Council 

launched the National Road Safety Strategy 2001–2010 

plan. The council is made up of member organizations, 

including state and federal government agencies, insurance 

companies, automobile clubs, and user groups.(16) The plan 

is implemented primarily by state and local governments. 

The goal of the plan is to reduce the fatality rate from 9.3 

per 100,000 people in 1999 to 5.6 by 2010. 

The department of transportation in the Australian state 

of New South Wales is the Roads and Traffic Authority 

(RTA). This agency oversees all roadway construction, 

maintenance, and operation for the state. In addition, this 

agency handles vehicle and driver licensing. The state 

government is implementing its Safer Roads Priority 

Development Plan, which called for the creation of a 

Centre for Road Safety in the RTA. The centre began 

operations in January 2008 and is founded on a safe 

systems partnership approach that includes programs to 

address safer roads, safer vehicles, safer people, and road 

safety technology.(17) Its Road Safety 2010 plan places an 

emphasis on reducing speeding and involving local 

governments in implementation.(18) The Centre for 

Road Safety, functioning in the state DOT, has signoff 

responsibilities for preliminary and detailed construction 

and operational change plans. This responsibility allows 

for the implementation of safety-conscious planning.

The state of Victoria’s department of transportation, 

VicRoads, has a strategic safety plan called “Arrive Alive!” 

The first phase of this plan ran from 2002 to 2007, and it 

was recently revised and extended through 2017. The larger 

plan is implemented through 3-year action plan documents(19) that function as a systematic “black spot” (high 

crash location) reduction program. This action plan is also 

based on a safe systems approach that calls for programs 

aimed at roads, vehicles, and users. Safety improvements 

are implemented through revised design standards for 

roads and roadsides for construction and maintenance 

activities. The “gray spot” program takes information from 

the black spot crash analyses and applies these countermeasures to locations, particularly intersections, with similar 

characteristics. On this systemic level, road safety targets 

are established and evaluated through the use of a 

macro-level modeling tool.(20) This evidence-based 

approach, adjusting for future growth in exposure and 

vehicle ownership, predicts long-term traffic safety 
10 A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO SAFETY BENEFITS OLDER ROAD USERS

improvements due to changes in the systematic variables of 

roadway infrastructure, speed, vehicle design, and driver 

behavior. In this way, the tool helps policymakers set 

realistic traffic safety goals and evaluate the impact of 

individual crash reduction measures.

The current 3-year VicRoads action plan calls for new 

actions in the areas of road improvements, vehicle safety 

standards, drugged driving enforcement, young driver 

graduated licensing, and strategic enforcement of speeding 

and impaired driving. The larger plan includes actions 

aimed at older drivers through education, infrastructure 

improvements, and research. The infrastructure improvements aimed at older road users include land-use planning 

and roadway design enhancements. These are discussed 

in detail later in this report. 

The third Australian state the scan team visited, Queensland, also has a road safety strategy administered by its 

transportation department, known as Queensland Main 

Roads. The Safe4Life plan is similar to the other states’ 

plans in its systematic approach. Because Queensland 

encompasses a large portion of rural roads in the outback 

area of Australia’s interior, this plan includes more 

strategies aimed at rural road safety and heavy vehicle 

movements. One action item of this plan is the Safer 

Roads Sooner program, which allocates money for 

low-cost road safety improvements in high-crash 

locations. Examples of these improvements include 

shoulder rumble strips, new traffic signals, and roadside 

hazard removal and shielding.

Japan also has stated road safety improvement goals for 

federal and state (prefecture) roadways. Its plan was 

developed with input from citizens in local communities 

who answered the question “What should the roads be like 

for the next 10 years?” It also invoked a sense of community and familial responsibility by asking citizens and 

officials “Is this the type of roadway system we want to 

leave for our children and grandchildren?” The goals were 

set during the Central Traffic Safety Measures Conference, 

chaired by the Japanese prime minister. The conference set 

a target to reduce traffic fatalities to below 5,000 by 2012. 

The roadway improvements of this plan primarily focus 

on high-crash locations. Systemwide programs focus on 

pedestrian and bicycle safety by removing utility poles 

in urban areas, separating pedestrians and bicycles from 

vehicular traffic, and improving accessibility of transportation systems for handicapped users. Public support for this 

program was garnered through use of an analogy in media 

reports that tied the number of road crash fatalities to the 

number of Japanese killed in the Sino-Japanese war 

during the Meiji period.

In the United States, federal legislation (Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA-LU)) mandates each State to develop its 

own strategic highway safety plan. To date, 24 of 50 States 

Figure 5. Examples of state strategic road safety plans in Australia.
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 11

have included items specifically geared toward improving 

older road user safety. Like Australia, each U.S. State has its 

own safety plan, but the States vary in their implementation 

progress. 

Strategic Partnering

In both countries visited, but particularly in Australia, road 

safety programs were delivered through partner organizations, not just by transportation agencies. In Australia, this 

approach is very much in keeping with the safe systems 

approach and brings a safety culture to the partnering 

organizations.

Local Governments

National and state road safety initiatives in Australia are 

communicated and executed through partnerships with 

local councils, the equivalent of U.S. county and city 

governments. The scan team heard directly from one 

Melbourne suburb, the city of Whitehorse.(21) The road 

safety officer from this town worked directly with a traffic 

safety staff member from the district VicRoads office. 

Together, they developed a road safety strategy for the city 

that draws on the statewide program, but sets priorities 

based on the city’s own crash data. The road safety programs include pedestrian safety training, vehicle safety 

checks, and senior driver seminars. In addition, the local 

government unit hires engineering consulting firms to 

conduct road safety audits. The programs are funded by a 

city tax. The program administrator reports that these 

programs reflect well on the city government and make 

citizens feel safer. Similar programs exist in New South 

Wales as part of its Road Safety 2010 strategic plan.(22) It is 

important to note that not all local councils have dedicated 

road safety resources to put toward a traffic safety staff 

member.

In addition to individual city road safety coordinators, the 

state DOT sponsors RoadSafe groups through its regional 

or district offices.(23) A VicRoads traffic safety staff person 

works with community groups across multiple councils 

that make up RoadSafe groups. The activities of these 

groups focus primarily on behavioral programs. They 

receive matching funds from VicRoads and local councils 

and/or private businesses to run their programs. For 

example, in one council a local taxi company sponsors 

safety programs and in return is allowed to list its phone 

number on provisional drivers’ license plates, along with 

a message reminding provisional (novice) drivers of the 

zero-tolerance drunk driving laws.

Another partnering approach is taken in the Australian 

state of Queensland, where the Main Roads state DOT 

teams with the Local Government Association of 

Queensland (LGAQ) to address road safety problems.(24)

These two entities jointly sponsor the Roads Alliance, 

which develops regional plans, coordinates resource 

sharing, and conducts road safety audits in coordination 

with the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB). The 

Roads Alliance board administers funds provided by the 

state government by diverting 20 percent of state funding 

directly to local administration. These safety activities 

are conducted on a regional network basis through the 

designation of Regional Roads of Significance. This 

designation assures a systematic approach to improvement protected from local political priorities. In addition, 

the Roads Alliance is pilot testing local government road 

safety program administrators, as used in other states. 

The LGAQ also provides local councils with road 

safety program information and support through its 

community toolbox program.(25)

In Japan, certain regional offices of the Ministry of Land, 

Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism have developed 

their own traffic safety plans. The scan team attended a 

presentation of one such regional plan from the Kanto 

district, which includes the city of Tokyo. The Regional 

Development Bureau strives to use crash data to set 

Figure 6. Logo for community RoadSafe program 

sponsored by VicRoads in Victoria, Australia.
12 A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO SAFETY BENEFITS OLDER ROAD USERS

priorities for infrastructure improvements. It calls this plan 

Mieruka, which translates as “visualization,” to stress the 

importance of looking at data while identifying issues 

and setting priorities. 

Motoring Clubs

Another partnership witnessed in Australia is the link 

between state governments and motoring clubs. Each 

state has its own club that is part of the national Australia 

Automobile Association (AAA). These clubs provide 

road safety information, evaluation, and education to 

members. Perhaps more than in the United States, the 

Australian motoring clubs collaborate with government 

transportation agencies to shape public policy. The clubs 

offer a diversified range of services, such as tour packages 

and resorts, that appeal to members even if they no longer 

drive a vehicle. Motoring clubs also provide road safety 

and vehicle safety information to their customers.

The potential safety of roadway segments based on design 

elements is rated independently by the Australian Road 

Assessment Program (AusRAP), which is administered by 

the AAA with financing from state and federal governments and state motoring clubs.(26) AusRAP provides Star 

Ratings, similar to vehicle crashworthiness ratings, for state 

roads.(27) State motoring clubs, such as the National Roads 

and Motorists’ Association (NRMA), also provide reports 

on community roads to local councils (city governments).

(28) The clubs also provide senior driver education and 

self-assessment programs detailed later in this report. 

Health Service Providers, Insurance Companies, 

and Retirement Planners

Health service providers and health insurers also were 

partners in road safety activities. Overall, Australian 

education efforts for older drivers emphasized physical 

fitness and how this affects ability to drive. The focus on 

physical fitness also has implications for pedestrians’ ability 

to climb on and off transit vehicles, to cross the street 

within timed walk phases, and to avoid slip-and-fall 

hazards throughout the roadway environment. The healthcare providers’ main effort appeared to be to lessen the 

suddenness of the transition from driving to nondriving. 

Programs were in place to train home health-care workers 

to provide information about mobility options for people 

who had ceased driving because of age-related illnesses or 

decline. Transportation safety education programs were 

tailored specifically to older road users’ experience and 

judgment.

Victoria has a unique liability insurance program, whereby 

all injuries due to motor vehicle crashes are covered by a 

state-run Transport Accident Commission funded by 

vehicle registration fees. This gives the state unprecedented 

access to health-care outcomes and costs. These data are 

used to evaluate the success of the road safety plan.

The last example of an innovative partnership involved 

retirement planners and pension fund administrators, 

who are beginning to encourage their clients to include 

planning for transportation needs as part of normal 

retirement planning. Their thinking is that in discussions 

on goals for retirement activities, it would be natural to 

include transportation needs and options.

Figure 7. Local Government Association of Queensland 

Community-Based Transport Toolbox.
As described in the previous chapter, systematic 

safety planning is an important element of 

policy development. In both countries, it was 

clear that safety needs to be a consideration 

both at the highest levels of government and the local level. 

Federal and state legislative bodies discuss road safety and, 

specifically, older road user issues. Also, at the highest level 

of government officials, state premiers (governors) have 

roadway safety as important policy initiatives. The 

involvement of political officials is key to securing longterm funding and building societal support for road safety 

initiatives. In Australia, the long-term strategic road safety 

plans adopted by each state had champions in the federal 

parliament and relevant ministry offices. The policies 

developed permeated the entire the department of 

transportation, regardless of departmental organization. 

Across the three states visited, the scan team observed 

different organizational structures of the functional groups 

of transportation planning; operation, construction, and 

maintenance; risk management; and drivers’ licensing and 

testing. The road safety goals and culture operated across 

agency and divisional boundaries. 

Another important factor in the success of safety planning 

was the way long-term, aspirational goals were combined 

with short-term action plans. State safety plans typically 

covered a 5- to 10-year period, with ambitious crash 

reduction goals clearly stated. These plans were always 

accompanied by action plans, typically in a 1- to 3-year 

framework, that could be used to set funding and 

legislative priorities.

In Japan, as well, federal research and safety improvement 

plans were being applied by government entities at the 

prefecture (state) and city level. This focus on data-driven 

decisionmaking was dominant in all of the Japanese 

programs reviewed. This was true for national, regional, 

and local agencies. Historical crash data were used to 

garner political and popular support for infrastructure 

investment and safety program and policy development.

This integrated use of data from multiple sources to guide 

safety planning was prominent in both countries. Data 

sources for plan development included the items listed 

below. Subsequent report sections present examples of how 

some of these data elements are used to guide strategic 

safety plan and policy development.

`Demographic projections, including immigration and 

geographic distribution in the city, state, or country

`Long-range land-use and development plans

`Historical crash data and projected estimates

`Roadway infrastructure inventory and asset 

management data

`Medical cost and crash outcome health data

`Vehicle damage data from private and public insurers

`Surveys of transport system users, citizens, and 

motoring club members

`Personal travel surveys and diaries

Examples of Evidence-Based Planning 

and Policy Development for Older 

Road Users

Personal Travel Surveys

One example from Australia of how planning tools directly 

guide policy is at VicRoads. The state of Victoria is 

conducting a large personal travel survey that will guide 

transportation planning through 2030. The Victorian 

Integrated Survey of Travel and Activity (VISTA) will 

provide data for land-use planning, transit services, and 

other programs. Results of the last large survey, conducted 

in 1999, showed that two-thirds of men over age 65 made 

their daily trips by driving. The policies and programs that 

arose from this finding are in four areas:

`Supporting older drivers to drive safely longer through 

education and vehicle and infrastructure improvements

`Supporting older drivers transitioning to nondriving 

through research on licensing tests and self-assessment 

educational programs

`Making conventional transport more user-friendly for 

older people by changing schedules and fares and by 

improving physical accessibility

`Removing barriers and providing incentives for 

innovative community transportation approaches, such 

as demand-response services and subsidized taxis

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 13

C H A PTER

3 Policy and Planning for Older 

Road User Safety
14 POLICY AND PLANNING FOR OLDER ROAD USER SAFETY

Long-Range Land-Use and Development Plans

Transit service planning can also be aided through data 

examination. The Roads Alliance, mentioned in the 

previous chapter, provides regional planning coordination 

and resource sharing and accelerates the achievement of 

safety goals. The coastal areas of Queensland are popular 

locations for large planned retirement communities, but 

they are located in rural and suburban areas that are not 

well served by transit. By examining land-use development 

plans, local agencies can work with developers to improve 

roadways serving these communities in ways that specifically aid older drivers. For instance, agencies may recommend protected turn phases at signalized intersections 

serving the development. To serve residents who have 

stopped driving, local transportation officials may recommend improved pedestrian access to transit stops in the 

development. The Community-Based Transport Toolbox(25)

includes suggestions on establishing ride-sharing programs 

at congregate living facilities and retirement communities.

Transit use in Australia and Japan is complemented by 

government policies that support urban infill and concentrated development near transit stops and stations. The 

scan team was impressed by the number and variety of 

transportation options available and the general mix of 

residential, institutional, and light commercial development located along or near the arterial roadway network. 

Sidewalks and bicycle paths were typically included as part 

of the roadway design, and automobile parking restrictions 

and enforcement further supported their nonmotorized 

and public transportation investments. Throughout the 

Australian cities visited, the team noticed a significant 

number of outdoor public recreation and athletic facilities. 

Taken together, these policies and practices contribute to 

the development of walkable and livable communities and 

the opportunity for older road users to age in place. One 

such example of a transit-oriented development is in the 

Melbourne suburb of Box Hill.(29) The state of Victoria has 

invested in expanding tram and bus services in this area. 

Other communities also benefit from the state’s Transit 

Cities program.(30)

Local Government Safety Planning

An example of how data are used as performance metrics 

was observed in Whitehorse, a Melbourne, Australia, 

suburb with a population of 143,000. There the city council 

funds a traffic safety staff position through city tax revenue. 

This person develops a 2-year safety improvement plan 

based on analyses of local crash data, citizen input, and an 

evaluation of the effectiveness of past educational and 

infrastructure programs. This plan is presented to the 

council, which endorses it and provides funding that is 

administered by the traffic safety staff person. This action 

plan is tied closely to the state strategic plan.(31) One 

program in the strategy is the Wiser Driver behavioral 

education program for older drivers, which was developed 

by Hawthorn Community Education Centre in Victoria, 

Australia. The city traffic safety officer works as a partner 

with his or her counterpart in the district state department 

of transportation office to deliver an education program 

over 4 weeks to seniors that, apart from driver safety, 

focuses on planning for future mobility, training on 

ticketing systems for transit, encouraging women to drive 

more while their husband is still alive to maintain their skill 

level, training on map reading, and trip planning to avoid 

high-risk left-hand turns.

Roadway Infrastructure Inventory

Queensland Main Roads uses modeling software to 

predict safety based solely on roadway and roadside 

design features, without looking at actual historical crash 

rates. The NetRISK software provides a tool for local 

maintenance and engineering staff members to inventory 

their current roadways and assess factors that may be 

more likely to cause crashes.(32) Examples include 

shoulder width, condition of pavement markings, and 

horizontal alignment. Weights in the model can be 

modified to emphasize particular data elements to target 

specific user groups, such as older road users.

Surveys of Transport System Users and Citizens

In Japan, the scan team found an example of using citizen 

survey data to prioritize investment and programs. The 

Japanese federal transport agency recognizes that local and 

regional priorities vary based on land use, commuting 

patterns, and existing infrastructure. Because of the 

relatively late start in the construction of expressways in 

Japan in general, the main concern in the past in all 

prefectures was expressway construction. Today, however, 

an increasing number of local governments rate the 

importance of other infrastructure elements higher than 

expressways. These include taking disaster preparedness 

measures, burying utilities, and improving roadway 

accessibility for disabled and elderly users primarily 
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 15

through sidewalk improvements and barrier removal. In 

the face of the diversified needs in the towns and prefectures, the federal agency wants to know if the performance 

measures it has developed are really sufficient to meet these 

needs. Federal laws and policy development are now based 

solely on crash data. 

Logically, addressing the high-importance items identified 

by the citizen survey will affect crash rate. For instance, 

burying utility lines eliminates many casualties due to 

struck-object crashes. Likewise, improving sidewalk 

facilities will minimize vehicle-pedestrian conflicts and 

should reduce pedestrian crashes, a prominent problem for 

older road users. The aim is not just to improve safety, but 

also to improve the aesthetics and usability of the road 

scene. The Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, 

Transport, and Tourism is developing performance metrics 

that capture both the safety improvement due to these 

changes and the more intangible benefits to the roadscape 

and livability of the affected areas. 
16
Standards and Guidelines

As in the United States, the consensus standards development process in Australia and Japan is time consuming. 

Best practices and established engineering solutions may 

appear in guideline documents years before they are 

incorporated into state or federal design standards. 

This implementation lag is present in the United States as 

well. The recommendations of the FHWA Older Driver 

Highway Design Handbook are just now appearing in 

the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for 

Streets and Highways (MUTCD) and A Policy on 

Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO 

Green Book), even though the original handbook is 

more than a decade old.

Austroads is the association of Australian and New 

Zealand road transport and traffic authorities, so it 

functions much like AASHTO does in the United States. 

Austroads has sponsored research and policy development 

to identify infrastructure improvements for older road 

users.(33) This major research effort, titled Environment 

and Design for Older Drivers, was conducted by researchers at Monash University Accident Research Centre under 

the sponsorship of Austroads. Stage one of the research, 

conducted in the late 1990s, used the FHWA Older Driver 

Highway Design Handbook as a guide to evaluate the state 

of Australasian roads (encompassing Australia and New 

Zealand).(34) This effort also included site visits to “black 

spots” with a higher-than-normal involvement of older 

drivers in accidents. The site visits concluded that 

intersection sight distance and gap acceptance were 

particular problems for older drivers. The second phase of 

this project, completed in 2004, includes a large roadway 

design handbook with points to consider when designing 

roads to accommodate older road users.(33) A training 

workshop was also developed and efforts are underway to 

incorporate these recommendations into Australasian 

road design standards. In general, it appears that Australia 

has followed the FHWA model very closely on handbook 

and training course development paired with changes in 

existing standards to better address the specific needs of 

older road users.

The Japanese Industrial Standards address some 

infrastructure elements such as roadway lighting and 

accessibility for disabled people. The roadway lighting 

standard has been influenced by research on the 

visibility of elderly pedestrians.(35) The accessibility 

standards, similar to Americans with Disabilities Act 

standards in the United States, also serve the needs 

of older road users by specifying curb heights, tactile 

markings, and sidewalk widths to aid older people 

with mobility limitations.

Institutional Issues in Implementing 

Infrastructure Changes

Jurisdictional Funding Priorities

As in the United States, the countries visited have a 

stratified level of government, each with its own spending 

priorities and political pressures. The Japanese example 

cited in Chapter 3 on local agencies’ desires for infrastructure changes that affect the aesthetics and livability of their 

towns demonstrates this. 

In Australia, the strategic safety plan is used to unify all 

levels of government on project selection and funding. 

As mentioned in Chapter 2, the involvement of political 

officials from all levels of government in developing 

and adopting the strategic safety plan can prevent 

some of these conflicts. At a state government district 

office level, the national or state safety plan can be used 

as a defense against politicians and citizens who may be 

promoting infrastructure changes that will have a smaller 

impact on safety. In addition to the safety plan, crash data 

and projections can also be used to defend priorities.

Cost-sharing plans that give local governments direct 

control over a portion of state or federal aid money are 

another tool used to encourage improvements on local 

roads. The Japanese federal roads agency has used crash 

data to demonstrate safety problems on local roads to 

local governments. It then offers to improve regional 

arterial systems to pull traffic off the local roads, reducing 

traffic volumes and exposure on the local roads. This 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 17

C H A PTER

4 Infrastructure Improvements for 

Older Road Users
18 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLDER ROAD USERS

traffic diversion enables local governments to establish 

lower speed limits in residential areas, enhancing 

pedestrian and bicycle safety.

Some local governments may be reluctant to participate 

with state or regional partnerships because they view 

roadway issues as state issues and fear that maintenance 

costs may shift to them. Good communication between 

local and state district officials is important to assuage those 

fears. Professional societies and formal partnerships such as 

the Road Alliance can also promote interaction and 

information sharing.

Regional Coordination and Partnerships

Coordination of design and operations standards, 

maintenance activities, and construction on a regional 

level is important to provide road users with a predictable 

system. This predictability in and of itself can enhance 

safety by easing the driving task. Local preferences for 

certain infrastructure elements that provide a local identity 

such as street name sign design, crosswalk markings, or 

roadside landscaping can often interfere with the goal of 

uniformity. Formal partnerships such as the Road Alliance 

in Queensland offer one way of encouraging coordination 

and cooperation by providing a means for local agencies to 

share resources, such as sign maintenance contracts that 

save money for the agency but also provide 

uniformity on regional roadways.

Design Flexibility

A flexible approach to roadway design standards, similar to the U.S. resurfacing, rehabilitation, and restoration (3R) standards, was 

discussed at Queensland Main Roads. This 

concept, known as the Extended Design 

Domain, allows roads to meet different 

minimum design criteria as long as there is no 

known negative safety record. This flexibility 

in design criteria allows rehabilitation 

improvements to be made without bringing 

the entire roadway up to current design 

standards. It also allows funds to be spread 

across multiple lower-cost improvements on a 

systemwide basis rather than dedicated solely 

to one expensive countermeasure. If the 

roadway serves areas of high use by older 

drivers, as determined by local authorities, 

these extended design criteria cannot be applied and the 

road must meet the highest current standards. 

The scan team observed other examples of flexibility in 

roadway design in many of the urban areas it visited. 

Innovative pedestrian treatments were applied in locations 

judged by local engineers to be areas of high pedestrian 

traffic. In other cases, countermeasures were installed based 

on crash history. Systemwide transit boarding area 

improvements were being phased in where right-of-way 

allowed. In some cases, traffic lane shifts and parking 

restriction changes were necessary to accommodate the 

wider boarding areas.

Implementation Examples

The FHWA Older Driver Highway Design Handbook(13)

and the subsequent Australian modification of it(12) were 

the basis for most of the roadway improvements observed 

in Australia. Many of the improvements implemented, 

particularly those at intersections, focus on removing the 

go/no-go decision from the driver. 

Intersection Operations and Design

For urban intersections, the most common improvement 

was to add a protected right-turn (left-turn in the United 

Figure 8. Protected right-turn signals in dedicated right-turn lanes in 

Melbourne (equivalent to left turn in the United States).
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 19

States) phase and add a turn arrow to the signal 

head. This improves safety for all drivers, but 

especially for seniors, who have historically high 

crash rates in these situations. The addition of a 

dedicated turn lane also aids older drivers by 

removing them from through traffic. More 

important, it offsets them laterally to provide better 

visibility of oncoming traffic. As figure 8 shows, the 

signal head is mounted overhead and on the center 

median island to further enhance visibility.

Another area of infrastructure improvement aimed 

at older road users in Australia was roadway and 

roadside design criteria changes. Examples from 

geometric design were adjustments to intersection 

angle and merge lane length that would differentially aid older drivers by reducing the amount 

of head turning needed to navigate intersections 

and merge areas. For older drivers, a more 

perpendicular crossing also reduces the need for 

extreme head turns, which can be difficult for 

those with arthritic necks and shoulders.

The slowing response times of older drivers were reflected 

in allowing longer perception reaction times in formulas 

for intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance. 

Many of the adjustments to these parameters were 

adapted from the FHWA Older Driver Highway 

Design Handbook.(13)

Traffic Control Devices

As with most other safety improvements, changes in 

traffic control device standards aid all drivers, not just 

older drivers. Traffic control device standards in Australia 

require high-brightness sign sheeting and pavement 

marking materials to ensure good nighttime visibility for 

older road users.(36) Some agencies use larger signs and 

wider markings to further this aim, but no standards are 

in place for these applications. 

In Japan, horizontal curves on expressways are enhanced 

through the placement of retroreflective materials on 

concrete median barrier walls and guard rails, as figure 9 

shows. The Japanese also make widespread use of text and 

symbols in pavement markings. The text used on expressways shown in figure Figure 9 lists a destination city name 

before a major interchange.

Pedestrian Facilities

Both countries presented further examples of infrastructure improvements aimed specifically at pedestrians. These 

changes would especially benefit older pedestrians because 

of their large over-representation in severe injury and fatal 

crashes involving a motor vehicle and a pedestrian.

In Japan, a strong theme driving many changes to 

infrastructure is the physical separation of pedestrians, 

bicyclists, and motor vehicles. This is accomplished 

through sidewalk widening, dedicated barrier-separated 

bicycle facilities, and pedestrian grade separation at large, 

busy, multilane intersections (either overpasses or tunnels). Figure 10 (see next page) shows the street-level 

entrance to an underground pedestrian tunnel under a 

busy urban intersection in Tokyo. Even where barrierseparated bicycle lanes cannot be built, traffic control 

devices encourage separate travelways for these modes 

(see figure 11 on the next page, in which the text in the 

foreground reads “stop” and the text within the lane lines 

reads “bicycle”). These separations provide an added 

measure of protection from vehicles for vulnerable road 

users. In addition, Japanese officials reported some injuryproducing collisions between bicyclists and pedestrians. 

The separation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities will 

help reduce those risks as well.

Figure 9. Median barrier treatments and pavement marking text 

in Tokyo.
20 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLDER ROAD USERS

In Australia, pedestrians were also the focus of many 

infrastructure improvements. These improvements 

aid all pedestrians, not just older persons, by providing 

better visibility of the crosswalk to approaching vehicles. 

Figure 12 shows a raised crosswalk with curb extensions in 

Sydney. This design shortens the walking distance for 

pedestrians, reducing the time they are exposed to traffic. 

The curb extensions also bring the pedestrian closer to the 

travelway, making the waiting pedestrian more visible to 

approaching motorists. Figure 13 shows a shopping area 

that uses curbside fencing and landscaping to channelize 

pedestrians to the crosswalks. In addition to parking 

restrictions near crosswalks, the landscaping provides 

a mechanism to provide bump-outs that shorten the 

Figure 10. Underground pedestrian walkway under a 

busy urban intersection in Tokyo.

Figure 11. A crosswalk in Tokyo with separate lanes for 

bicycles and pedestrians.

Figure 12. Raised crosswalk with curb extensions in 

Sydney, Australia.

Figure 13. A pedestrian crossing with refuge islands and 

gates in Sydney, Australia.
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 21

walking distance at the crosswalk. The median island signs 

and marking also improve the conspicuity of the crosswalk 

to approaching vehicles. Another example of pedestrian 

fencing is shown in figure 14. Melbourne also uses actuated 

pedestrian signals at midblock crossings in areas of high 

pedestrian traffic.

Some cities, such as Melbourne, are making improvements 

to transit infrastructure to enable easy boarding and 

transferring for elderly and disabled riders. The transfer 

station located in the median of a suburban arterial street 

shown in figure 15 allows tram riders to exit the tram at the 

end of the line and board local buses without crossing the 

street. In general, after discussions with experts in 

both countries, the scan team believed that the low 

level of paratransit services was comparable to those 

in the United States. This was particularly true in 

rural areas. Both Japan and Australia have laws 

equivalent to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 

but it appeared that these laws had not been in place 

as long as the U.S. law. 

Colored Pavements

In both countries, the scan team noticed the 

frequent use of colored pavements for a variety 

of purposes. Australia used red to prohibit 

normal vehicular traffic from bus and taxi lanes 

(see figures 16 and 18) and green to emphasize 

bicycle lanes in high-hazard areas (see figure 17). 

Japan was experimenting with colored pavement 

to mark high-hazard horizontal curves. Crash 

data from one location shows a large reduction in 

run-off-road crashes, particularly for large trucks. 

Japan was also experimenting with using colored 

pavement as a tool for positive guidance and 

Figure 14. Midblock pedestrian-actuated crossing with pedestrian 

fencing in Melbourne, Australia.

Figure 15. Tram-bus transfer station in Melbourne.

Figure 16. Red-colored pavement used to mark a bus 

queue-jump lane at a signalized intersection in 

Melbourne, Australia.
22 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR OLDER ROAD USERS

lane assignment through complex intersections. 

In lane guidance applications, the colored 

pavements match the colors of route legs shown 

on accompanying diagrammatic signs. This could 

be particularly advantageous to older drivers, 

especially in decreasing decision time at 

information-rich locations. Australia reported 

some recent developments in materials with 

durable color and sufficient pavement friction 

to not pose a safety hazard to pedestrians and 

cyclists. While these materials appear to show 

promise, thorough evaluations of material 

durability and driver behavior have not been 

completed. This is an area for future research 

in the United States.

Figure 17. Green-colored pavement used to highlight a bicycle 

lane as it crosses an unsignalized intersection in Sydney, Australia.

Figure 18. Bus lane with red pavement on the Sydney Harbor 

Bridge.
As in the United States, the issue of driving 

cessation is one federal and state governments 

in Australia struggle with to maintain a balance 

between public safety and individual mobility. 

The public perception is that older drivers are hazards to 

other road users and should be removed from driving. 

This perception is reinforced when high-profile older 

driver crashes receive significant media attention. Crash 

data, however, generally do not support this perception. 

In general, agencies do not want to remove drivers from 

their vehicles prematurely because it creates a travel mode 

shift to walking, which has a higher risk for injury, and 

because driving cessation has negative health consequences 

as former drivers become socially isolated. During the 

scan study, radically different approaches to the problem 

were observed.

Licensing and Assessment

In New South Wales, the RTA mandates annual driver 

retesting beginning at age 85.(37) Beginning at age 80, 

an annual medical certification is required. This recent 

change to the policy has prompted a strong response 

from the community and motoring clubs.(38) The RTA 

also maintains an anonymous tip line for family 

members, law enforcement, and the general public to 

report unsafe drivers who may need to be retested.

In contrast, the state of Victoria has conducted research 

that shows no benefit of mass age-based driver retesting 

and cannot justify the cost of these tests.(39) It allows mail 

renewals every 3 years for those over age 75. Victoria does 

provide many self-assessment aids, offered by several 

agencies, that encourage drivers and families to be aware 

of potential age-related declines in driving ability. As part 

of the RoadSafe community road safety program (funded 

through VicRoads), Wiser Driver courses (developed by 

Hawthorn Community Education Centre) are offered in 

the community and supporting information is provided 

to health-care providers and family members.(40)

The state of Queensland is reevaluating its driver licensing 

policy and expects changes to come in the next version of 

its strategic safety plan. It now has a mandatory selfreporting requirement for certain medical conditions 

and a medical evaluation system. Some older driver 

medical conditions such as eye disease and dementia 

are covered by this system. Drivers over 75 must 

have a medical evaluation every 2 years.(41)

In Japan, the law is scheduled to change in 2009 to 

require driver retesting at age 75. The Tokyo government 

announced a new incentive program to encourage drivers 

over 65 to voluntarily surrender their driving privileges. 

The program partners with local businesses to provide 

discounts to those who give up their licenses.(42)

Training and Education

The scan team’s conversations with researchers and 

transportation officials in Australia indicated that for the 

most part they believe older drivers limit their driving to 

low-risk situations as they age. Training programs and 

educational materials, therefore, are often geared toward 

helping drivers and their families assess their fitness to 

drive and providing information on high-risk driving 

situations. These training programs do not focus on 

driving skills, but rather on understanding risks and 

adapting driving exposure and behavior to mitigate 

those risks.

As seen in the strategic safety plans, partnerships are 

crucial in senior driver training and education. The 

automobile clubs play an important role. The Royal 

Automobile Club of Victoria offers a road safety program 

for seniors on safe driving, driving skill, and assessing 

fitness to drive.(43) The 1-hour Years Ahead program is 

offered at senior centers, community clubs, and retirement villages. The same program is offered by National 

Roads and Motorists’ Association (NRMA) motoring 

clubs in New South Wales.(44) In addition, they offer 

information on choosing vehicles with advanced safety 

features that provide more protection to frail seniors in 

the event of a crash.(45) Some clubs offer refresher behindthe-wheel driver training with a professional driving 

instructor.(46) These sessions can serve as an objective 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 23

C H A PTER

5

Driving Reduction and Cessation 

Issues for Older Road Users
24 DRIVING REDUCTION AND CESSATION ISSUES FOR OLDER ROAD USERS

assessment of fitness to drive as well as preparation for 

mandatory age-based retesting. In addition, the clubs 

offer study materials for driver’s reexamination.(47,48)

A pilot program in Queensland, being evaluated by the 

local university,(49) provides peer-to-peer education 

programs for those considering driving cessation. The 

classes include self-assessment of fitness to drive, as well 

as information on using the transit system and accessing 

home delivery services. Officials have found that peer 

education is particularly effective for these topics. The 

evaluation will assess quality of life and mental health 

outcomes for participants. The hope is that by learning 

about mobility options, participants will get out of their 

homes more often. These trips have been linked to 

positive mental health in previous studies. 

A similar program, called Mobility Advisor,(50) is 

being tested in Victoria in cooperation with the 

Monash University Accident Research Centre. The 

state Parliamentary Road Safety Committee initiated 

the program after public hearings and research on older 

road user safety.(51) The project will specially train state 

home health-care workers on mobility advice such as 

transit use. The project will measure performance by 

assessing physical and mental health and travel patterns 

throughout the study. It does not feature the peer 

education component of the Queensland program.

VicRoads provides a one-stop Web site for advice on 

transportation options after driving cessation for former 

drivers and their family members.(52) It provides 

information on driving cessation decisionmaking, public 

transport, and links to community alternative transportation programs. This Web site, along with several of the 

presentations the scan team saw throughout Australia, 

also promotes the use of delivery services for groceries, 

bill paying, postal services, and other common trip 

generators for older people.

Motoring clubs also offer members support for mobility 

after driving cessation.(53) While that may seem ironic, 

club officials report that these services help retain 

members who may use other travel and insurance 

products the club offers. In addition, the motoring clubs 

believe they have a role to play in representing not just 

the motoring interests of drivers, but also the mobility 

interests of citizens in general, including nondrivers. 

The clubs believe that community prosperity and 

well-being depend on having efficient transport and 

mobility services in place.

Community-Based Mobility Options 

If drivers elect to stop driving, their transportation needs 

must be met by other means. Traveling in personal vehicles 

remains the dominant form of transportation for many 

elderly people who have stopped driving. This is accomplished through direct requests of family or friends and 

through community rideshare groups. Being dependent on 

others for rides can be stressful for older people. Research 

in Japan has shown that it is more stressful for the elderly 

person making the request than it is for the person being 

asked.(54) In the countries visited, as in the United States, 

there is a shortage of mobility options to serve all the trip 

needs of older citizens. This is particularly true in rural 

areas, where routine trips such as medical appointments 

or shopping can require traveling long distances.

The scan team observed a community-based program in 

Queensland offered by the Transport Development and 

Solution Alliance, a nonprofit organization that provides 

support to communities to develop and coordinate 

transportation services.(55) The representative from this 

group noted that the majority of trips are for medical care. 

With the growth in outpatient surgery, the number of 

trips is increasing as more follow-up appointments are 

required. These multiple trips often use up an individual’s 

transportation budget for the month. The alliance 

sponsors a biannual conference among local governments, including those in rural areas, to share ideas for 

alternative transportation. The alliance has found that 

the cost of owning and maintaining a vehicle limits the 

success of many community-based programs. Some 

innovative vehicle use programs that have been tried 

in rural Queensland include the use of school buses for 

midday trips, the use of church buses during weekdays, 

and even the use of the local hearse as a transport 

vehicle for intercity trips in rural areas.
Future Trends

Societal Change Toward Aging in Place

As life spans and health-care costs increase, Australia, 

Japan, the United States, and other countries are increasing 

the emphasis on aging in place. This means providing 

goods and services to individuals in their own homes as 

long as possible. This trend away from traditional old-age 

homes has several implications for transportation. One 

not-so-obvious effect is an increase in delivery services for 

such items as groceries and medicines. Indeed, some 

transportation counseling programs for older persons that 

the scan team learned about in Australia include training 

on how to obtain delivery of items to reduce the need to 

drive or use on-demand transit services.

The other, more obvious, effect of aging in place is the 

sustained emphasis on personal vehicles as the primary 

mode of transport for elderly people—either as drivers or 

passengers. Hand in hand with this is a growing need for 

transit services accessible to older road users. Housing 

development trends toward transit-centered, mixed-use 

residential and commercial areas will serve some access 

needs as older people move out of the traditional singlefamily suburban home. But even those who choose to stay 

in their own homes will need transit, most likely in the 

form of on-demand services.

Transport Mode Changes: Mobility Scooters, 

Motorcycles, and Recreational Vehicles

Officials in both countries discussed the rising number of 

older people who use mobility scooters for transportation, 

often operating them in vehicle travelways. There was no 

clear consensus on what should be done in terms of 

licensing, training, or enforcement. Infrastructure changes 

may be needed to accommodate these machines as well. 

Some agencies provide public education materials to guide 

the selection of scooters and offer tips for safe operation.(56)

In Japan, mobility scooters are welcomed by some in the 

aged services community who view them as a promising 

alternative form of transportation. They allow individuals 

to retain personal mobility, which is important for mental 

health and high quality of life.

In Australia, as in the United States, the number of older 

motorcyclists is rising. The largest single motorcycle club in 

Australia is the Ulysses Club, which is open only to members over age 50. Many of these motorcyclists are new 

riders or have not ridden in many years. Motorcycles today 

are much more powerful than 25 years ago, and a new “old” 

rider may not be ready for the new machines. Some 

agencies are considering changes in training and licensing 

laws to accommodate these returning motorcyclists, who 

may have kept their license current for 30 years but have 

not owned a motorcycle for many years. Again, the fragility 

and physical strength limitations of older motorcyclists 

pose a particular risk for injury. 

The last trend on the horizon in Australia is an increase in 

recreational vehicle ownership among older people—the 

so-called “graying nomads.” As in the United States, retiring 

baby boomers are buying motor homes and camping 

trailers and going on extended driving trips. In Australia 

these trips pose a particular hazard because of the poorquality roads in much of the country’s interior. In addition, 

these remote roads are used by long-haul tractor-trailers 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 25

C H A PTER

6

Future Trends and Research 

Initiatives

Figure 19. An elderly shopper using a mobility scooter 

in Tokyo, Japan.
26 FUTURE TRENDS AND RESEARCH INITIATIVES

that tow up to four trailers (called “road trains”). Changes 

to paved surface widths, turn radii, passing lane length, 

and other infrastructure elements may be needed to 

accommodate this increase.

Research Initiatives

Several research programs presented to the scan team 

hold promise for future policy changes, infrastructure 

development, and educational programs. 

A study at Monash University Accident Research Centre 

(MUARC) uses a portable driving simulator located in a 

car dealership (see figure 20). This is a large-scale study 

examining driving patterns at intersections and other 

high-risk traffic maneuvers and hazards in drivers of all 

ages. In similar previous studies, MUARC researchers have 

shown that older drivers have a wider gaze pattern when 

negotiating some hazardous events, which in general is 

safer. But researchers also found that older drivers are 

slower to notice a hazard such as an unexpected vehicle 

entering their lane. This delay is likely because of both 

slowed response time and the wider gaze pattern, which 

lessens the probability of looking in the critical location 

at the time the vehicle pulls out.(57,58)

MUARC is also conducting an Older Driver Naturalistic 

Driving Study similar to those proposed in the U.S. Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2) Safety program. 

This study will focus on older driver behavior at intersections. The study, funded by a private automotive company, 

will provide participants with an instrumented vehicle to 

drive for one month. Driving performance data such as 

gaze pattern, speed, braking, and steering will be collected 

for predetermined intersections in the Melbourne area.

The Queensland University of Technology is investigating 

the effects of age-related eye disease on driving through 

research using open-road driving with professional driving 

instructors and occupational therapists conducting 

assessments of older drivers on directed and nondirected 

routes. The professional instructors score drivers for errors 

in checking blindspot, lane position, gap selection, braking, 

and acceleration. The participants also undergo a battery 

of tests that measure vision, perceptual-motor skills, and 

physical health. The results of this test will be used to 

develop a battery of fitness-to-drive tests for use by medical 

personnel and licensing examiners. More basic research on 

the visual capabilities of older people who suffer from 

age-related cataracts and other eye diseases is also 

underway at this university. Another line of research here 

is examining pedestrian visibility enhancements provided 

by reflectors placed on biomotion points such as major 

joints (see reference 59 for a demonstration).

Researchers at the Center for Accident Research and Road 

Safety–Queensland (CARRS-Q) at the Queensland 

University of Technology are beginning an evaluation of 

older drivers of recreational vehicles, whom they refer to as 

“graying nomads.” This study will examine infrastructure 

changes needed to accommodate motor homes in rural 

and recreational areas. The study will also interview older 

RVers about safety concerns associated with driving in the 

outback, which is characterized by narrow roads, limited 

services, and heavy truck traffic (see figure 21 and endnote 

60). Other research at CARRS-Q is examining the impact of 

multiple prescription medications on driving performance.

Figure 20. Scan team members test the Monash 

University Accident Research Centre driving simulator.

Figure 21. Example of a road train heavy vehicle used 

in rural Australia.
Findings

`The aging of society is a global issue and other countries 

face the same challenges as the United States.

`A systems approach to safety provides for integration of 

safety of older road users. Care must be taken with safety 

planning to keep the focus on a systematic approach, and 

not allow subgroups of users, such as seniors, to become 

individual categories addressed separately from the whole.

`Improving safety for older road users improves safety for 

all and vice versa.

`Removing driving privileges from older drivers 

prematurely has unintended consequences because older 

persons are at higher risk of injury as pedestrians than 

they are as vehicle occupants (drivers or passengers). 

The social isolation that often follows driving cessation 

impacts physical and mental health.

`Successful safety and mobility programs are being 

implemented at the local government level. These 

programs rely on data for program prioritization and 

evaluation.

`Research and practice have demonstrated engineering, 

policy, and educational programs that can improve the 

safety and mobility of older road users. These changes 

require the political will to provide the resources needed 

to implement them.

`Historical data can be a powerful tool in setting policy 

and priorities for engineering, operational, and 

educational changes to improve road safety for all 

users. Evidence-based planning and evaluation are 

also critical to gaining political support and countering 

public misperceptions about older road users’ 

capabilities.

`Society must provide mobility options for older citizens 

to maintain their quality of life and their contribution to 

the economy.

Implementation Plan

The scan team firmly believes that much can be gained in 

the United States by implementing the systems approach 

to safety and promoting the types of innovative partnerships it observed in the countries visited. To that end, the 

scan team plans a number of technical presentations and 

papers at national meetings and conferences sponsored by 

FHWA, AASHTO, and other organizations to disseminate 

information from the scan. The team also formed a 

subgroup to draft a scan implementation plan for the 

initiatives and strategies described above. 

The success of this international scan can be measured by 

the number of ideas brought back to the United States and 

translated into strategies that will improve safety and 

mobility for older road users. Below are the initial strategies that the scan team developed from the knowledge it 

acquired on this scan and that it believes are the most 

critical for making progress in the United States. These 

strategies, while aimed at older persons, will improve 

safety for all road users.

Enhancement of U.S. Roadway Design and 

Operations Practice

The first implementation item is to integrate the knowledge 

of infrastructure improvements from Australia and Japan 

into relevant U.S. documents (e.g., FHWA’s Highway Design 

Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians) and training 

programs. FHWA is updating the handbook, and a revised 

version is expected in spring 2009. The implementation 

plan calls for a subsequent updating of the training curriculum and the development of a 1-hour briefing for DOT 

executives. The effort on this implementation item will 

include consideration of how state strategic highway safety 

plans could include infrastructure changes that would 

especially benefit older road users, as suggested in the 

FHWA handbook.

Outreach to Nontraditional Partners

The second implementation item is to encourage partnerships between government agencies, such as departments 

of transportation and health, and nongovernment organizations (e.g., American Association of Retired Persons, 

American Automobile Association, National Optometric 

Association) to address the needs of older road users. Joint 

activities may include driver training and self-assessment 

programs, visual screening, pairing of transport planning 

with retirement planning, and development of educational 

materials on a variety of mobility topics.

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 27

C H A PTER

7 Major Findings and 

Implementation Plan
28 MAJOR FINDINGS AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Targeted Research Program 

The scan implementation team has also created a plan to 

develop a research program on policies and interventions 

targeted at older road users. The program will cover 

evaluation of specific interventions aimed at improving 

safety and mobility for older road users, development 

of new procedures and tools to aid practitioners in 

making decisions, and sharing of information on 

best practices through synthesis documents and 

professional conferences. 

Establishment of Development Guidelines 

The fourth implementation item is to develop planning and 

land development guidelines for congregate housing and 

related transportation facilities and services intended to 

meet the growing needs of older populations and older 

road users. The guidelines would be developed to assist 

local governments and the development community in 

planning and retrofitting existing facilities, as well as to 

help local governments evaluate land development proposals as they relate to older populations and older road users. 

The proposal could become a joint-venture research project 

developed cooperatively by national transportation and 

land development organizations.

Professional Training for Transportation Providers 

The last implementation idea arose from presentations on 

research that showed that one barrier to using transit was 

older users’ fear of falling because of sudden starts and 

stops. The implementation team will evaluate the need for 

new training materials for professionals who provide 

alternative means of transport (e.g., transit, taxis, etc.) to 

educate them on the needs and capabilities of the elderly. 

To implement this training, the team will work with 

government and industry partners (e.g., Federal Transit 

Administration and American Public Transportation 

Association) to disseminate these materials throughout the 

profession. The team is aware of some existing training and 

educational materials and will assess how agencies have 

used them.
1

 Federal Highway Administration, International 

Programs, http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/tmpl.

cfm?title=scanning.

2

 General Accounting Office, Older Driver Safety: 

Knowledge Sharing Should Help States Prepare for Increase 

in Older Driver Population, Report to the U.S. Senate 

Special Committee on Aging, GAO-07-413, Washington, 

DC, April 2007.

3

 Yoshitaka Motoda, Iwate Prefectural University, 

“Problems of Transportation for Aged People in Japan,” 

Presentation to Older Road Users Scan Team, Tokyo, 

Japan, March 14, 2008.

4

 J.C. Day, Population Projections of the United States by 

Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1995–2050, Current 

Population Reports, P25–1130, U.S. Bureau of the Census, 

Washington, DC, 1996.

5

 Brian Fildes, Monash University Accident Research 

Center, “Older Driver Crashes,” Presentation to 

Older Road Users Scan Team, Melbourne, Australia, 

March 6, 2008.

6

 Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Road Deaths 

Australia: 2006 Statistical Summary, April 2007,

www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/

2007/pdf/mrf_2006.pdf.

7

 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Traffic 

Safety Facts 2006, DOT HS 810 818, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Washington, DC, 2006, www-nrd.nhtsa.

dot.gov/Pubs/TSF2006FE.PDF.

8

 N.Y. Mineta, “Ensuring Safe Mobility for America’s 

Seniors,” Public Roads, Federal Highway Administration, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 

January/February 2006. 

9

 R. Hodder, “Creating Safe Travel Environments for 

Mobility as We Age: AARP’s Efforts and Key Roles for 

Transportation Professionals,” ITE Journal, Institute of 

Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, April 2007, 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3734/is_200704/

ai_n19198685/pg_1.

10 T. Granda and S. Thompson, “The Older Driver Comes 

of Age,” Public Roads, Federal Highway Administration, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 

January/February 2006.

11 I. Potts, J. Stutts, R. Pfefer, T.R. Neuman, K.L. Slack, 

and K.K. Hardy, Volume 9: A Guide For Reducing 

Collisions Involving Older Drivers, Guidance 

for Implementation of the American Association 

of State Highway and Transportation Officials Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan, National Cooperative 

Highway Research Program Report 500:9, 

Transportation Research Board, Washington, 

DC, 2006.

12 B. Fildes, J. Oxley, B. Corben, and J. Langford, Road 

Environment and Design for Older Drivers: Stage II, 

Volume 1–Overview, Volume 2–Handbook of Suggestions for Road Design Changes, AP-R261/04, Austroads, 

Sydney, Australia, 2004, www.austroads.com.au/

handbook.html.

13 L. Staplin, K. Lococo, and S. Byington, Older Driver 

Highway Design Handbook, FHWA-RD-97-135, 

Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department

of Transportation, Washington, DC, 1998.

14 Julie Hatfield, Ralston Fernandes, R.F. Soames Job, and 

Ken Smith, “Misunderstanding of Right-of-Way Rules at 

Various Pedestrian Crossing Types: Observational Study 

and Survey,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, Volume 39, 

Issue 4, July 2007, 833–842.

15 Federal Highway Administration, Halving Roadway 

Fatalities: A Case Study from Victoria, Australia 

1989–2004, FHWA-PL-06-011, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Washington, DC, April 2006,

http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/halving_fatalities/

halving_fatalities.pdf.

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 29

Endnotes
30 ENDNOTES

16 Australian Government, Australian Transport Safety 

Bureau, National Road Safety Strategy Panel, 

www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/national_road_

safety_stategy/member_organisations.aspx.

17 New South Wales Road and Traffic Authority Centre 

for Road Safety, www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/

index.htm.

18 New South Wales Road and Traffic Authority Centre for 

Road Safety, www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/

rs2010.pdf.

19 VicRoads, Arrive Alive! Road Safety Plan, 

www.arrivealive.vic.gov.au.

20 B.F. Corben, D.B. Logan, and P. Schofield, “Predicting 

Road Safety Strategy Performance,” Paper presented at the 

2007 Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and 

Education Conference, Melbourne, Australia, Oct. 17–19, 

2007, www.roadsafetyconference2007.com.au/

Presentation/Logan_David.pdf.

21 City of Whitehorse, Victoria, Australia, Road Safety 

Program, www.whitehorse.vic.gov.au/Page/Page.

asp?Page_Id=246&h=1.

22 City of Orange, New South Wales, Australia, Road 

Safety Program, www.orange.nsw.gov.au/index.

cfm?objectId=94D7F8B3-0E34-8D1F19D64F8126F0A287.

23 VicRoads, Community Road Safety Programs, 

www.roadsafe.org.au.

24 Local Government Association of Queensland, 

www.lgaq.asn.au/portal/dt.

25 Local Government Association of Queensland, 

Community-Based Transport Queensland Toolbox, 

December 2006, www.lgaq.asn.au/lgo/resources/

infrastructure/Transport/PublicTransport/CBT_TB_

Final.pdf.

26 Australian Automobile Association, Australian Road 

Assessment Program (AusRAP), www.ausrap.org.

27 Australian Automobile Association, AusRAP Safer Roads 

Save Lives: Star Ratings for Victoria’s Country Highways,

www.ausrap.org/ausrap/starratings.htm.

28 National Roads and Motorists’ Association, Better Roads 

Project, Safer Roads Initiative, www.mynrma.com.au.

29 State of Victoria, Department of Planning and 

Community Development, Box Hill: Transit Cities 

Program, www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/nrenpl.nsf/

LinkView/FF67B5E11BA2DDD7CA256D480003CF03 

CB3A095B12F1DCC1CA256D190029AA6B.

30 State of Victoria, Department of Planning and Community Development, Transit Cities Program, www.dse.vic.

gov.au/DSE/nrenpl.nsf/childdocs/-3AFDBF77580D7A93 

CA256D19002583CC-CB3A095B12F1DCC1CA256D1900

29AA6B?open.

31 City of Whitehorse, Victoria, Australia, Follow Your 

Road To Safety: Road Safety Strategy 2006-2011, 

August 2006, www.whitehorse.vic.gov.au/Files/

DraftRoadSafetyStrategy.pdf

32 D. Hense, P. Roper, and R. McInerney, “NetRISK: The 

Ultimate Solution for Road Network Safety Assessments,” 

Paper presented at the 2006 Safe Roads Conference, 

Melbourne, Australia, Sept. 7–8, 2006,

www.saferoadsconference.com/2006/papers/

Philip%20ROPER%20Netrisk%20paper 

%20-%20Saferoads%202006.pdf.

33 B. Fildes, J. Oxley, B. Corben, and J. Langford, Road 

Environment and Design for Older Drivers: Stage II 

Volume 1–Overview, Volume 2–Handbook of Suggestions 

for Road Design Changes, AP-R261/04, Austroads, Sydney, 

Australia, 2004, www.austroads.com.au/handbook.html.

34 B. Fildes, B. Corben, A. Morris, J. Oxley, N. Pronk, L. 

Brown, and M. Fitzharris, Road Safety Environment and 

Design for Older Drivers, AP-R169/00, Austroads, Sydney, 

Australia, 2000, www.onlinepublications.austroads.com.au/

script/Details.asp?DocN=AR0000136_0904.

35 O. Kunihiko, K. Ikehara, O. Minoshima, T. Kawai, and 

N. Inukai, Study on Requirements of Intersection Lighting, Report Number 289, National Institute for Land and 
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 31

Infrastructure Management, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport, Tokyo, Japan, 2006, www.nilim.go.jp/

lab/bcg/siryou/tnn/tnn0289pdf/ks0289002.pdf

(in Japanese).

36 Department of Main Roads, Queensland Road Traffic 

Management Manual, Queensland Government, Brisbane, 

Australia, 2002, www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/web/

AttachStore.nsf/allobjects/Traffic%20&%20Road%20

Use%20Management%20Manual%20-%20Volume%20

1.1/$file/TRUM_Volume1_1.1.pdf.

37 New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, Options 

for Older Drivers, www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/

renewingalicence/olderdrivers/older_driver_options.html.

38 National Roads and Motorists’ Association, NRMA’s 

response to the RTA Older Driver Licensing Paper, 

www.mynrma.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/mynrma/hs.xsl/

nrma_response_rta_older_driver_paper.htm.

39 J. Langford, S. Koppel, J.L. Charlton, B. Fildes, and S. 

Newstead, “A Re-Assessment of Older Drivers as a Road 

Safety Risk,” IATSS Research, International Association of 

Traffic and Safety Services, Tokyo, Japan, 2006, 30(1), 27–37.

40 VicRoads, Stepping Out of the Driver’s Seat: RoadSafe 

Older Drivers Program, www.roadsafe.org.au/media/

Stepping%20out%20of%20the%20drivers%20seat%20

factsheets.pdf.

41 Queensland Government, Queensland Transport 

Licensing Rules, http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/Home/

Licensing.

42 Asahi ShimBum/Herald Tribune, “Incentives aim to stop 

elderly driving,” Tokyo, Japan, March 19, 2008, www.asahi.

com/english/Herald-asahi/TKY200803180383.html.

43 Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, Years Ahead: 

Road Safety for Seniors Program, www.racv.com.au/

wps/wcm/connect/Internet/Primary/road+safety/

road+safety+for+seniors/road+safety+for+seniors 

+program.

44 National Roads and Motorists’ Association, 

NRMA Years Ahead Senior Driving Program,

www.mynrma.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/mynrma/hs.xsl/

yearsahead.htm.

45 Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, Making the Right 

Choice: Vehicle Safety Advice for Seniors, www.racv.com.

au/wps/wcm/connect/Internet/Primary/road+safety/

road+safety+for+seniors/choosing+a+safe+vehicle.

46 Royal Automobile Club of Queensland, Driver 

Assessment Services, www.racq.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/

racq_cms_production/hs.xsl/Motoring_Road_Safety_

Foun_motor_roadsafety_older_drvassess_ENA_

HTML.htm.

47 National Road and Motorists’ Association, NRMA Older 

and Wiser, www.mynrma.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/mynrma/

hs.xsl/older_drivers.htm.

48 Royal Automobile Club of Queensland, Refresh Driver 

Handbook, www.racq.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/racq_cms_

production/hs.xsl/Comm_Ed_Res_Foun_comm_

educresource_yearsahead_ENA_HTML.htm.

49 J. Liddle, K. McKenna, and H. Bartlett, “Improving 

Outcomes for Older Retired Drivers: The UQDRIVE 

Program,” Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 

Australian Association of Occupational Therapists, Fitzroy, 

Victoria, Australia, 54(4):303-306, December 2007.

50 Victoria Department of Infrastructure, Maintaining 

Mobility: The Transition From Driver To Non-Driver, 

www.doi.vic.gov.au/Doi/Internet/planningprojects.nsf/

AllDocs/383B1372FCA1F9CCCA257398001ECD17?

OpenDocument.

51 State of Victoria, Inquiry Into Improving Safety for 

Older Road Users, Road Safety Committee, May 2001, 

www.parliament.vic.gov.au/rsc/older/tor.htm.

52 VicRoads, Getting Around Without a Car, 

www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/Home/RoadSafety/

SafetyForRoadUsers/GettingAroundWithoutACar.htm.

53 Royal Automobile Club of Victoria, Mobility Planning 

for Seniors, www.racv.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/Internet/

Primary/road+safety/road+safety+for+seniors/

mobility+planning.
54 Yoshitaka Motoda, Iwate Prefectural University, 

“Problems of Transport for Aged People,” 

Presentation to Older Road Users Scan Team, Tokyo, 

Japan, March 14, 2008.

55 Queensland Transport Development and Solutions 

Alliance, http://www.tdsa.org.au.

56 VicRoads, Guide for Electric Wheelchairs and Other 

Motorised Mobility Devices, www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/

Home/RoadSafety/SafetyForRoadUsers/

GuideForElectricWheelchairs.htm.

57 Judith Charlton, Monash University Accident Research 

Centre, “Older Drivers, Vision Impairment, and

Naturalistic Driving Studies,” Presentation to Older Road 

Users Scan Team, Melbourne, Australia, March 6, 2008.

58 B. Fildes, J.L. Charlton, C. Muir, and S. Koppel, Driving 

Responses of Older and Younger Drivers in a Driving 

Simulator, Proceedings of the 51st Annual Conference, 

Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, 

Melbourne, Australia, October 14–17, 2007.

59 Queen’s University, BioMotion Laboratory Walker 

Demonstration, www.biomotionlab.ca/Demos/

BMLwalker.html.

60 Photo of road train, http://upload.wikimedia.org/

wikipedia/commons/d/df/Road_Train_Australia.jpg.

32 ENDNOTES
The focus of this scan is on the implementation 

of infrastructure improvements and traffic 

operations for older road users. The scan team 

also aims to investigate and discuss policy 

initiatives on transportation system planning, operations, 

and design as they relate to older road users. Rural roadway 

safety issues are of particular interest to the group. The 

scope of this project specifically excludes driver licensing 

and remedial training programs, but the scan team is 

interested in learning about any particularly innovative 

programs in these areas in the countries it visits. The team 

is particularly interested in actually visiting roadways where 

infrastructure improvements have been implemented to 

observe firsthand the materials and construction 

techniques employed. 

Policy and Planning 

Policy Development 

`What is the long-range vision or strategy of your agency 

to address older road users? What policies and programs 

are in place to address the needs of older road users?

`Are there specific laws, rules, and regulations in effect that 

require your agency to address the needs of older road 

users? Do you have flexibility in assessing these needs or 

has the policy been dictated from above?

`What efforts have you made to educate and influence 

decisionmakers and legislators about older road user 

issues?

`Are there partnerships established and used to address 

the immediate and long-term needs of older road users? 

Who are the partners (e.g., regional or local transportation departments, other government agencies such as 

licensing administrators, retirement organizations, 

medical professionals, automobile clubs, etc.) and 

how do they work together?

`What institutional barriers had to be overcome to allow 

infrastructure decisions to be made on the basis of safety 

benefits for older road users? How were those barriers 

addressed? Do they still exist?

Planning Data and Process

`What is the demographic future of your country or region 

and how will it impact the ability of the older population 

to use the transportation system (as drivers, pedestrians, 

and transit users)? What data sources are used for 

planning for older road users?

`What funding opportunities and constraints are placed 

on your agency to address the needs of older road users?

`Are there dedicated funds (e.g., safety programs, transit 

infrastructure) to address the needs of older road users? 

Approximately how much of the transportation budget 

in your country is spent on addressing older road user 

needs?

Mobility Alternatives and Community-Based 

Planning

`How has transit-oriented development been promoted 

and implemented to accommodate older road users and 

minimize their automobile use or dependence?

`How are suburban and rural areas (where public 

transportation systems are not sufficiently robust) 

identifying needs and implementing alternative 

transportation programs for older road users?

`How do the transport sector and the health and human 

services sector coordinate policies and work together to 

meet older adults’ transportation needs?

Implementation and Evaluation 

`How do you educate and train practitioners responsible 

for the planning, design, and construction of the infrastructure about the needs of the aging population and 

potential solutions to accommodate those needs?

`How do you assess the effectiveness of planning and 

policy initiatives targeted to older road users?

`How do you encourage innovation in traffic safety 

product development in the private sector in a way that 

rewards research that finds new ways to benefit older 

road users?

Infrastructure Issues

Standards and Guidance for Engineering and 

Operations

`Have specific standards and policies been developed 

that must be followed in constructing new facilities or 

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 33

Amplifying Questions A

PPE N DI X

A
34 APPENDIX A: AMPLIFYING QUESTIONS

reconstructing existing facilities that specifically address 

the needs of older road users? Examples may range from 

typeface requirements on signs to changes in signal 

phasing to enhanced geometric designs.

`How are the needs of older users considered in the 

normal cycle of revising infrastructure design and 

operational standards?

`Have the needs of older road users changed the 

replacement cycle of critical infrastructure elements 

(i.e., signs, pavement markings)? How was this 

change justified? 

Implementation and Evaluation 

`At what levels of government are engineering standards 

implemented—national, regional, or local? What policies 

and regulations are in place to insure the needs of older 

road users are met at all levels?

`How do you prioritize projects for implementation? 

What are the tradeoffs you must consider in implementation? Are the infrastructure improvement decisions most 

often made at the project level to respond to a specific 

problem or need, or at the system level to proactively 

address anticipated needs?

`What measures of effectiveness does your agency use to 

assess infrastructure or operational improvements? 

Best Practices in Infrastructure Improvements

`Can you provide case studies (examples) of successful 

changes in the following areas on improvements made for 

older road users: a) roadway design/geometrics (including intersections), b) traffic control devices (signs, signals, 

markings), c) pedestrians and bicyclists, and d) transit 

services/design?

`Have any of your advanced traveler information systems 

or other intelligent transportation system services been 

designed, tested, or implemented specifically with older 

users in mind?

`What specific facilities could you show our group that 

demonstrate infrastructure improvements designed to 

aid older road users?

Research and Evaluation Issues 

Research 

`What are the most significant gaps in knowledge that 

need to be addressed through research to improve 

facilities for older road users?

`What research is being pursued, either by your own staff 

or through agreements with research centers and universities, to identify potential infrastructure improvements 

to aid older road users?

`Who has taken the lead in identifying and funding 

research to address older road user needs? Are there 

partnerships in place to address these research needs?

`How do you integrate research results in your planning 

process and in the development of engineering 

standards and guidance?

`What are the safety research collaboration opportunities 

between international and U.S. transportation research 

centers?

Other Topics of Interest

`Does your country or state have a special license renewal 

schedule for the older road user? Does special testing 

accompany license renewal after a certain age?

`How do you communicate the availability of other travel 

modes to older users to eventually have them rely less on 

the automobile?

`What programs are in place to educate older road 

users (as well as others) on the rules of the road and 

appropriate driving and walking behaviors, particularly 

where unfamiliar infrastructure treatments may be 

implemented? Are future initiatives planned to educate 

older road users?

`Are you helping to manage the transition from older 

driver to older passenger/traveler? What efforts are you 

engaged in that encourage older drivers who are not 

competent to drive to surrender their licenses? Do you 

have a program that targets the children of older drivers 

to help the parents make the decision to stop driving?

`Have you specifically accounted for older users when 

designing advanced traveler information systems and 

services (e.g., traffic Web sites, automated phone traveler 

information systems)?

`Are you aware of any innovative technologies being 

developed in your country that may assist older road 

users? This would include vehicle-based systems, 

as well as roadway or information systems.
Date City Meeting Topic/Agency

Sunday, March 2 Sydney Team Organization Meeting

Monday, March 3 Sydney Road and Traffic Authority, New South Wales

• Centre for Road Safety

• Traffic Management

• Policies and Guidelines

• Customer Education

Austroads 

• Operations and Strategic Priorities

Tuesday, March 4 Sydney National Roads and Motorists’ Association

Wednesday, March 5 Melbourne VicRoads, State of Victoria

• Road Safety and Network Access

• Road User Safety

• Behavioral and Community Programs

• Road Engineering and Safety

• Vehicle Management and Safety

City of Whitehorse Road Safety Coordinator

Thursday, March 6 Melbourne Monash University Accident Research Centre

• Epidemiology

• Highway Design

• Visual Impairments

• Vehicle Safety

• Cognitive Impairments

Tour of VicRoads Transit and Roadway Improvements

Friday, March 7 Melbourne VicRoads, State of Victoria

• Infrastructure Policy

• Network and Asset Planning

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and 

 Development Activities on Older Drivers

Transportation Accident Commission

Royal Automobile Club of Victoria

Saturday, March 8 Travel Day Melbourne to Brisbane

Sunday, March 9 Brisbane Team Working Meeting

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 35

Itinerary and Meeting Schedule A

PPE N DI X

B

continued on next page
36 APPENDIX B: ITINERARY AND MEETING SCHEDULE

Date City Meeting Topic/Agency

Monday, March 10 Brisbane Queensland Department of Main Roads

• Road Design Standards

• Design Innovations and Standards

• Road Safety Strategy

• Licensing and Standards

• Local Government Relations

Local Government Association of Queensland

Royal Automobile Club of Queensland

University of Queensland Mobility Training Research

Tuesday, March 11 Brisbane Queensland University of Technology

• Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety

• School of Optometry and Institute of Health and 

 Biomedical Innovations

• Mt. Cotton Driver Training Centre

Wednesday, March 12 Travel Day Australia to Japan

Thursday, March 13 Tokyo Ministry of Land and Infrastructure, Transport, 

 and Tourism

• National Road Bureau

• Kanto Division

• National Institute for Land and Infrastructure 

 Management

Expressway Authority

Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis

Friday, March 14 Tokyo Iwate Prefectural University

Tour of Tokyo Pedestrian and Transit Facilities

Saturday, March 15 Tokyo Team Working Meeting

Sunday, March 16 Travel Day Japan to United States
AUSTRALIA

Roads and Traffic Authority 

Dr. Soames Job, Ph.D., B.A. (Hons.)

General Manager, Road Safety

Telephone: 02 9218 3564

E-mail: soames_job@rta.nsw.gov.au

Robert W. O’Keefe

Manager, Policies and Guidelines

Traffic Management Branch

Telephone: 02 9218 6287

E-mail: robert_okeefe@rta.nsw.gov.au

Paul Rees

Manager, Customer Education and Compliance

Driver and Vehicle Strategy Branch

Road Safety, Licensing, and Vehicle Management

Telephone: 02 9218 6185

E-mail: paul_rees@rta.nsw.gov.au

National Roads and Motorists’ Association

Rene van der Loos

General Manager-Marketing

Telephone: 02 8222 2159

E-mail: rene.vanderloos@mynrma.com.au

Anne Morphett

Senior Adviser-Road Safety

Government Relations & Public Policy 

Telephone: 02 8222 2163

E-mail: anne.morphett@mynrma.com.au

Austroads

Murray Kidnie

Executive Director

Telephone: +61 2 9264 2550

E-mail: mkidnie@austroads.com.au

VicRoads

George Mavroyeni

Director-Road Safety & Network Access

Telephone: (03) 9854 2700

E-mail: george.mavroyeni@roads.vic.gov.au

David Shelton

Director, Road User Safety

Telephone: (03) 9854 2550

E-mail: david.shelton@roads.vic.gov.au

Antonietta Cavallo, B.A. (Hons.), M.A. (Psych.), MPsS

Manager, Road User Behavior

Telephone: +61 3 9854 2714

E-mail: antonietta.cavallo@roads.vic.gov.au

Tricia Williams

Registered Psychologist, MAPS AHRI

Manager, Road Safety Policy and Older Drivers

Telephone: (03) 9854 2612

E-mail: tricia.williams@roads.vic.gov.au

Ross McArthur

Acting Director, Vehicle Management & Safety 

Telephone: (03) 9854 2642

E-mail: ross.mcarthur@roads.vic.gov.au

Tarmi Wright

Road Safety Coordinator

Telephone: (03) 9881 8019

E-mail: tarmi.wright@roads.vic.gov.au

Peter White

Director, Network Planning & Policy 

Network and Asset Planning 

Telephone: (03) 9854 2213

E-mail: peter.white@roads.vic.gov.au

VicRoads Design

David Barton, B.E. (Civil) Hons.

Principal Road Design Engineer

Telephone: +61 3 9811 8201

E-mail: david.barton@roads.vic.gov.au

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 37

Host Country Contacts A

PPE N DI X

C
38 APPENDIX C: HOST COUNTRY CONTACTS

VicRoads International

Wendy Goad 

Project Operations Officer

Telephone: +61 3 9854 2276

E-mail: wendy.goad@roads.vic.gov.au

Bob Cross

Manager, International Projects

Telephone: +61 3 9854 2283

E-mail: robert.cross@roads.vic.gov.au

Australasian New Car Assessment Program

Ross E. McArthur

Chartered Professional Engineer, Institution of Engineers 

Australia

ANCAP Council Chairman

Telephone: +61 3 9854 2642

E-mail: ross.mcarthur@roads.vic.gov.au

City of Whitehorse

Leah McGuinness

Road Safety Officer

Telephone: (03) 9262 6369

E-mail: leah.mcguinness@whitehorse.vic.gov.au

Monash University Accident Research Centre

Dr. Brian Fildes

Chair of Road Safety

Telephone: +61 3 9905 4369

E-mail: brian.fildes@muarc.monash.edu.au

Dr. Bruce Corben

Senior Research Fellow

Telephone: +61 3 9905 4375

E-mail: bruce.corben@muarc.monash.edu.au

Dr. Judith L. Charlton

Senior Research Fellow

Telephone: +61 3 9905 1903

E-mail: judith.charlton@muarc.monash.edu.au

Dr. Jennifer Oxley

Senior Research Fellow

Telephone: +61 3 9905 4374

E-mail: jennie.oxley@muarc.monash.edu.au

Eric Howard & Associates Strategic Road Safety 

Advisory Services

Eric Howard

Telephone: +61 3 9563 6131

E-mail: eric.howard@bigpond.com

Department of Infrastructure

Jenny Morris

Director, Transport Policy Branch 

Telephone: +61 3 9655 6551

E-mail: jenny.morris@doi.vic.gov.au

Transport Accident Commission

Liz Knight

Project Manager, Road Safety

Telephone: 03 9664 6954

E-mail: elizabeth_knight@tac.vic.gov.au

Royal Automobile Club of Victoria

Brian Negus

General Manager, Public Policy

Telephone: +61 03 9703 6103

E-mail: brian_negus@racv.com.au

Melinda Congiu, B. Bus. (Psych.), 

Post Grad. Dip. (Psych.)

Research and Policy Officer

Telephone: 03 9790 2917

E-mail: melinda_congiu@racv.com.au

Queensland Government Department of Main Roads

Alan Tesch

Director-General

Telephone: 07 3306 7320

E-mail: mr.dg@mainroads.qld.gov.au

Graham Wright

Director (Community and Industry Relations)

Strategic Policy and Development

Telephone: +61 7 3306 7061 

E-mail: graham.l.wright@mainroads.qld.gov.au

Alita Singer, B. Int. Bus., Dip. Export Mgt.

Manager (Trade & Industry Relations)

Corporate Office

Telephone: +61 7 3306 7288

E-mail: alita.n.singer@mainroads.qld.gov.au
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 39

Ricky Cox

Principal Advisor (Design Standards)

Telephone: +61 7 3834 2285 

E-mail: rlcox@mainroads.qld.gov.au

Dr. Owen Arndt, B.E. (Civil), M.Eng., Ph.D., 

MIEAust, RPEQ

Principal Engineer (Road Engineering Standards)

Infrastructure Design

Telephone: 07 3834 2398

E-mail: owen.k.arndt@mainroads.qld.gov.au

Ross Mensforth, B.A., M. Pub. Ad. (J.P. Qual.)

Principal Advisor 

Local Government Relations

Telephone: 07 3306 7142

E-mail: ross.j.mensforth@mainroads.qld.gov.au

Queensland Transport

Pam Palmer

Senior Manager (Policy)

Land Transport & Safety

Telephone: 07 3253 4397

E-mail: pam.palmer@transport.qld.gov.au

Local Government Association of Queensland

Mark Piorkowski

Roads, Transport, and Infrastructure Manager

Telephone: 07 3000 2226

E-mail: mark_piorkowski@lgaw.asn.au

Pine Rivers Neighbourhood Centre

Sandy Doré

Community Development

Telephone: 07 3205 2955

E-mail: cd@prnc.org.au

ARRB Group

Brett Martin, B.E. (Civil), MIEAust, RPEQ

Regional Manager (QLD/NT)

Telephone: +61 7 3260 3535

E-mail: brett.martin@arrb.com.au

Royal Automobile Club of Queensland Road 

Safety Education 

David Foster 

Manager

Telephone: 07 3872 8925

E-mail: david.foster@racq.com.au

University of Queensland Drive

Melody Webb

Telephone: +61 7 3346 7487

E-mail: m.webb3@uq.edu.au

Queensland University of Technology

Dr. Mark King, B.Sc. (Hons.), M.B.A., Ph.D.

Lecturer

Telephone: +61 7 3864 4546

E-mail: m2.king@qut.edu.au

Prof. Narelle Haworth, B.A. (Hons.), Ph.D.

Professor in Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation 

Telephone: +61 7 3864 8417

E-mail: n.haworth@qut.edu.au

Joanne Wood, B.Sc. (Hons.), Ph.D.

Professor, School of Optometry 

Faculty of Health

Telephone: +61 7 3864 5701

E-mail: j.wood@qut.edu.au

Professor Mary Sheehan, B.A. (Hons.), 

Dip. Psych., Ph.D.

Director

Telephone: +61 7 3864 4549

E-mail: m.sheehan@qut.edu.au

Troutbeck & Associates 

Rod Troutbeck

Telephone: +61 7 3862 1554

E-mail: rod@troutbeck.com.au
40 APPENDIX C: HOST COUNTRY CONTACTS

JAPAN

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, 

and Tourism

Norihiro Saka

Deputy Director of Road Safety Management Office

Regional Road and Environment Division

Road Bureau

Telephone: +81-3-5253-8495

E-mail: saka-n22aa@mlit.go.jp

Shigeyoshi Uehara

Deputy Director of Road Planning, 1st Division

Road Department

Kanto Regional Bureau

Telephone: +81-48-600-1341

E-mail: uehara-s8310@ktr.mlit.go.jp

Masahiro Kaneko

Head, Advanced Road Design and Safety Division

Road Department

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Telephone: +81-29-864-2510

E-mail: kaneko-m92pq@nilim.go.jp, kuukan@nilim.go.jp

Koji Matsumoto

Senior Researcher, Advanced Road Design and 

Safety Division

Road Department

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Telephone: +81-29-864-4539

E-mail: matsumoto-k88ce@nilim.go.jp, 

kuukan@nilim.go.jp

Sinsuke Setoshita

Senior Researcher, Advanced Road Design and 

Safety Division

Road Department

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Telephone: +81-29-864-4539

E-mail: setoshita-s8910@nilim.go.jp, kuukan@nilim.go.jp

Hiroki Hashimoto

Researcher, Advanced Road Design and Safety Division

Road Department

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Telephone: +81-29-864-4539

E-mail: hashimoto-h92ta@nilim.go.jp, kuukan@nilim.go.jp

Osamu Minoshima

Researcher, Advanced Road Design and Safety Division

Road Department

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Telephone: +81-29-864-4539

E-mail: minoshima-o92ta@nilim.go.jp, 

kuukan@nilim.go.jp

Expressway Research Institute, Inc.

Yoshiyasu Murashige

Director, Traffic Engineering Division

Telephone: +81-42-791-1673

E-mail: y.murashige.aa@ri-nexco.co.jp

Institute for Traffic Accident Research and 

Data Analysis

Shinichi Yoshida

Senior Research Engineer

Research Division

Telephone: +81-3-3515-2515

E-mail: yoshida@itarda.or.jp

Iwate Prefectural University

Yoshitaka Motoda, Dr.Eng.

Professor

Telephone: +81-52-561-9377

E-mail: motoda@iwate-pu.ac.jp
Contact Information

Elizabeth Alicandri (FHWA Cochair)

Transportation Specialist

Federal Highway Administration

400 7th St. SW 

Room 3407, HSA-20

Washington, DC 20590

Telephone: (202) 366-6409

E-mail: beth.alicandri@fhwa.dot.gov

Pamela Hutton (AASHTO Cochair)

Chief Engineer

Colorado Department of Transportation

Suite 262

4201 E. Arkansas Ave.

Denver, CO 80222-3406

Telephone: (303) 757-9206

E-mail: pamela.hutton@dot.state.co.us

Dr. Susan T. Chrysler (Report Facilitator)

Senior Research Scientist

Manager, Human Factors Program

Center for Transportation Safety

Texas Transportation Institute

The Texas A&M University System

3135 TAMU

College Station, TX 77843-3135

Telephone: (979) 862-3928

E-mail: s-chrysler@tamu.edu

Dr. Leanna Depue

Highway Safety Director

Missouri Department of Transportation

105 W. Capitol Ave.

Jefferson City, MO 65102

Telephone: (573) 751-7643

E-mail: leanna.depue@modot.mo.gov

Howard Glassman

Executive Director

Florida Metropolitan Planning Organization 

Advisory Council

605 Suwannee St., MS 28B 

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450

Telephone: (850) 414-4062 

E-mail: howard.glassman@dot.state.fl.us

Dr. Thomas Granda

Engineering Research Psychologist

Team Leader, Human Centered Systems Team 

Federal Highway Administration 

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, VA 22101

Telephone: (202) 493-3365

E-mail: thomas.granda@fhwa.dot.gov

David Harkey, P.E.

Director

UNC Highway Safety Research Center

730 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.

Bolin Creek Center, Suites 200 & 300 

Chapel Hill, NC 27514

Telephone: (919) 962-2202

E-mail: david_harkey@unc.edu

Thomas Smith

Division Administrator

Federal Highway Administration 

West Virginia Division

700 Washington St. E., Suite 200

Charleston, WV 25301

Telephone: (304) 347-5928

E-mail: thomas.smith@fhwa.dot.gov

Barry Warhoftig, P.E.

Director of Traffic Engineering 

West Virginia Division of Highways 

Capitol Complex

1900 Kanawha Blvd. E.

Charleston, WV 25305

Telephone: (304) 558-3722

E-mail: barry.i.warhoftig@wv.gov

Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 41

Scan Team Members A

PPE N DI X

D
42 APPENDIX D: SCAN TEAM MEMBERS

Biographic Sketches

Elizabeth Alicandri (FHWA cochair) is the director of the 

Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office of 

Safety Programs. She provides national leadership to a 

wide range of highway safety initiatives, including the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program and the Safe 

Routes to School Program. She leads a multidisciplinary 

staff that supports States in developing and implementing 

strategic highway safety plans, improving data systems 

and analysis techniques, and advancing and applying 

tools to improve highway safety decisionmaking. Before 

joining the Office of Safety in 2000, she spent 15 years in 

the FHWA Human Factors Laboratory, managing an 

interdisciplinary staff and leading the development of the 

FHWA Older Driver Highway Design Handbook and the 

affiliated 1-day workshop that has been taught across 

North America. She has a bachelor’s degree in psychology 

from Georgetown University in Washington, DC, and a 

master’s degree in transportation engineering from the 

University of Maryland in College Park, MD. She is a 

member of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 

serves on several committees of the Transportation 

Research Board, and is the secretary of the World Road 

Association (PIARC) Road Safety Committee.

Pamela Hutton (AASHTO cochair) is the governor’s 

highway safety representative for Colorado, as well 

as the chief engineer for the Colorado Department 

of Transportation (CDOT). Hutton has 30 years of 

progressive engineering experience in the transportation 

industry, primarily with CDOT, where she started her 

career in the Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch. 

She has also held positions as region traffic engineer and 

statewide intelligent transportation engineer, during 

which traffic safety was a strong focus area for her. She 

has bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil engineering 

from the University of Colorado in Denver, and is a 

licensed professional engineer in Colorado. Hutton 

is a delegate in a number of professional organizations, 

including the American Association of State Highway 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Western Association 

of State Highway Officials, and Governor’s Highway 

Safety Association. She is a member of the AASHTO 

Standing Committee on Highways, which includes the 

Subcommittee on Highway Traffic Safety.

Dr. Susan Chrysler (report facilitator) is a senior research 

scientist in the Center for Transportation Safety and the 

manager of the Human Factors Program at the Texas 

Transportation Institute (TTI). Her areas of expertise 

include human factors, driver behavior, older driver 

issues, visual attention, traffic control devices, and 

photometry. Since joining TTI in 2001, Chrysler has led 

projects on sign and pavement marking design, comprehension, and visibility. Before joining TTI, Chrysler was 

a human factors specialist in the Traffic Control Materials 

Division Laboratory of the 3M Company. Her work at 

3M involved developing products, conducting original 

visibility research, and developing marketing tools. 

Chrysler received a Ph.D. in experimental psychology 

with a minor in cognitive science from the University of 

Minnesota in 1993, and a bachelor’s degree in psychology 

from the University of Minnesota. Chrysler is a member 

of several Transportation Research Board committees and 

is the past chair of the Surface Transportation Technical 

Group of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. 

She also chairs Human Factors Resources, a sponsor 

group for the National Committee on Uniform Traffic 

Control Devices.

Dr. Leanna Depue is the director of the Highway Safety 

Division of the Missouri Department of Transportation. 

She oversees the development and implementation 

of the State’s strategic highway safety plan, “Missouri’s 

Blueprint for Safer Roadways.” This comprehensive 

safety plan addresses an array of highway safety 

initiatives in the engineering, education, enforcement, 

and emergency medical services areas. Currently 13.5 

percent of Missouri’s population is age 65 or older, a 

percentage that is expected to grow substantially. 

As a result, several older driver programs are being 

implemented throughout the State. Depue graduated 

from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale with a 

master’s degree and Ph.D. in health education, specializing in safety. She serves on the Strategic Highway 

Research Program (SHRP2) Safety Technical Coordinating Committee, chairs the Safety Users Group for the 

Transportation Research Board, is vice chair of the 

AASHTO Safety Subcommittee on Safety Management, 

and is a member of the Highway Safety Manual Task 

Force. She also serves on the National Safety Council 

board of delegates and as regional director of the National 

Association of Women Highway Safety Leaders, Inc. 
Improving Safety and Mobility for Older Road Users in Australia and Japan 43

Howard Glassman is the executive director of the Florida 

Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council, 

a statewide organization representing Florida’s 26 

metropolitan planning organizations. He is responsible 

for developing transportation policy and implementing 

strategies that support the movement of people and goods 

in Florida’s metropolitan areas. The participation of older 

road and transit users in planning and providing modal 

choices is an important component of the transportation 

planning process. He serves on the Policy Committee of 

the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations 

in Washington, DC, and on the Metropolitan Policy, 

Planning, and Processes Committee of the Transportation 

Research Board. He was previously employed by the 

Florida Departments of Transportation and Community 

Affairs, the Mid South Engineering Company, and the 

Broward County, FL, Planning Department. He has a 

master’s degree in community planning and area development from the University of Rhode Island and a master’s 

degree in Urban Studies from Southern Connecticut State 

University. He has served as an adjunct instructor in 

urban and regional planning at Florida State University. 

Dr. Thomas M. Granda is a senior research psychologist 

for the Office of Safety Research and Development at 

FHWA’s Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center in 

McLean, VA. He is the leader of the Human Centered 

Systems Team, which conducts behavioral research in 

such areas as intersections, visibility, pedestrians, speed 

management, signage, and pavement markings. In all 

areas of research, the performance of older road users 

(e.g., drivers and pedestrians) is always measured and 

analyzed. Granda has a bachelor’s degree in psychology 

from Wagner College, a master’s degree in generalexperimental psychology from California State University, 

and a Ph.D. in human factors from the Catholic University of America. He is a member of the National Older 

Driver Safety Advisory Council and has chaired the 

U.S. Department of Transportation Human Factors 

Coordinating Committee.

David L. Harkey is the director of the University of North 

Carolina Highway Safety Research Center (HSRC). His 

research focus is on applying transportation engineering 

principles and research evaluation methodologies to 

improve highway safety for motorists, pedestrians, and 

bicyclists in the areas of traffic operations, geometric 

design, and roadside design. He is a coauthor of the 

Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and 

Pedestrians, published by FHWA. He has conducted more 

than 20 workshops throughout the United States to teach 

engineers and planners about the guide and help them 

understand what changes can be made in the roadway 

environment to enhance older driver and pedestrian safety 

and mobility. Harkey has more than 20 years of experience 

in the field of transportation safety research, including the 

past 14 with HSRC. He is a graduate of the University of 

North Carolina at Charlotte with a bachelor’s degree in civil 

engineering and a master’s degree in engineering. Harkey is 

a registered professional engineer in North Carolina and 

chairs the Transportation Research Board Committee 

on Safety Data, Analysis, and Evaluation. 

Tom Smith is the division administrator for the FHWA 

West Virginia Division in Charleston, WV. Smith and his 

team work closely with the West Virginia Department 

of Transportation (WVDOT) to deliver the Federal-Aid 

Highway Program, totaling almost half a billion dollars 

per year. West Virginia road users are among the oldest in 

the United States on a per capita basis, so FHWA’s and 

WVDOT’s delivery of the Federal-Aid Program is strategically designed to address these needs. Smith has served 

in a number of progressively responsible positions 

throughout the United States, including several management assignments in the design and construction of 

highways. He also served as the FHWA safety engineer in 

Ohio for 4 years. Smith received a bachelor’s degree from 

North Carolina State University and completed a number 

of graduate courses at the University of California, 

Berkeley. He is a registered professional engineer in West 

Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, and has received a 

number of awards for leadership and achievements 

during his 29-year career with FHWA.

Barry Warhoftig is the director of traffic engineering for 

the West Virginia Division of Highways (WVDOH) in 

Charleston, WV. He is responsible for establishing, 

administrating, and implementing policies, guidelines, 

and standards associated with traffic engineering 

activities throughout West Virginia. During Warhoftig’s 

40-plus-year career with WVDOH, he has had positions 

in the planning, design, implementation, operation, and 

maintenance of programs on highway signing, traffic 

signal control systems, and pavement markings. He has 
also had a wide range of responsibilities associated with 

highway safety and bicycle-pedestrian initiatives. He has 

a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from Clarkson 

University in Potsdam, NY, and a master’s degree in 

transportation engineering from Marshall University in 

Huntington, WV. He is a licensed professional engineer 

in West Virginia. Warhoftig serves on the AASHTO 

Standing Committee on Highway Traffic Safety, AASHTO 

Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering, and National 

Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

44 APPENDIX D: SCAN TEAM MEMBERS

OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

FHWA/US DOT (HPIP)

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Tel: (202) 366-9636

Fax: (202) 366-9626

international@fhwa.dot.gov

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

Publication No. FHWA-PL-09-001

HPIP/10-08(3.5)EW