View source for Road traffic safety

{{short description|Methods and measures for reducing the risk of death and injury on roads}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2019}}
[[Image:TrafficLights-HagerstownMD.jpg|thumb|[[Sidewalks]], [[Curb (road)|curbs]] and [[traffic signals]] in [[Hagerstown, Maryland]], United States]]
[[File:Kostanz speed limits.jpg|thumb|[[Speed limit]]s in different areas, unusually with only a "recommended" limit (130&nbsp;km/h) for the [[Autobahn]]]]
[[Image:DRIP op A13 voor Kleinpolderplein.jpg|thumb|''DRIP''{{#tag:ref| Dynamic Route Information Panel |group=Note}} [[Variable Message Sign|variable message sign]] guiding traffic on the [[A13 motorway (Netherlands)|Dutch A13]] motorway]]
[[File:15-05-23-Berlin-Sachsendamm-Tesla-RalfR-N3S 7354.jpg|thumb|Vehicles experiencing a [[Breakdown (vehicle)|breakdown]] or an emergency can stop in the [[emergency lane]]; these lanes may themselves present risks to traffic.]]
[[File:Sacrifices to the Modern Moloch.jpg|thumb|''Sacrifices to the Modern [[Moloch]]'', a 1923 cartoon published in [[St. Louis Star]], criticizing the apparent acceptance by society of increasing automobile-related fatalities]]
'''Road traffic safety''' refers to the methods and measures used to prevent road users from being killed or seriously injured. Typical road users include [[pedestrian]]s, [[cyclist]]s, [[Driving|motorists]], vehicle passengers, and passengers of on-road [[public transport]] (mainly [[bus]]es and [[tram]]s).

Best practices in modern road safety strategy: 
{{blockquote|text=The basic strategy of a Safe System approach is to ensure that in the event of a crash, the impact energies remain below the threshold likely to produce either death or serious injury. This threshold will vary from crash scenario to crash scenario, depending upon the level of protection offered to the road users involved. For example, the chances of survival for an unprotected pedestrian hit by a vehicle diminish rapidly at speeds greater than 30&nbsp;km/h, whereas for a properly restrained motor vehicle occupant the critical impact speed is 50&nbsp;km/h (for side impact crashes) and 70 km/h (for head-on crashes).|sign=International Transport Forum|source=Towards Zero, Ambitious Road Safety Targets and the Safe System Approach, Executive Summary page 19<ref name="OECDTowardsZero08" />}}

As sustainable solutions for classes of road safety have not been identified, particularly low-traffic rural and remote roads, a hierarchy of control should be applied, similar to classifications used to improve occupational safety and health.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=McLeod|first1=Sam|last2=Curtis|first2=Carey|date=2020-12-21|title=Integrating urban road safety and sustainable transportation policy through the hierarchy of hazard controls|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15568318.2020.1858376|journal=International Journal of Sustainable Transportation|volume=16|issue=2|language=en|pages=166–180|doi=10.1080/15568318.2020.1858376|s2cid=234431488|issn=1556-8318}}</ref> At the highest level is sustainable prevention of serious injury and death crashes, with sustainable requiring all key result areas to be considered. At the second level is real-time risk reduction, which involves providing users at severe risk with a specific warning to enable them to take mitigating action. The third level is about reducing the crash risk which involves applying the road-design standards and guidelines (such as from [[American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials|AASHTO]]), improving driver behavior and enforcement.<ref name="OECDTowardsZero08">{{cite web|url=http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/safety/targets/targets.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080515231629/http://internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/safety/targets/targets.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=15 May 2008|title=Towards Zero, Ambitious Road Safety Targets and the Safe System Approach|year=2008|publisher=OECD|quote=It recognises that prevention efforts notwithstanding, road users will remain fallible and crashes will occur.|access-date=26 January 2012|author=International Transport Forum}}</ref> It is important to note that drivers' traffic behaviors are significantly influenced by their perceptions and attitudes.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mehri|first1=Mahsa|last2=Khazaee-Pool|first2=Maryam|last3=Arghami|first3=Shirazeh|date=2019|title=Phenomenology of being a safe taxi driver|journal=BMC Public Health|volume=19|pages=1753|doi=10.1186/s12889-019-8106-1|doi-access=free |pmc=6937910}}</ref>

Traffic safety has been studied as a science for more than 75 years.<ref>{{cite journal| pmc=4103211 | pmid=24922136 | doi=10.2105/AJPH.2014.301922 | volume=104 | issue=8 | title=Traffic fatality reductions: United States compared with 25 other countries | year=2014 | author=Evans L | journal=Am J Public Health | pages=1501–7}}</ref>

==Background==
[[Image:Ridge Route ca 1920 3.jpg|thumb|[[Guard rail|Guardrail]]s save a vehicle from a long fall c.&nbsp;1920. Guard rails were only sometimes effective at the time. It was not until the 1960s that safety testing ensured adequate protection, and even then only for vehicles of a limited weight-class.]]
[[Traffic collision|Road traffic crashes]] have become one of the world's largest [[public health|public-health]] and [[injury prevention|injury-prevention]] problems. The issue is all the more acute because the victims are overwhelmingly healthy before their crashes. According to the [[World Health Organization]] (WHO), more than 1 million people are killed on the world's roads each year.<ref>[https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/publications/road_traffic/world_report/statistical_annex.pdf Statistical Annex], World report on road traffic injury prevention</ref> A report published by the WHO in 2004 estimated that some 1.2 million people were killed and 50 million injured in [[traffic collision]]s on the roads around the world each year<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/publications/road_traffic/world_report/en/index.html |title= World report on road traffic injury prevention|publisher=World Health Organisation|access-date= 14 April 2010}}</ref> and that traffic accidents were the leading cause of death among children 10–19 years of age. The report also noted that the problem was most severe in developing countries and that simple prevention-measures could halve the number of deaths.<ref name=bbc>{{cite news |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7776127.stm |title= UN raises child accidents alarm |work= BBC News |access-date= 22 May 2010| date=10 December 2008}}</ref>

The standard measures used in assessing road safety interventions are fatalities and [[Killed or Seriously Injured|killed-or-seriously-injured]] (KSI) rates, usually expressed per billion (10<sup>9</sup>) passenger kilometres. Countries using older road-safety paradigms<ref>KSI league tables</ref> replace KSI rates with crash rates – for example, crashes per million vehicle-miles.

Vehicle speed within the human tolerances for avoiding serious injury and death is a key goal of modern road-design, because impact speed affects the severity of injury both to vehicle occupants and to pedestrians. For occupants, Joksch (1993) found the probability of death for drivers in multi-vehicle collisions increased as the fourth power of impact speed (often referred to by the mathematical term δv ("delta V"), meaning change in velocity). Injuries are caused by sudden, severe acceleration (or deceleration); this is difficult to measure. However, crash reconstruction techniques can estimate vehicle speeds before a crash. Therefore, the change in speed is used as a surrogate for acceleration. This enabled the Swedish Road Administration to identify the KSI risk curves using actual crash-reconstruction data which led to the human tolerances for serious injury and death referenced above.

Interventions are generally much easier to identify in the modern road-safety paradigm, which focusses on the human tolerances for serious injury and death. For example, the elimination of head-on KSI crashes simply required the installation of an appropriate [[Traffic barrier#Types and performance|median crash-barrier]]. Also, roundabouts, often with speed-reducing approaches, feature very few KSI crashes.

The old road-safety paradigm of purely crash risk is a far more complex matter. Contributing factors to highway crashes may be related to the driver (such as driver error, illness, or fatigue), the vehicle (brake, steering, or throttle failures), or the road itself (lack of sight distance, poor roadside clear- zones, etc.). Interventions may seek to reduce or compensate for these factors, or to reduce the severity of crashes. A comprehensive outline of interventions areas can be seen in [[management systems for road safety]]. Study conducted in Finland revealed that the fatality risk is increased most when a collision type is either pedestrian or meeting{{clarify|date=October 2021}} of the vehicles.<ref>Sirvio, Konsta; Hollmén, Jaakko. PIARC Paris 23rd World Road Congress: Exploratory Analysis
of Road Accidents with the Self-Organising Map. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320857470_EXPLORATORY_ANALYSIS_OF_ROAD_ACCIDENTS_WITH_THE_SELF-ORGANISING_MAP</ref>

In addition to management systems, which apply predominantly to networks in built-up areas, another class of interventions relates to the design of roadway networks for new districts. Such interventions explore the configurations of a network that will inherently reduce the probability of collisions.<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Lovegrove G. |author2=Sayed T. | year = 2006 | title = Macro-level collision models for evaluating neighbourhood traffic safety | journal = Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering | volume = 33 | issue = 5| pages = 609–621 | doi=10.1139/l06-013}}</ref>

Interventions for the prevention of road traffic injuries are often evaluated; the [[Cochrane Library]] has published a wide variety of reviews of interventions for the prevention of road-traffic injuries.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving/speed/speed-cameras.aspx|title=Speed Cameras|publisher=ROSPA|quote=The Cochrane Collaboration published out a second systematic review in 2006, which was updated in 2010. These studies only included before-and-after trials with comparison areas and [[interrupted time series]] studies.|access-date=25 September 2011|archive-date=10 December 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111210185906/http://rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving/speed/speed-cameras.aspx|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url= https://www.cdc.gov/transportation/references.htm|title=Reduce Injuries Associated with Motor Vehicle Crashes |publisher=Centers for Disease Control and Prevention|quote=Alcohol ignition interlock programmes for reducing drink driving recidivism. |journal=Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews| issue =3|page= CD004168|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD004168.pub2|year=1996|author=Willis Charlene|volume=2004 |pmid=15495082 |pmc=6986691}}</ref>

For the purposes of road-traffic safety it can be helpful to classify roads into three usages: 
* '''built-up''' urban streets with slower speeds, greater densities, and more diversity among road users
* '''non built-up''' rural roads with higher speeds
*'''major highways''' ([[motorways]]/ [[Interstates]]/ [[freeways]]/ [[Autobahns]], [[autostrade]], etc.) reserved for motor-vehicles, and which are often designed to minimize and attenuate crashes

Most injuries occur on urban streets but most fatalities on rural roads, while motorways are the safest in relation to distance traveled. For example, in 2013, [[Autobahn#Safety|German autobahns]] carried 31% of motorized road traffic (in travel-kilometres) while accounting for 13% of Germany's traffic deaths. The autobahn fatality-rate of 1.9 deaths per billion-travel-kilometres compared favorably with the 4.7 rate on urban streets and 6.6 rate on rural roads.<ref name=debast/>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|-
! Road Class
! Injury Crashes
! Fatalities
! Injury Rate<ref group=rate name=crashes>per 1,000,000,000 travel-kilometres</ref>
! Fatality Rate<ref group=rate name=crashes/>
! Fatalities per 1000 Injury Crashes
|-
|Autobahn
|align=right| 18,452
|align=right| 428
|align=right| 82
|align=right| 1.9
|align=right| 23.2
|-
|Rural
|align=right| 73,003
|align=right| 1,934
|align=right| 249
|align=right| 6.6
|align=right| 26.5
|-
|Urban
|align=right| 199,650
|align=right| 977
|align=right| 958
|align=right| 4.7
|align=right| 4.9
|-
| style="background: #efefef;" | Total, Average
|  style="background:#efefef; text-align:right;"| 291,105
|  style="background:#efefef; text-align:right;"| 3,399
|  style="background:#efefef; text-align:right;"| 401
|  style="background:#efefef; text-align:right;"| 4.6
|  style="background:#efefef; text-align:right;"| 11.6
|}

{{reflist|group=rate}}

== History ==
{{expand section|date=October 2021}}
Roadways originally carried all sorts of traffic indiscriminately - [[beasts of burden]] as well as pedestrians. Road behavior and rules have developed to prioritize certain types of traffic.

Important people traversing crowded streets and alleys in [[ancient Rome]] (famous for its [[Roman roads]]) deployed minions to clear the way for their [[Litter (vehicle)|litter]]s or (if allowed) carts and chariots.<ref>
{{cite book
 |editor1-last         = Laurence
 |editor1-first        = Ray
 |editor-link1         = Ray Laurence
 |editor2-last         = Newsome
 |editor2-first        = David J.
 |title                = Rome, Ostia, Pompeii: Movement and Space
 |date = 24 November 2011
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=byYUDAAAQBAJ
 |location             = Oxford
 |publisher            = Oxford University Press
 |publication-date     = 2011
 |pages                 = 191, 342
 |isbn                 = 9780199583126
 |access-date          = 13 October 2021
 |quote                = Some carts were preceded by a 'runner' (cursor) with a whip who would clear the way and who could make sure a one-lane street was clear of oncoming traffic. [...] During transport of lumbering loads, someone ran ahead to clear the way of pedestrians and other blockages.
}} 
</ref>
Even the mighty preferred not to trample the bystanders.

In the 19th century the advent of powered vehicles inspired British road-safety law to impose speed limits and to require a person on foot [[Red flag traffic laws|carrying a red flag]] warning of the arrival of a frightening noisy mechanical contrivance.<ref>
{{cite book
 |last1                = Merkin
 |first1               = Robert M.
 |last2                = Stuart-Smith
 |first2               = Jeremy
 |author-link2         = Jeremy Stuart-Smith
 |chapter              = Framework of Motor Insurance Law
 |title                = The Law of Motor Insurance
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=uJkwId8zvS0C
 |series               = Insurance practitioners library
 |year = 2004
 |location             = London
 |publisher            = Sweet & Maxwell
 |publication-date     = 2004
 |page                 = 4
 |isbn                 = 9780421839304
 |access-date          = 13 October 2021
 |quote                = Once steam-driven vehicles had begun to proliferate, draconian legislative steps were taken to protect other road users. The Locomotives on Highways Act 1865, generally known as the 'Red flag Act'. required a vehicle of this nature to be manned by three persons: one to steer; one to stoke; and one to walk 60 yards ahead with a red flag, primarily to alert those in control of horses of the imminent presence of the vehicle. The 1865 Act also imposed a 2 mph speed limit in cities and a 4 mph speed limit in the open.
}} 
</ref>

Subsequently, motoring lobby-groups pressed for the priority of motorized traffic, and safety laws drove playing children off the streets and ghettoized the likes of walkers, bicycles, wheel-chairs and scooters to the margins.<ref>
{{cite book
 |last1                = Reid
 |first1               = Carlton
 |title                = Roads Were Not Built for Cars: How Cyclists Were the First to Push for Good Roads & Became the Pioneers of Motoring
 |date = 9 April 2015
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=6iS8BwAAQBAJ
 |location             = Washington, D.C.
 |publisher            = Island Press
 |publication-date     = 2015
 |pages                 = 250–251
 |isbn                 = 9781610916899
 |access-date          = 13 October 2021
 |quote                = The marginalisation - framed by legislators as a safety concern - was highly successful and by the late 1950s almost everybody had bought into the concept [...]. A cinema news snippet from British Pathé described the Western Avenue cycle track as 'a new safety innovation' [...].
}} 
</ref><ref>
{{cite book
 |last1                = Davis
 |first1               = Robert
 |title                = Death on the Streets: Cars and the Mythology of Road Safety
 |year = 1993
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=qJ5tQgAACAAJ
 |publisher            = Leading Edge Press
 |publication-date     = 1992
 |isbn                 = 9780948135460
 |access-date          = 13 October 2021
}} 
</ref>
Concepts like [[shared space]], [[living street]]s and [[Woonerf|woonerven]] developed to counter this paradigm.

==Mortality ==
===Mortality units===
According to the WHO/IRTAD:
{{blockquote|Traffic  accident  data  are  often  compared  between  countries  and  between  regions.  These  comparisons  are  done  in  numbers  of  casualties,  but  also  in  relation  to  the  number  of  inhabitants  (a  measure  of  national  health  risk),  the  number  of  vehicle  kilometres  driven  (a  measure  of  the  transport  risk) as well as the number of cars in a country, etc. For a reliable comparison the real volumes should be used (rather than recorded numbers with different recording rates)<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.who.int/roadsafety/publications/irtad_underreporting.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=5 October 2020 |archive-date=21 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210721214411/https://www.who.int/roadsafety/publications/irtad_underreporting.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

===Mortality statistics===
{{further|List of countries by traffic-related death rate}}
{|
! Killed EU28, 2013
! Killed EU27, 2019
! Killed Japan, 2017
! Killed US
|-
| {{Graph:Chart|width=100|height=100|type=pie|legend=Killed in EU28, 2013
|x=Cars/taxi, Motor bike, Moped, Cyclist, Pedestrian, HGV, Utility vehicle, Bus & coach, Agriculture, Other
|y1=11946,3877,745,2035,5805,592,663, 154, 165, 145
|showValues=}}
| {{Graph:Chart|width=100|height=100|type=pie|legend=Killed in EU27, 2019
|x=Passenger cars,	Motorcycles,Mopeds,Bicycles,Pedestrians,HGV,
Light goods  vehicles,		Buses & coaches,					Other
|y1=10130,3547,616,2047,4650,449,
	820,		113,					484
|showValues=}}
| {{Graph:Chart|width=100|height=100|type=pie
|legend=Japan, 2017
|x=While riding on a car,While riding on a motorbike, While riding on a moped bike,While riding on a bicycle,  While walking,Others
|y1=1221,448,184,480,1347,14
|showValues=}}

|{{Graph:Chart|width=160|height=120|xAxisTitle=Year|yAxisTitle=Killed|legend=Killed on road|type=stackedrect
|x=1990,2000,2010,2019
|y1= 859, 693, 623,846
|y2= 76,29,113,0
|y3= 3168, 2868,4405,5014
|y4= 24092, 20699, 12491, 12239
|y5= 6482, 4763, 4302,6205
|y6= 9922, 12893, 11065,{{#expr:9976+892}}
|colors=#ae3C01,#7171fe,#019A37,#FeFe01,#4674C0,#FeAaA5
|y1Title= Cyclist
|y2Title= Moped
|y3Title= Motor bike
|y4Title= Car
|y5Title= Pedestrian
|y6Title= Misc + SUV
|yGrid=1
|yAxisMin=0 }}
|-
| colspan=4 | 
* EU source: European institutions (EC): EU28 2013;<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/files/pdf/statistics/2013_transport_mode.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=8 July 2017 |archive-date=29 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829160841/https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/files/pdf/statistics/2013_transport_mode.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> EU27 2019<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Road_accident_fatalities_-_statistics_by_type_of_vehicle#of_persons_killed_were_passenger_car_occupants.2C_while_20.2_.25_were_pedestrians_in_2019|title=Road accident fatalities - statistics by type of vehicle}}</ref>
* Japan source: WHITE PAPER ON TRAFFIC SAFETY IN JAPAN 2018 
* US Source: OECD <ref name="oecd">{{cite web|url=http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/7516011e.pdf?expires=1499482517&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=FEC76B0844E90B4461D64B8CD578659A|title=Road Safety Annual Report, Books / Road Safety Annual Report / 2016|website=www.oecd-ilibrary.org|access-date=27 March 2018}}{{Dead link|date=February 2022 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
* US Source, 2019: NHTSA<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/nhtsa-releases-2019-crash-fatality-data|title = NHTSA Releases 2019 Crash Fatality Data &#124; NHTSA}}</ref>
|}

{|
! Global mortality by region per million inhabitant in 2015
! 
|-
| {{Graph:Chart|width=180|height=100|type=rect|legend= by income region
|x=low, medium, high, World
|y1=281,184,92
|y2=,,,174
|y1Title=by income level region
|y2Title=World Mean
|showValues=}}
| {{Graph:Chart|width=470|height=100|type=rect|legend= by WHO region
|x=Africa, East Med., West. Pacif., S.East Asia, Americ., Europe, World
|y1=266,199, 173, 170, 159, 93
|y2=,,,,,,174
|y1Title=by WHO region
|y2Title=World Mean
|yGrid=1
|showValues=}}
|-
| colspan=2 | 
* source: World Health Organization, Global status report on road safety 2015<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2015/en/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151020144338/http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2015/en/|url-status=dead|archive-date=20 October 2015|title=Global status report on road safety 2015|website=World Health Organization|access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref>
|}

{|
! US mortality by state per million inhabitant in 2013
! 
|-
| {{Graph:Chart|width=1100|height=120|type=rect|legend= by US state
|x=Montana, Mississip., N Dakota, W Virgin., Alabam., Oklaho., Arkans., S Carolin., S Dakota, Tennes.,
D Columb. ,
Massachu.,
N Jersey ,
N York 	,
Rhode Is. 	,
Washingt. 	,
Alaska 	,
Minnesot.,
Hawaii 	,
Utah 	
|y1= 	226, 	205, 	205, 	179, 	176, 	176, 	163, 	161, 	160, 	153,
|y2=,,,,,,,,,, 	31, 	49, 	61, 	61, 	62, 	63, 	69, 	71, 	73, 	76
|y1Title=Most fatality
|y2Title=More careful
|yGrid=1
|showValues=}}
|-
| colspan=2 | 
* source citylab:<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/10/the-geography-of-car-deaths-in-america/410494/|title=The Geography of Car Deaths in America|newspaper=Bloomberg.com|date=15 October 2015|access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref>
|}

{|
! Europe mortality in selected countries per million inhabitant in 2013 
! 
|-
| {{Graph:Chart|width=1100|height=120|type=rect|legend= by EU/EFTA/TR member
|x=Romania, Latvia, Poland, Croatia, Lithuania, Luxemb., Bulgaria, Greece, Belgium, Portugal,
Malta, Germany, Ireland, Norway, Spain, Denmark, Netherl., Switzer., UK, Sweden
|y1=93,88,88,86,86,84,83,80,65,64
|y2=,,,,,,,,,,43,41,41,37,36,34,34,33,28,27
|y1Title=Most fatality
|y2Title=More careful
|yGrid=1
|showValues=}}
|-
| colspan=2 | 
* source Eurostat (trans_r_acci serie) (data provided by member countries on a voluntary basis)
|}

{|
|-
! '''Fatalities by billion traveled km'''
|-
|+ '''Fatalities by billion traveled km'''
|-
|{{Graph:Chart|width=400|height=100
|type=rect
|xAxisTitle=Kind of road
|yAxisTitle=by billion traveled km
|legend=Killed by billion traveled km (2000)
|x=Départementales,
Autoroutes,
Nationales,
Communales
|y1=20,5,54,8.3
|y1Title=France
|colors=#80515130,#80fe3030,#80ae9100,#803131fe,#80418181,#80814181,#80b1b1b1,#010101
|yGrid=1
|showValues=}}
|-
| Fatalities by VMT allow to compare different class of roads, here in France
|-
|colspan = "2" | Source:
*  Maille France: SOeS, 49e Rapport de la commission des comptes des transports de la nation / La documentation française.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/var/storage/rapports-publics/134000525.pdf |title=La Sécurité routière en France: Bilan de l'année 2011 |language=fr |trans-title=Road safety in France: Review of the year 2011 |publisher=Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière |place=Paris}}</ref>
* Setra, Ministère des transports
|}

===Built-up areas===
[[Image:Wavy lines before pedestrian crossing.jpg|thumb|right|[[Pedestrian crossing]], [[Road surface marking|line markings]] and [[street furniture]]]]
[[Image:Curb extensions at midblock crosswalk.jpg|thumb|A [[curb extension]] at a mid-block [[crosswalk]]]]
[[Image:Traffic-Circle-Vancouver-Grid.jpg|thumb|A traffic circle applied to a four-way intersection as a means of improving its safety. This device, with a proven record of collision reductions and traffic flow improvement, turns the cross-intersection into four virtual three-way intersections.]]
[[File:Utrecht-IMG 7242.JPG|thumb|right|[[Utrecht (city)|Utrecht]] has specially painted bicycle-only lanes.]]
On neighborhood roads where many vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians and bicyclists can be found, [[traffic calming]] can be a tool for road safety. Though not strictly a traffic calming measure, mini-traffic circles implanted in normal intersections of neighbourhood streets have been shown to reduce collisions at intersections dramatically<ref>Neighborhood Traffic Calming: Seattle's Traffic Circle Program http://www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9801/rm980102.htm {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120418163915/http://www.usroads.com/journals/rmej/9801/rm980102.htm |date=18 April 2012 }}</ref> (see picture). [[Shared space]] schemes, which rely on human instincts and interactions, such as [[eye contact]], for their effectiveness, and are characterised by the removal of traditional [[traffic signal]]s and [[Traffic sign|signs]], and even by the removal of the distinction between carriageway (roadway) and footway (sidewalk), are also becoming increasingly popular. Both approaches can be shown to be effective.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pps.org/reference/livememtraffic/|title=Traffic Calming 101 - Project for Public Spaces|website=Project for Public Spaces|language=en-US|access-date=13 May 2016}}</ref>

For planned neighbourhoods, studies recommend new network configurations, such as the [[Fused Grid]] or 3-Way Offset. These layout models organize a neighbourhood area as a zone of no cut-through traffic by means of loops or dead-end streets. They also ensure that pedestrians and bicycles have a distinct advantage by introducing exclusive shortcuts by path connections through blocks and parks. Such a principle of organization is referred to as "Filtered Permeability" implying a preferential treatment of active modes of transport. These new patterns, which are recommended for laying out neighbourhoods, are based on analyses of collision data of large regional districts and over extended periods.<ref>Sun, J. & Lovegrove, G. (2008). Research Study on Evaluating the Level of Safety of the Fused Grid Road Pattern, External Research Project for CMHC, Ottawa, Ontario</ref><ref name="ReferenceA">Eric Dumbaugh and Robert Rae. Safe Urban Form: Revisiting the Relationship Between Community Design and Traffic Safety. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 75, No. 3, Summer 2009</ref><ref>Vicky Feng Wei, BASc and Gord Lovegrove PhD (2011), Sustainable Road Safety: A New Neighbourhood Road Pattern that saves VRU Lives, University of British Columbia</ref><ref name="Xie18TRB">{{cite journal |last1=Xie |first1=Xiao-Feng |last2=Wang |first2=Zunjing | title=Multiscale crash analysis: A case study of integrating FARS, Maryland's crash data, and Montgomery County's traffic violation data | journal=Transportation Research Board (TRB) Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA | date=2018 |url=http://www.wiomax.com/team/xie/paper/TRB18.pdf}}</ref> They show that four-way intersections combined with cut-through traffic are the most significant contributors to increased collisions.

Modern [[safety barriers]] are designed to absorb impact energy and minimize the risk to the occupants of cars and bystanders. For example, most side rails are now anchored to the ground, so that they cannot skewer a passenger compartment. Most light poles are designed to break at the base rather than violently stop a car that hits them. Some [[road fixtures]] such as signs and [[fire hydrants]] are designed to collapse on impact. authorities have removed trees in the vicinity of roads; while the idea of "dangerous trees" has attracted a certain amount of skepticism, unforgiving objects such as trees can cause severe damage and injury to errant road users. Safety barriers can provide some combination of physical protection and visual protection depending on their environment. Physical protection is important for protecting sensitive building and pedestrian areas. Visual protection is necessary to alert drivers to changes in road patterns.

Most roads are cambered (crowned), that is, made so that they have rounded surfaces, to reduce standing water and ice, primarily to prevent frost damage but also increasing traction in poor weather. Some sections of road are now surfaced with porous bitumen to enhance drainage; this is particularly done on bends. These are just a few elements of [[highway engineering]]. As well as that, there are often grooves cut into the surface of cement highways to channel water away, and rumble strips at the edges of highways to rouse inattentive drivers with the loud noise they make when driven over. In some cases, there are raised markers between lanes to reinforce the lane boundaries; these are often reflective. In pedestrian areas, [[speed bump]]s are often placed to slow cars, preventing them from going too fast near pedestrians.

Poor road surfaces can lead to safety problems. If too much asphalt or bituminous binder is used in asphalt concrete, the binder can 'bleed' or flush' to the surface, leaving a very smooth surface that provides little traction when wet. Certain kinds of stone [[Construction aggregate|aggregate]] become very smooth or polished under the constant wearing action of vehicle tyres, again leading to poor wet-weather traction. Either of these problems can increase wet-weather crashes by increasing braking distances or contributing to loss of control. If the pavement is insufficiently sloped or poorly drained, standing water on the surface can also lead to wet-weather crashes due to [[Hydroplaning (tires)|hydroplaning]].

[[Lane]] markers in some countries and states are marked with [[Cat's eye (road)|cat's eyes]], [[Botts' dots]] or reflective [[raised pavement marker]]s that do not fade like paint. Botts dots are not used where it is icy in the winter, because frost and snowplows can break the glue that holds them to the road, although they can be embedded in short, shallow trenches carved in the roadway, as is done in the mountainous regions of California.

Road hazards and intersections in some areas are now usually marked several times, roughly five, twenty, and sixty seconds in advance so that drivers are less likely to attempt violent manoeuvres.

Most [[road signs]] and [[road surface marking|pavement marking materials]] are [[retro-reflector|retro-reflective]], incorporating small glass spheres<ref>{{cite web|title=Reflective Glass Beads|url=http://www.dyroad.cn/reflective-glass-beads.html|access-date=13 May 2014|archive-date=21 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181021211747/http://www.dyroad.cn/reflective-glass-beads.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> or prisms to more efficiently reflect light from vehicle headlights back to the driver's eyes.

====Turning across traffic====
Turning across traffic (i.e., turning left in right-hand drive countries, turning right in left-hand drive countries) poses several risks. The more serious risk is a collision with oncoming traffic. Since this is nearly a head-on collision, injuries are common. It is the most common cause of fatalities in a built-up area. Another major risk is involvement in a [[rear-end collision]] while waiting for a gap in oncoming traffic.

Countermeasures for this type of collision include:
* Addition of left turn lanes<ref name=500v5>{{cite book|last=NEUMAN|first=TIMOTHY R.|title=NCHRP REPORT 500 Volume 5: A Guide for Addressing Unsignalized Intersection Collisions|year=2003|publisher=TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD|location=WASHINGTON, D.C. |url=http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_500v5.pdf|display-authors=etal}}</ref>
* Providing protected turn phasing at signalized intersections<ref name=500v12>{{cite book|last=ANTONUCCI|first=NICHOLAS D.|title=NCHRP REPORT 500 Volume 12: A Guide for Reducing Collisions at Signalized Intersections|publisher=Transportation Research Board|location=Washington D.C.|url=http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_500v12.pdf|display-authors=etal}}</ref>
* Using indirect turn treatments such as the [[Michigan left]]
* Converting conventional intersections to [[roundabouts]]<ref name=500v5/>

In the absence of these facilities as a driver about to turn:
* Keep your wheels straight, so that in the event of a rear end shunt, you are not pushed into on-coming traffic.
* When you think it is clear, look away, to the road that you are entering. There is an optical illusion that, after a time, presents an oncoming vehicle as further away and travelling slower. Looking away breaks this illusion.

There is no [[Negligence per se|presumption of negligence]] which arises from the bare fact of a collision at an intersection,<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://law.justia.com/cases/california/calapp2d/246/180.html
|title=''Cordova v. Ford, 46 Cal. App. 2d 180''
|publisher=Official California Appellate Reports
|series=2
|volume=46
|page=180
|date=7 November 1966
|access-date=27 July 2013
|quote="All courts are agreed that the mere fact of a collision of two automobiles gives rise to no inference of negligence against either driver in an action brought by the other. ...When a vehicle operated by '''A''' collides with a vehicle operated by '''B''', there are four possibilities. '''A''' alone was negligent; '''B''' alone was negligent; '''both''' were negligent; or '''neither.''' Of these four only the first will result in liability of '''A''' to '''B'''. The bare fact of a collision affords no basis on which to conclude that it is the preponderant probability. '''The odds are against it.'''"
}} See [http://courts.ca.gov/opinions-slip.htm Official Reports Opinions Online]</ref> and circumstances may dictate that a left turn is safer than to turn right. The [[American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials|American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials]] (AASHTO) recommends in their publication [[Geometric design of roads|Geometric Design of Highways and Streets]]<ref name="Green Book">{{cite book |publisher=American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials |title=A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets |location=Washington D.C. |year=2004 }}</ref> that left or right turns are to be provided the ''same'' [[Geometric design of roads#Sight distance|time gap]].<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120926233007/http://www.transportation.org/Pages/default.aspx |url-status=dead |archive-date=26 September 2012 |title=Geometric Design of Highways and Streets |publisher=American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials |date=7 November 2010 |access-date=27 July 2013 |quote=Exhibit 9-54. Time Gap for Case B1-Left turn from Stop}}</ref> Some states have recognized this in statute, and a presumption of negligence is only raised ''because'' of the ''turn'' if and only if the turn was prohibited by an erected sign.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22101.htm |title=Cal. Veh C. § 22101. Regulation of Turns at Intersection |publisher=State of California |date=1 January 1975 |access-date=27 July 2013 |quote=When right- or left-hand turns are prohibited at an intersection notice of such prohibition shall be given by erection of a sign. |archive-date=7 August 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130807143413/http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc22101.htm |url-status=dead }} See opinions on C.V.C. § 22101: [http://courts.ca.gov/opinions-slip.htm Official Reports Opinions Online]</ref>

Turns across traffic have been shown to be problematic for older drivers.<ref name="Older driver handbook">{{cite book|last=Staplin|first=L.|title=Highway Design Handbook for Older Drivers and Pedestrians|year=2001|publisher=Federal Highway Administration|location=Washington D.C.|url=https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/humanfac/01103/|display-authors=etal}}</ref>

====Designing for pedestrians and cyclists====
{{Further|Mobility transition}}
Pedestrians and cyclists are among the most vulnerable road users<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irap.net/toolkit/default.asp?p=crash&ds=1&i=8|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090215161635/http://www.irap.net/toolkit/default.asp?p=crash&ds=1&i=8|url-status=dead|archive-date=15 February 2009|access-date=26 September 2008|title=Vehicle Pedestrian Crashes|publisher=[[International Road Assessment Programme]]}}</ref> and in some countries constitute over half of all road deaths. Interventions aimed at improving safety of non-motorised users:

* [[Sidewalk]]s (or pavements in British English) of suitable width for pedestrian traffic
* [[Pedestrian crossing]]s close to the desire line which allow pedestrians to cross roads safely
* Segregated pedestrian routes and [[cycle lane]]s away from the main highway
* Overbridges (tend to be unpopular with pedestrians and cyclists due to additional distance and effort)
* Underpasses (these can pose heightened risk from crime if not designed well, can work for cyclists in some cases)
* [[Traffic calming]] and [[speed bump|speed hump]]s
* Low [[speed limit]]s that are rigorously enforced, possibly by [[speed camera]]s
* [[Shared space]] schemes giving ownership of the road space and equal priority to all road users, regardless of mode of use
* Pedestrian barriers to prevent pedestrians crossing dangerous locations
* [[Cycling infrastructure]]
* [[Protected intersection]]

American passive traffic safety measures which were adopted in the mid-20th century created roadways which were forgiving to motorists traveling at high speeds but which de-prioritized cycling and pedestrian facilities. Passive traffic safety policies led to excessively wide streets, clear zones adjacent to roadways, wide turn radii and a focus on protecting drivers from the consequences of high speeds. Passive traffic safety measures sought to avoid influencing the behavior of drivers while giving automobiles maximum convenience.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://carfreeamerica.net/2017/04/12/design-oriented-traffic-safety-vs-passive-safety/|title=Design-Oriented Traffic Safety Vs. Passive Safety|date=12 April 2017|website=Car Free America|access-date=31 August 2017}}</ref> Recent [[Complete streets|complete street]] policies seek to create design-oriented traffic safety improvements which actively slow drivers down by narrowing roadways while better accommodating pedestrians and cyclists.

Pedestrians' advocates question the equitability of schemes if they impose extra time and effort on the pedestrian to remain safe from vehicles, for example overbridges with long slopes or steps up and down, underpasses with steps and addition possible risk of crime and at-grade crossings off the desired crossing line. [[Make Roads Safe]] was criticised in 2007 for proposing such features. Successful pedestrian schemes tend to avoid over-bridges and underpasses and instead use at-grade crossings (such as pedestrian crossings) close to the intended route. Successful cycling schemes by contrast avoid frequent stops even if some additional distance is involved, because cyclists expend more energy when starting off.

In Costa Rica 57% of road deaths are pedestrians. However, a partnership between [[Automovil Club de Costa Rica|AACR]], Cosevi, MOPT and [[international Road Assessment Programme|iRAP]] has proposed the construction of 190&nbsp;km of pedestrian footpaths and 170 pedestrian crossings which could save over 9000 fatal or serious injuries over 20 years.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irap.net/documents/pdf/08%2006%201047%20iRAP_Pilotweb.pdf |access-date=26 September 2008 |title=Vaccines for Roads; The new iRAP tools and their pilot application |publisher=[[International Road Assessment Programme]] |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081028230953/http://www.irap.net/documents/pdf/08%2006%201047%20iRAP_Pilotweb.pdf |archive-date=28 October 2008 }}</ref>

[[File:Cycling Amsterdan 04.jpg|thumb|Safe from traffic for [[cycling]] along a fully segregated ''Fietspad'', properly designed [[cycling infrastructure]] in [[Amsterdam]]]]

====Shared space====
{{Main|Shared space}}
[[Image:New Road, Brighton - shared space.jpg|thumb|A [[shared space]] in [[Brighton]] (UK)]]

By 1947 the [[Pedestrians' Association]] was suggesting that many of the safety features being introduced ([[speed limit]]s, [[traffic calming]], [[road sign]]s and [[road marking]]s, [[traffic lights]], [[Belisha beacons]], [[pedestrian crossings]], [[cycle lane]]s, etc.) were potentially self-defeating because "every nonrestrictive safety measure, however admirable in itself, is treated by the drivers as an opportunity for more speeding, so that the net amount of danger is increased and the latter state is worse than the first."<ref>{{Cite journal |url=http://issuu.com/carltonreid/docs/murder-most-foul|title=Murder most foul|author=J.S.Dean|journal=New Scientist|year=2017|volume=233|issue=3111|page=33|doi=10.1016/S0262-4079(17)30226-9|bibcode=2017NewSc.233...33M}}</ref>

During the 1990s a new approach, known as '[[shared space]]' was developed which removed many of these features in some places has attracted the attention of authorities around the world.<ref name="spiegel">{{cite news |title=European Cities Do Away with Traffic Signs |author=Matthias Schulz |work=Spiegel Online |date=16 November 2006 |url=http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,448747,00.html |access-date=27 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Signing Off: Visionary traffic planners |author=Ted White |date=September 2007 |url=http://www.urbanitebaltimore.com/sub.cfm?issueID=52&sectionID=4&articleID=748 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080120123015/http://www.urbanitebaltimore.com/sub.cfm?issueID=52&sectionID=4&articleID=748 |url-status=dead |archive-date=20 January 2008 |publisher=Urbanite Baltimore |access-date=27 February 2008  }}</ref> The approach was developed by [[Hans Monderman]] who believed that "if you treat drivers like idiots, they act as idiots"<ref name="t_20080111">{{cite news |title=Obituaries: Hans Monderman |work=The Times |date=11 January 2008 |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article3167372.ece |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080512010617/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article3167372.ece |url-status=dead |archive-date=12 May 2008 |publisher=Times Newspapers Ltd |access-date=27 February 2008 | location=London |first=Sadie |last=Gray}}</ref> and proposed that trusting drivers to behave was more successful than forcing them to behave.<ref name="es_20080207">{{cite news |title=It's hell on the roads, and I know who's to blame |author=Andrew Gilligan |date=7 February 2008
 |work=The Evening Standard |publisher=Associated Newspapers Limited |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23436116-details/It's+hell+on+the+roads,+and+I+know+who's+to+blame/article.do |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130421114143/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23436116-details/It's+hell+on+the+roads,+and+I+know+who's+to+blame/article.do |url-status=dead |archive-date=21 April 2013 |access-date=27 February 2008}}</ref> [[Professor John Adams]], an expert on [[risk compensation]], suggested that traditional traffic engineering measures assumed that motorists were "selfish, stupid, obedient automatons who had to be protected from their own stupidity" and non-motorists were treated as "vulnerable, stupid, obedient automatons who had to be protected from cars – and their own stupidity".<ref name="adams_20070902">{{cite web|title=Shared Space – would it work in Los Angeles? |author=Professor John Adams |date=2 September 2007 |publisher=John Adams |url=http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/shared-space-for-la-times.pdf |access-date=27 February 2008 |author-link=Professor John Adams }}</ref>

Reported results indicate that the 'shared space' approach leads to significantly reduced traffic speeds, the virtual elimination of road casualties, and a reduction in congestion.<ref name="es_20080207"/> [[Living street]]s share some similarities with shared spaces. The [[Woonerf|woonerven]] also sought to reduce traffic speeds in community and housing zones by the use of lower speed limits enforced by the use of special signage and road markings, the introduction of [[traffic calming]] measures, and by giving pedestrians priority over motorists.

===Non-built-up areas===

Roads outside built-up areas, also known as rural roads not including motorways, are roads which are not classified as urban road and which are not classified as motorway.
In the European Union, this is the kind of road with the most people killed (54.3%) in 2015, more than inside urban areas (36.8%).<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/files/pdf/statistics/dacota/asr2017.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=28 November 2019 |archive-date=8 February 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200208133956/https://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/sites/roadsafety/files/pdf/statistics/dacota/asr2017.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> However, such numbers might change country by country.

{{Graph:Chart
|type=pie
|width=80
|height=80
|x=inside built-up area, outside urban area (non motorway), motorway (outside urban area), unknown
|y1=9713, 14335, 2024, 349
|showValues=
|legend=People killed by area/road, European Union-28, 2015
}}

Fatalities on the rural roads come from the many collisions due to the dangers that exist on such roads, and the important energy involved in those collisions due to the practiced speeds. In contrast, risks of collision are less numerous on motorways, and speeds are lower on rural roads.

{{Expand section|date=April 2010}}

===Major highways===
[[File:Kaluga Region Trassa.jpg|thumb|Guard rail on road in [[Kaluga Oblast]] ([[Russia]])]]
[[Image:Ruta Panamericana Buenos Aires Florida.jpg|thumb|The [[Pan-American Highway]] with central median and no freestanding obstructions]]
[[File:Autostrada A20 Torregrotta.jpg|thumb|The [[Autostrada A20 (Italy)|Autostrada A20]] ([[Italy]]) with large central median]]

Major [[highway]]s including [[motorways]], [[freeways]], [[Autobahns|Autobahnen]], [[autostrade]] and [[interstates]] are designed for safer high-speed operation and generally have lower levels of injury per vehicle km than other roads; for example, in 2013, the German autobahn fatality rate of 1.9 deaths per billion-travel-kilometers compared favorably with the 4.7 rate on urban streets and 6.6 rate on rural roads.<ref name="debast">{{cite web |date=October 2014 |title=Traffic and Accident Data: Summary Statistics – Germany |url=http://www.bast.de/EN/Publications/Media/Unfallkarten-national-englisch.pdf?__blob=publicationFile |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170525172538/http://www.bast.de/EN/Publications/Media/Unfallkarten-national-englisch.pdf?__blob=publicationFile |archive-date=25 May 2017 |access-date=14 December 2014 |publisher=Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen (Federal Highway Research Institute) |format=PDF}} [https://azinjuryattorney.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Unfallkarten-national-englisch.pdf Alt URL]</ref>

Safety features include:
*[[Limited access road|Limited access]] from the properties and local roads.
*[[Grade separation|Grade separated junctions]]
*[[Dual carriageway|Median dividers]] between opposite-direction traffic to reduce likelihood of head-on collisions
*Removing roadside obstacles.
*Prohibition of more vulnerable road users and slower vehicles.
*Placements of energy attenuation devices (e.g. [[Crash barrier|guard rails]], wide grassy areas, sand barrels).
*Eliminating road toll booths

The ends of some guard in rails on high-speed highways in the [[United States]] are protected with impact attenuators, designed to gradually absorb the [[kinetic energy]] of a vehicle and slow it more gently before it can strike the end of the guard rail head on, which would be devastating at high speed. Several mechanisms are used to dissipate kinetic energy. [[Fitch Barrier]]s, a system of sand-filled barrels, uses momentum transfer from the vehicle to the sand. Many other systems are tear or deform steel members to absorb energy and gradually stop the vehicle.

In some countries major roads have "tone bands" impressed or cut into the edges of the legal roadway, so that drowsing drivers are awakened by a loud hum as they release the steering and drift off the edge of the road. Tone bands are also referred to as "[[rumble strips]]", owing to the sound they create. An alternative method is the use of "Raised Rib" markings, which consists of a continuous line marking with ribs across the line at regular intervals. They were first specially authorised for use on motorways as an edge line marking to separate the edge of the hard shoulder from the main carriageway. The objective of the marking is to achieve improved visual delineation of the carriageway edge in wet conditions at night. It also provides an audible/vibratory warning to vehicle drivers, should they stray from the carriageway, and run onto the marking.

Better motorways are banked on curves to reduce the need for tire-traction and increase stability for vehicles with high centers of gravity.

The US has developed a prototype [[Automated highway system|automated roadway]], to reduce driver fatigue and increase the carrying capacity of the roadway. Roadside units participating in future [[wireless vehicle safety communications]] networks have been studied.

Motorways are far more expensive and space-consumptive to build than ordinary roads, so are only used as principal arterial routes. In developed nations, motorways bear a significant portion of motorized travel; for example, the United Kingdom's 3533&nbsp;km of motorways represented less than 1.5% of the United Kingdom's roadways in 2003, but carry 23% of road traffic.

The proportion of traffic borne by motorways is a significant safety factor. For example, even though the United Kingdom had a higher fatality rates on both motorways and non-motorways than Finland, both nations shared the same overall fatality rate in 2003. This result was due to the United Kingdom's higher proportion of motorway travel.

Similarly, the reduction of conflicts with other vehicles on motorways results in smoother traffic flow, reduced collision rates, and reduced [[Fuel economy in automobiles#Measurement cycles|fuel consumption]] compared with stop-and-go traffic on other roadways.

The improved safety and fuel economy of motorways are common justifications for building more motorways. However, the planned capacity of motorways is often exceeded in a shorter timeframe than initially planned, due to the under estimation of the extent of the suppressed demand for road travel. In developing nations, there is significant public debate on the desirability of continued investment in motorways.

With effect from January 2005 and based primarily on safety grounds, the UK's [[Highways Agency]]'s policy is that all new motorway schemes are to use high containment [[concrete step barrier]]s in the central reserve. All existing motorways will introduce concrete barriers into the central reserve as part of ongoing upgrades and through replacement as and when these systems have reached the end of their useful life. This change of policy applies only to barriers in the central reserve of high speed roads and not to verge side barriers. Other routes will continue to use steel barriers.

More people die on the hard shoulder than on the highway itself. Without other vehicles passing a parked car, following drivers are unaware that the vehicle is parked, despite hazard lights. Truck drivers indicate that they are parked by putting their cab seat behind their truck.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} In the UK, the AA and police park their vehicles on the hard shoulder at a slight angle so that following drivers can see down the side of their vehicle and are therefore aware that they are stopped.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}}

30% of highway crashes occur in the vicinity of toll collection booths in the countries that have them, these can be reduced by switching to electronic toll systems.<ref name=tollcrash>{{cite web|url=http://www.issues.org/26.4/ezell.html|title=Bringing U.S. Roads into the 21st Century|date=July 2010 }}</ref>

==Vehicle safety==
Safety can be improved in various ways depending on the transport taken.

===Buses and coaches===
{{Multiple issues|section=yes|
{{unreferenced section|date=January 2012}}
{{Expand section|date=April 2012}}
}}
Safety can be improved in various simple ways to reduce the chance of a crash occurring. Avoiding rushing or standing in unsafe places on the bus or coach and following the rules on the bus or coach itself will greatly increase the safety of a person travelling by bus or coach. Various safety features can also be implemented into buses and coaches to improve safety including safety bars for people to hold onto.

The main ways to stay safe when travelling by bus or coach are as follows:
* Leave your location early so that you do not have to run to catch the bus or coach.
* At the bus stop, always follow the queue.
* Do not board or alight at a bus stop other than an official one.
* Never board or alight at a red light crossing or unauthorized bus stop.
* Board the bus only after it has come to a halt without rushing in or pushing others.
* Do not sit, stand or travel on the footboard of the bus.
* Do not put any part of your body outside a moving or a stationary bus.
* While in the bus, refrain from shouting or making noise as it can distract the driver.
* Always hold onto the handrail if standing in a moving bus, especially on sharp turns.
* Always adhere to the bus safety rules.

===Cars===
{{Main|Automobile safety}}
[[Image:Crashtestdummy-computersimulation.jpg|frame|right|Simulated crashes using [[Crash test dummy|crash test dummies]] can help improve automobile design.]]
Safety can be improved by reducing the chances of a driver making an error, or by designing vehicles to reduce the severity of crashes that do occur. Most industrialized countries have comprehensive requirements and specifications for safety-related vehicle devices, systems, design, and construction. These may include:
* Passenger restraints such as [[seat belt]]s – often in conjunction with [[seat belt legislation|laws requiring their use]] – and [[airbag]]s
* Crash avoidance equipment such as [[Automotive lighting|lights and reflectors]]
* Driver assistance systems such as [[Electronic Stability Control]]
* Crash survivability design including fire-retardant interior materials, standards for fuel system integrity, and the use of [[safety glass]]
*''Sobriety detectors'': These interlocks prevent the ignition key from working if the driver breathes into one and it detects significant quantities of alcohol. They have been used by some commercial transport companies, or suggested for use with persistent drunk-driving offenders on a voluntary basis<ref name=science>{{Cite journal| title = Primary and secondary prevention of drink driving by the use of alcolock device and program: Swedish experiences | journal = Accident Analysis & Prevention | volume=37 |issue=6 |date=November 2005| doi=10.1016/j.aap.2005.06.020 | pages=1145–1152 | author=Bjerre Bo| pmid = 16055069 }}</ref>

[[File:The Dutch Reach - Use far hand on handle when opening to avoid dooring cyclists or injuries to exiting drivers and passengers.png|thumb|The [[Dutch Reach]] - Use far hand on handle when opening to avoid [[dooring]] cyclists or injuries to exiting drivers and passengers.]]

Motorists and passengers<ref name="rospa.com">{{Cite web|url=http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/sharing-the-road-together-drivers-cyclists/dutch-reach/|title=Dutch Reach: What is the Dutch Reach? - Road Safety, Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, UK|access-date=9 February 2017}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.massrmv.com/Portals/30/docs/dmanual/chapter_4.pdf|title=Commonwealth of Massachusetts Revised 2017 Driver's Manual, Chapter 4, Rules of the Road: "The Danger of Open Doors to Bicyclists"[cf. The Danger of Open Doors to Bicyclists, p. 109]|access-date=9 June 2017|archive-date=10 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170610114830/http://www.massrmv.com/Portals/30/docs/dmanual/chapter_4.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> – both front and rear – can make [[dooring]] less likely by practicing the "[[Dutch reach]]" – opening the car door by reaching across the body with the more distant hand.<ref name="rospa.com"/><ref name="bostonglobe.com">{{Cite web|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/09/08/this-cyclist-wants-drivers-dutch-reach/V2Ei5bEiOCfU6ubxX1r8VN/story.html|title=This cyclist wants drivers to do the 'Dutch Reach' - The Boston Globe|website=[[The Boston Globe]]|access-date=24 September 2016}}</ref>

===Motorbikes===
{{Expand section|date=April 2010}}
{{Main|Motorcycle safety}}
UK road casualty statistics show that motorcycle riders are nine times more likely to crash, and 17 times more likely to die in a crash, than car drivers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2013|title=Reported road casualties Great Britain: annual report 2013 - Publications - GOV.UK|website=www.gov.uk|access-date=13 January 2017}}</ref> The higher fatality risk is due in part to the lack of crash protection (unlike in enclosed vehicles such as cars), combined with the high speeds motorcycles typically travel at.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/safebike/anatomy.html|title=Anatomy of a Motorcycle Crash|website=National Highway Traffic Safety Administration|access-date=13 January 2017}}</ref> According to US statistics, the percentage of intoxicated motorcyclists in fatal crashes is higher than other riders on roads.<ref>Driving Safety. http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/Motorcycles. NHTSA. Retrieved 3 January 2014.</ref>  Helmets also play a major role in the safety of motorcyclists. In 2008, The [[National Highway Traffic Safety Administration]] (NHTSA) estimated the helmets are 37 percent effective in saving lives of motorcyclists involved in crashes.<ref>Motorcycles: Traffic Safety Facts-2008 Data. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/811159.pdf. [[National Highway Traffic Safety Administration]]. Retrieved 3 January 2014.</ref>

===Trucks===
According to the European Commission Transportation Department "it has been estimated that up to 25% of accidents involving [[truck]]s can be attributable to inadequate cargo securing". Improperly-secured cargo can cause severe crashes and lead to loss of [[cargo]], loss of lives, loss of vehicles, and can be a hazard for the environment. One way to stabilize, secure, and protect cargo during transportation on the road is by using [[dunnage bags]], which are placed in the voids among the cargo and are designed to prevent the load from moving during transport.

Together for Safer Roads (TSR) has developed best practices for implementing corporate road safety programs that includes data management and analysis, route mapping, investment and upkeep of fleets, safety policies and training for employees, and first-aid/safety training in case collisions do occur.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.togetherforsaferroads.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/TSR%20Best%20Practices%20Report.pdf|title=Advancing Best Practices for Companies and Their Fleets: Guidelines for Developing and Managing Transportation Programs|last=Together for Safer Roads|publisher=TSR|access-date=2 November 2016}}</ref>

===Police===
Hundreds of people are killed each year due to [[high-speed chase]]s of fleeing suspects by police.  Different jurisdictions allow such pursuits in different circumstances; fewer injuries might occur if these are restricted to violent felonies.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/2015/07/23/425598535/even-if-a-car-chase-will-help-police-nab-a-suspect-some-don-t|title=In Hot Pursuit Of Public Safety, Police Consider Fewer Car Chases|website=NPR.org|access-date=23 January 2017}}</ref>

==Regulation of road users==
Various types of road user regulations are in force or have been tried in most jurisdictions around the world, some these are discussed by road user type below.

===Motor vehicle users===
Dependent on jurisdiction, driver's age, road type and vehicle type, motor vehicle drivers may be required to pass a [[driving test]] (public transport and goods vehicle drivers may need additional training and licensing), conform to [[Driving under the influence|restrictions on driving after consuming alcohol or various drugs]], comply with [[Mobile phones and driving safety|restrictions on use of mobile phones]], be covered by [[vehicle insurance|compulsory insurance]], wear [[seat belts]] and comply with certain [[speed limits]]. Motorcycle riders may additionally be compelled to wear a [[motorcycle helmet]]. Drivers of certain vehicle types may be subject to maximum [[tachograph|driving hour]] regulations.

Some jurisdictions, such as the US states Virginia and Maryland, have implemented specific regulations such as the prohibiting mobile phone use by, and limiting the number of passengers accompanying, young and inexperienced drivers.<ref name=wp>{{cite news | url = https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52687-2005Jan31.html | title = Brain Immaturity Could Explain Teen Crash Rate | newspaper = Washington Post | date = 1 February 2005 | first = Elizabeth | last = Williamson}}</ref> ''The State of Safety Report'' from the [[National Safety Council]] released in 2017 ranks states on these road safety regulations.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170630/ohio-gets-d-in-safety-report-on-preventable-deaths-injuries|title=Ohio gets 'D' in safety report on preventable deaths, injuries|last=Williams|first=Mark|work=The Columbus Dispatch|access-date=6 July 2017|language=en}}</ref> It has been noticed that more serious collisions occur at night, when vehicles are more likely to have multiple occupants, and when seat belts are less likely to be used.<ref name=young>{{cite web| url = http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme2/pdfgoodbadtalenteddriver.pdf | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080216102117/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme2/pdfgoodbadtalenteddriver.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-date = 16 February 2008 | publisher = Transport Research Laboratory | work = Road Safety Research Report No. 74 | title = The Good, the Bad and the Talented: Young Drivers' Perspectives on Good Driving and Learning to Drive |date=January 2007 | access-date = 4 January 2008 }}</ref>

The [[Insurance Institute for Highway Safety]] proposes restrictions for new drivers,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.iihs.org/iihs/brochures/beginning-teen-drivers|title=Beginning teen drivers|website=www.iihs.org|access-date=6 July 2017}}</ref> including a "[[curfew]]" imposed on young drivers to prevent them driving at night, an experienced supervisor to chaperone the less experienced driver, forbidding the carrying of passengers, zero alcohol tolerance, raising the standards required for driving instructors and improving the driving test, vehicle restrictions (e.g. restricting access to 'high-performance' vehicles), a sign placed on the back of the vehicle (an N- or [[L-Plate|P-Plate]]) to notify other drivers of a novice driver and encouraging good behaviour in the post-test period.

While government has primary responsibility for providing safe roads, the challenges of development and equity require that all segments of society engage and contribute, including the private sector. Private and public sector coalitions, like Together for Safer Roads (TSR) and the Road to Zero Coalition<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dot-national-safety-council-launch-road-zero-coalition-end-roadway-fatalities|title=U.S. DOT, National Safety Council Launch 'Road to Zero' Coalition to End Roadway Fatalities|last=matthew.lynberg.ctr@dot.gov|date=9 October 2016|website=NHTSA|language=en|access-date=6 July 2017|archive-date=2 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702123110/https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dot-national-safety-council-launch-road-zero-coalition-end-roadway-fatalities|url-status=dead}}</ref> exist to work alongside government policies to advance the business case of having safer roads; they help companies meet their duty of care to employees and minimize fleet-related dangers to the wider community.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.togetherforsaferroads.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Investing-in-Road-Safety-A-Global-Imperative-for-the-Private-Sector.pdf|title=Investing in Road Safety: A Global Imperative for the Private Sector|last=Together for Safer Roads|publisher=TSR|access-date=2 November 2016|archive-date=4 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161104074942/http://www.togetherforsaferroads.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Investing-in-Road-Safety-A-Global-Imperative-for-the-Private-Sector.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Safer roads also benefit business by improving employee health and safety, by protecting assets, reducing productivity losses and healthcare costs, and enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of supply chains.

Some countries or states have already implemented some of these ideas through [[Vision Zero]] networks. [[PAYD|Pay-as-you-drive]] adjusts insurance costs according to when and where the person drives.

===Pedal bicycle users===
Dependent on jurisdiction, road type and age, pedal cyclists may be required conform to [[Driving under the influence|restrictions on driving after consuming alcohol or various drugs]], comply with [[Mobile phones and driving safety|restrictions on use of 
mobile phones]], be covered by [[vehicle insurance|compulsory insurance]], wear a [[bicycle helmet]] and comply with certain [[speed limits]].

===Pedestrians===
Dependent on jurisdiction, [[jaywalking]] may be prohibited. The frequent road safety education for the children helps to improve the dangerous behaviors.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Duperrex |first1=O |last2=Roberts |first2=I |last3=Bunn |first3=F |title=Safety education of pedestrians for injury prevention. |journal=The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews |date=2002 |volume=2002 |issue=2 |pages=CD001531 |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD001531 |pmid=12076415|pmc=7025789 |url=http://uhra.herts.ac.uk/bitstream/2299/5191/5/SafetyEducationCD001531.pdf |hdl=2299/5191 }}</ref>

===Animals===
{{see also|Roadkill#Prevention}}
Collisions with animals are usually fatal to the animals, and occasionally to drivers as well.

==Information campaigns==
[[File:Georgia road fatalities this year, 1182 October 20, 2016.jpg|thumb|Annual traffic deaths sign over [[Interstate 95 in Georgia|I-95 in Georgia]], US, indicating more than three deaths per day]]
Information campaigns can be used to raise awareness of initiatives designed to reduce road casualty levels. Examples include:
* Think! encouraging use of seatbelts (UK 2000–present)
* '' [[Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011–2020|Decade of Action]]'' by [[World Health Organization]] and [[Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile]] (2011–2020)
* Traffic awareness campaigns such as the "one false move" campaign documented by Hillman et al.
* ''[[Speeding. No one thinks big of you.]]'' ([[New South Wales]], [[Australia]], 2007)
* ''Road Safety is no Accident'' [[World Health Organization]]
* ''[[Designated driver]] campaign'', (US, 1970s–present)
* ''[[Click It or Ticket]]'', (US, 1993–present)
* ''[[Clunk Click Every Trip]]'' (UK 1971)
* ''[[Green Cross Code]]'' (UK 1970–present)

==Statistics==
[[File:Persons killed in road accidents per millions of passenger-kilometres driven by car.png|thumb|340px|According to [[Eurostat]], there is almost a linear proportion between the total number of passenger-km driven by car and road fatalities.]]
[[File:Car fatalities per pax-km vs. Car usage per pax-day; in Europe.png|thumb|340px|Car fatalities per pax-km vs. car usage per pax-day; in Europe. It seems, at least in these European countries, that car fatalities per person-km have no strong correlation with massification of car usage. The average car usage in these countries is around 30km per person-day with varying number of fatalities ratios. These differences might be related with different cultural approaches to traffic codes, or more safety measures implemented on such countries.]]
[[File:Road-way vs. railway safety.png|thumb|right|340px|According to [[Eurostat]] and [[European Railway Agency]], in European [[railway]] mode of transport, there is a fatality risk for passengers and occupants 28 times lower compared with car usage.  Based on data by EU-27 member nations, 2008–2010.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/transport/data/database| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120603163108/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/transport/data/database| url-status=dead| archive-date=3 June 2012| type=statistical database| title=Statistics database for transports| date=20 April 2014| publisher=Eurostat, European Commission| access-date=12 May 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/SPR%202013%20Final%20for%20web.pdf| title=Intermediate report on the development of railway safety in the European Union 2013| editor=Vojtech Eksler| type=report| date=5 May 2013| page=1| publisher=Safety Unit, European Railway Agency & European Union| access-date=12 May 2014}}</ref>]]

===Rating roads for safety===
Since 1999 the [[EuroRAP]] initiative has been assessing major roads in Europe with a road protection score. This results in a star rating for roads based on how well its design would protect car occupants from being severely injured or killed if a head-on, run-off, or intersection crash occurs, with 4 stars representing a road with the best survivability features.<ref name="eurorap">{{cite web |date=3 December 2007 |title=Star rating roads for safety: UK trials 2006–07 |url=http://www.eurorap.org/news_item?search=y&ID=39 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071214090335/http://www.eurorap.org/news_item?search=y&ID=39 |archive-date=14 December 2007 |publisher=EuroRAP |df=dmy-all}} (Note: see country maps here [http://www.eurorap.org/risk_maps?search=y&protocol=risk&country=*&parent=*] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080924011634/http://www.eurorap.org/risk_maps?search=y&protocol=risk&country=%2A&parent=%2A|date=24 September 2008}})</ref> The scheme states it has highlighted thousands of road sections across Europe where road-users are routinely maimed and killed for want of safety features, sometimes for little more than the cost of safety fencing or the paint required to improve road markings.<ref name=eurorap2>{{cite web | url = http://www.eurorap.org/about | title = Chairman's Message | last = John Dawson | first = John | access-date = 18 August 2008 | archive-date = 29 July 2012 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20120729195809/http://www.eurorap.org/about | url-status = dead }}</ref>

There are plans to extend the measurements to rate the probability of a collision for the road. These ratings are being used to inform planning and authorities' targets. For example, in Britain two-thirds of all road deaths happen on rural roads, which score badly when compared to the high quality motorway network; single carriageways claim 80% of rural deaths and serious injuries, while 40% of rural car occupant casualties are in cars that hit roadside objects, such as trees. Improvements in driver training and safety features for rural roads are hoped to reduce this statistic.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.eurorap.org/library/pdfs/20071130_UK_RPS_report.pdf | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080227050304/http://www.eurorap.org/library/pdfs/20071130_UK_RPS_report.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-date = 27 February 2008 |title = Star rating roads for safety, UK trials 2006–07 | publisher = TRL, EuroRAP & ADAC |date=December 2007}}</ref>

The number of designated traffic officers in the UK fell from 15% to 20% of police force strength
in 1966 to seven per cent of force strength in 1998, and between 1999 and 2004 by 21%.<ref name=policeforce>{{cite web|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmtran/975/975.pdf |title=Section 21, traffic officer numbers reduction in the UK |access-date=9 April 2012}}</ref> It is an item of debate whether the reduction in traffic collisions per 100 million miles driven over this time<ref name=accreduction>{{cite web|url=http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/217792/4212241/transportstatisticgreatbrit.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110429083452/http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/217792/4212241/transportstatisticgreatbrit.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=29 April 2011 |title=page 147 Transport statistics 2009 edition |publisher=Dft.gov.uk |date=31 March 2012 |access-date=9 April 2012}}</ref> has been due to robotic enforcement.

In the [[United States]], roads are not government-rated, for media-releases and public knowledge on their actual safety features. [<sup>unclear</sup>] However, in 2011, the [[National Highway Traffic Safety Administration]]'s ''Traffic Safety Facts'' found that over 800 persons were killed across the US by "non-fixed objects" that includes roadway debris. [[California]] had the highest number of total deaths from those crashes; [[New Mexico]] had a best chance for an individual to die from experiencing any vehicle-debris crash.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811754AR.PDF|title=Traffic Safety Facts 2011: Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and the General Estimates System|access-date=27 March 2018|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130711073509/http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811754AR.PDF|archive-date=11 July 2013}}{{page needed|date=October 2021}}</ref>

===[[Killed or Seriously Injured|KSI]] statistics===
{{main|Epidemiology of motor vehicle collisions}}
{{See also|List of countries by traffic-related death rate}}
According to WHO in 2010 it was estimated that 1.24 million people were killed worldwide and 50 million more were injured in [[motor vehicle collisions]]. Young adults aged between 15 and 44 years account for 59% of global road traffic deaths. Other key facts according to the WHO report are:<ref name=WHORRS>{{cite book |url=https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130320025340/http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=20 March 2013 |title=Global status report on road safety 2013: Supporting a Decade of Action |publisher=World Health Organisation WHO |year=2013 |format=PDF |type=report |location=Geneva, Switzerland |isbn=978-92-4-156456-4 |quote=data from 2010 |access-date=11 October 2014}}</ref>

*Road traffic injuries are the '''leading cause of death among young people, aged 15–29 years'''.
*'''91%''' of the world's fatalities on the roads occur in '''low-income and middle-income countries''', even though these countries have approximately half of the world's vehicles.
*Half of those dying on the world's roads are "vulnerable road users": '''pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists'''.
*Without action, road traffic crashes are predicted to result in the deaths of around '''1.9 million people annually by 2020'''.
*'''Only 28 countries''', representing 416 million people (7% of the world's population), '''have adequate laws that address all five risk factors''' (speed, drunk-driving, helmets, seat-belts and child restraints).

It is estimated that motor vehicle collisions caused the death of around 60 million people during the 20th century, around the same number of [[World War II casualties]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.visualnews.com/2013/03/19/visualizing-major-causes-of-death-in-the-20th-century/ |title=Visualizing Major Causes of Death in the 20th Century |publisher=Visual News |type=news article |date=19 March 2013 |access-date=11 October 2014 |archive-date=20 May 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150520222249/http://www.visualnews.com/2013/03/19/visualizing-major-causes-of-death-in-the-20th-century/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>

As the comparatively poor improvements in pedestrian safety have become a concern at [[OECD]] level, the ''Joint Transport Research Centre of OECD and the International Transport Forum'' (JTRC) convened an international expert group and published a report entitled ''”Pedestrian Safety, Urban Space and Health in 2012”''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/Pub/pdf/11PedestrianSum.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110518153549/http://internationaltransportforum.org/Pub/pdf/11PedestrianSum.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=18 May 2011 |title=Pedestrian Safety, Urban Space and Health: Summary Report |publisher=International Transport Forum, OECD |year=2011 |type=research report |location=Paris, France |access-date=11 October 2014}}</ref>

According to BITRE/Australia agency changes in growth in population, vehicle registration, and estimated vehicle kilometres travelled have various impact on death trend from OECD countries.<ref name="bitre.gov.au">{{Cite web |url=http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_2016_III.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=14 May 2019 |archive-date=16 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190316163156/https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_2016_III.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>

{{Graph:Chart
|type=rect
|height=60
|x=population, vehicle, distance
|y1=0.74
|y2=,0.55
|y3=,,0.23
|legend=— 10 years to 2016
|y1Title=Change in population against change in road fatalities
|y2Title=Change in vehicle registrations against change in road fatalities 
|y3Title=Change in vehicle kilometres travelled against change in road fatalitie
|showValues=
|yAxisTitle=rate
}}

====KSI 2013====
According to the [[OECD]]'s ''International Transport Forum'' ([[International Transport Forum|ITF]]), in 2013 the key figures among their 37 member states and observer countries looked like the following:<ref name=irtad>{{cite web |url=http://internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130326032514/http://internationaltransportforum.org/irtadpublic/ |url-status=dead |archive-date=26 March 2013 |title=Road Safety Annual Report 2014 |publisher=International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group irtad, International Transport Forum, OECD |date=2015 |format=PDF |type=report |location=Paris, France |quote=data from 2013 |pages=22, 32, div |access-date=12 December 2015  }}</ref>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! data-sort-type="text" | Country
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />1 million inhabitants
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />10 billion vehicle-km
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />100 000 registered vehicles
! data-sort-type="number" | Registered vehicles per 1 000 inhabitants
! class="unsortable" | Seatbelt wearing rates Front (driver, passenger)/ Rear (adults, children)
! class="unsortable" | [[speed limit]]<br />urban / rural / motorways (km/h)
|-
|{{flag|Argentina}}
|align=right| 123
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 23
|align=right| 529
|align=center| 52%,45% / 19%,45%
| 30–60 / 110 / 130
|-
|{{flag|Australia}}
|align=right| 51
|align=right| 50
|align=right| 7
|align=right| 751
|align=center| 97% / 96%
| 50, 60–80 / 100 or 110 / 110
|-
|{{flag|Austria}}
|align=right| 54
|align=right| 58
|align=right| 8
|align=right| 710
|align=center| 89% / 77%
| 50 / 100 / 130
|-
|{{flag|Belgium}}
|align=right| 65
|align=right| 71
|align=right| 10
|align=right| 627
|align=center| 86% / 63%,79%<ref group=Note name=y2012>2012</ref>
| 30–50 / 70–90 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Cambodia}}
|align=right| 143<ref group=Note name=y2014>2014</ref>
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 78<ref group=Note name=y2014/>
|align=right| 151
|align=center| 17% / ''n.a.''
| 40 / 90 / ''n.a.''
|-
|{{flag|Canada}}
|align=right| 55
|align=right| 56
|align=right| 9
|align=right| 644
|align=center| 95% / 95% (estimated) (Metropolitan)
| 40–70 / 80–90 / 100–110
|-
|{{flag|Chile}}
|align=right| 120
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 50
|align=right| 237
|align=center| 62,78% / 15%
| 50 / 100–120 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Czech Republic}}
|align=right| 62
|align=right| 157
|align=right| 11
|align=right| 560
|align=center| 97% / 66%<ref group=Note name=y2012/>
| 50 / 90 / 130
|-
|{{flag|Denmark}}
|align=right| 34
|align=right| 39
|align=right| 6
|align=right| 523
|align=center| 94% / 81%<ref group=Note name=y2012/>
| 50 / 80 / 130 (110)
|-
|{{flag|Finland}}
|align=right| 48
|align=right| 48
|align=right| 7
|align=right| 725
|align=center| 95% / 87%
| 50 / 80 (winter) 100 (summer) / 120 (100)
|-
|{{flag|France}}
|align=right| 51
|align=right| 58
|align=right| 8
|align=right| 647
|align=center| 98% / 84%,90%<ref group=Note name=y2010>2010</ref>
| 50 / 90 / 130 (110 bad w.)
|-
|{{flag|Germany}}
|align=right| 41
|align=right| 46
|align=right| 6
|align=right| 651
|align=center| 96–98% / 97,98%
| 50 / 100 / no limit or 130
|-
|{{flag|Greece}}
|align=right| 79
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 11
|align=right| 726
|align=center| 77%,74% / 23%<ref group=Note name=y2009>2009</ref>
| 50 / 90 (110) / 130 (110)
|-
|{{flag|Hungary}}
|align=right| 60
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 16
|align=right| 366
|align=center| 87% / 57%,90%
| 50 / 90 / 130 (110)
|-
|{{flag|Iceland}}
|align=right| 47
|align=right| 47
|align=right| 6
|align=right| 830
|align=center| 84% / 65%
| 50 / 90 (80) / ''n.a.''
|-
|{{flag|Ireland}}
|align=right| 41
|align=right| 40
|align=right| 8
|align=right| 541
|align=center| 92% / 88%,91%
| 50 / 80 or 100 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Israel}}
|align=right| 34
|align=right| 54
|align=right| 9
|align=right| 352
|align=center| 97% / 74%
| 50,70 / 80,90,100 / 110
|-
|{{flag|Italy}}
|align=right| 57
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 7
|align=right| 821
|align=center| 64%–76% / 10%<ref group=Note name=y2011>2011</ref>
| 50 / 90–110 / 130 (110 bad w., 100 novice, 150)
|-
|{{flag|Jamaica}}
|align=right| 122<ref group=Note name=y2014/>
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 87
|align=right| 130
|align=center| 44% / ''very low'' (estimated)<ref group=Note name=y2008>2008</ref>
| 50 / 50 / 70 or 110
|-
|{{flag|Japan}}
|align=right| 40
|align=right| 69
|align=right| 6
|align=right| 657
|align=center| 96%,94% / 61%
| 40,50,60 / 50,60 / 100
|-
|{{flag|Lithuania}}
|align=right| 87
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 11
|align=right| 766
|align=center| 95% / 33%
| 50 / 90 (70) / 120 or 130 (110 in winter)
|-
|{{flag|Luxembourg}}
|align=right| 84
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 11
|align=right| 771
|align=center| 80% / ''n.a.''<ref group=Note name=y2003>2003</ref>
| 50 / 90 / 130 (110 in rain)
|-
|{{flag|Malaysia}}
|align=right| 231
|align=right| 122
|align=right| 29
|align=right| 792<ref group=Note>Including motorised two-wheelers</ref>
|align=center| 82%,68% / 9%
| 50 / 90 / 110
|-
|{{flag|Morocco}}
|align=right| 116
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 117
|align=right| 100
|align=center| 49%,46% / ''n.a.''<ref group=Note name=y2011/>
| 50 / 100 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Netherlands}}
|align=right| 34
|align=right| 45
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 537
|align=center| 97% / 82%<ref group=Note name=y2010/>
| 50 / 80 / 130
|-
|{{flag|New Zealand}}
|align=right| 57
|align=right| 63
|align=right| 8
|align=right| 734
|align=center| 97% / 92%,93%
| 50 / 100 / 100
|-
|{{flag|Norway}}
|align=right| 37
|align=right| 43
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 707
|align=center| 95% / 87–88%
| 30,50 / 80 / 90,100,110
|-
|{{flag|Poland}}
|align=right| 87
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 14
|align=right| 636
|align=center| 90% / 71%,89%
| 50 (60) / 90–120 / 140
|-
|{{flag|Portugal}}
|align=right| 61
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 11
|align=right| 551
|align=center| 96% / 77%,89–100%
| 50 / 90 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Russia}}
|align=right| 124
|align=right| 201
|align=right| 35
|align=right| 353
|align=center| n.a.
| 60 / 90 / 110 or 130
|-
|{{flag|Serbia}}
|align=right| 71
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 20
|align=right| 347
|align=center| 84% / 19%
| 50 / 80 / 130
|-
|{{flag|Slovenia}}
|align=right| 61
|align=right| 72
|align=right| 10
|align=right| 638
|align=center| 94% / 66%,87–94%
| 50 / 90 (110) / 130
|-
|{{flag|South Korea}}
|align=right| 101
|align=right| 172
|align=right| 23
|align=right| 450
|align=center| 89%,75% / 22% (on motorways)
| 60 / 60–80 / 110 (100)
|-
|{{flag|Spain}}
|align=right| 36
|align=right| ''n.a.''
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 662
|align=center| 90% / 81%<ref group=Note name=y2012/>
| 50 / 90 or 100 / 120
|-
|{{flag|Sweden}}
|align=right| 27
|align=right| 34
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 597
|align=center| 97% / 81%,95%
| 30,40,50 / 60,70,80,90,100 / 110 or 120
|-
|{{flag|Switzerland}}
|align=right| 33
|align=right| 43
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 708
|align=center| 94%,93% / 77%,93%
| 50 / 80 / 120
|-
|{{flag|United Kingdom}}
|align=right| 28
|align=right| 35
|align=right| 5
|align=right| 551
|align=center| 96% / 92%
| 48 / 96 or 113 / 113
|-
|{{flag|United States}}
|align=right| 103
|align=right| 68
|align=right| 12
|align=right| 852
|align=center| 87% / 74%
| set by state / set by state / 88–129 (set by state)
|}

====KSI 2020====
According to the [[OECD]]'s ''International Transport Forum'' ([[International Transport Forum|ITF]])/IRTAD, in 2020 the key figures of 34 members among their 62 member states and observer countries looked like the following:<ref name="irtad2020">{{cite web |url=https://www.itf-oecd.org/road-safety-annual-report-2020 |title=Road Safety Annual Report 2020 |date=23 October 2020 |publisher=International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group irtad, International Transport Forum, OECD  |format=PDF |type=report |location=Paris, France |quote=data from 2018-2019-2020}}</ref>

{| class="wikitable sortable"
! data-sort-type="text" | Country
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />1 million <br />inhabitants<br />2018
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths<br /> per<br />10 billion vkm<br />motorways<br />2018
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />10 billion vkm<br />2018
! data-sort-type="number" | Deaths per<br />100 000 <br />registered <br />vehicles<br />2018
! data-sort-type="number" | Registered<br /> vehicles<br /> per<br /> 1 000 inhabitants
! data-sort-type="number" | Seatbelt<br /> wearing <br />rates<br /> Front <br />(driver, passenger)
! data-sort-type="number" | Seatbelt<br /> wearing <br />rates<br /> Rear (adults, children)
! class="unsortable" | [[speed limit]]<br />urban / rural / motorways (km/h) <br /> 2020
! data-sort-type="number" | general BAC g/L
! data-sort-type="number" | lower BAC g/L
|-
|{{flag|Austria}} || 46 || 10 || 49 ||6 || || 97/98 || 96 || 50 / 100 / 130 || 0.5 || 0.1
|-
|{{flag|Belgium}} (2017) (c) || 53 || 24|| 59 ||8|| ||95 (2017)||86 (2015)||30–50 / 70–90 / 120 || 0.5 || 0.2
|-
|{{flag|Czech Republic}}  ||62 || 26 ||117 ||9 || || 95 (2015)  || 95 (2015)|| 50 / 90 / 130 || 0.0 || -
|-
|{{flag|Denmark}} (2017) (c) ||30 || 8 ||32 (or 31) || 5 || || 97 (2018) || 93 (2019) || 50 (sections with 30, 40 or 60) / <br /> 70, 80 (90 for specific sections) / <br />110, 130 || 0.5 || -
|-
|{{flag|Finland}}  || 43 || 6 || 47 || 5 || || 95 || 87 || 30–60 / 80, 100 / 100, 120 ||0.5 || -
|-
|{{flag|France}}||50 ||   22 ||54 ||7 || || 99 || 86 || 50 / <br /> 80 with 90 sections / <br />  110 on dual carriageways <br />  130 <br />  (110 wet + novice) || 0.5 || 0.2
|-
|{{flag|Germany}} (c) ||40  || 17|| 44 ||6 || || 99 || 98.5 ||  50 / 100 / <br /> None < (130 recommended) || 0.3-0.5 || 0.0
|-
|{{flag|Netherlands}} (2017) (b) || 39 || 10|| 40 (or 49) || 6 || || >95 (2010) || 82 (2010)||  30–50 / 60–80 / 100–130 || 0.5 || 0.2
|-
|{{flag|Slovenia}} (2017)  ||44 || 25|| 49 (or 42) || 6 || || 95/96 (2018) || 78 (adults 2018) || 50 / 90 (110 on expressways) / 130 (110 on expressways) || 0.5 || 0.0
|-
|{{flag|Switzerland}} || 27 ||8 || 34 || 4 || || 96/95 || 77|| 50 / 80 / 120 (100 on expressways) || 0.5 || 0.0
|-
|{{flag|Great Britain}} /{{flag|UK}}  ||28 || 10 || 33 ||5 || || 99 drivers,<br /> 97 passengers<br /> (2017 <br />for <br />GB) || 93 <br />(2017 <br />for GB) || 48 (30&nbsp;mph) 96, 113 (60, 70&nbsp;mph) 113 (70&nbsp;mph) || 0.8 <br />(England,<br /> Wales,<br /> Northern Ireland) <br /> 0.5 <br />(Scotland) || -
|-
|{{flag|Japan}} || 33 || || 56 || 5 || ||99 drivers,<br /> 96 passenger || 39 ||40, 50, 60 / 50, 60 / 100 || 0.3 || -
|-
|{{flag|USA}}|| 112 || || 70 || 12 || || 90.9 drivers, 89.8 passengers|| 76.1 (2018) || (see note)<br /> (see note)<br />88–129 || 0.8 || 0.0 - 0.4
|-
! colspan="11" | (b) Real data (actual numbers instead of reported numbers by the police).
(c) Mopeds are not included in the registered vehicles. <br />
VKM: vehicle-km <br />
In United-States, speed limit vary state by state
|}

=== Time effect ===
{|
|{{Graph:Chart|width=500|height=200|xAxisTitle=Year|yAxisTitle=Killed|legend=Count|type=line|x=1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013,2014,2015,2016,2017,2018,2019,2020
|y1= 44599, 44508, 39250, 40150, 40716, 41817, 42065,  42013, 	41501, 	41717, 	41945, 	42116, 	42815, 	42884, 	42836, 	43510, 	42708, 	41259, 	37423, 	33883, 	32999, 	32479, 	33782, 	32894, 	32675, 
|y2 = ,,,,,,,,,,  , ,,,,,,,,,  32999,	32479,	33782,	32894,	32744,	35485,	37806, 37133
|y3 = ,,,,,,,,,,  , ,,,,,,,,,  {{#expr: 18089+14659}},
{{#expr:17769+14575}},
{{#expr:18367+15371}},
{{#expr:17739+15119}},
{{#expr:16791+15917}},
{{#expr:17715+17573}},
{{#expr:19357+18321}},
{{#expr:19976+17405}},
{{#expr:20408+16323}},
{{#expr:19595+16340}}
|y4 = ,76200, 71500, 66200, 64700, 64000, 60100, 61000, 59600, 58400, 57080, 54900, 53300, 50400, 47300, 45300, 43100,  42500, 38900,  34800, 31500, 30700, 28200, 26000, 25900
|y5 = ,,,,,,,,,,,55092,	54174,	51165,	48017,	45981,	43781,43215,	39713,	35427,	31595,	30804,	28282,	26025,	26020,	26190,	25671
|y6 = ,,,,,,,,,,  , ,,,,,,,,,  31500,30700,28200,26000,26000,26100,25600,25300
| y7= ,,,,,,,,,
54680,	53410,	51282,	50343,	47331,	44466,	42552,	40365,	40038,	36880,	32978,	29576,	28708,	26429,	24213, 24133, 24358, 23812, 23394, 23339
<!-- old data : 24172,	24115,	24328,	23783,	23401 -->
| y8= ,,,,,,,,,
,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	, , , , , 23339, 22800
|xType=date
|xAxisFormat=%Y
|colors=#80Fe8C01,#80a67430,#80808080,
#40a121fe,#80a17A67,#a0a1Aaf5,
#c03030fe,#c041a1fe
|y1Title=United-States
|y2Title=United-States (IIHS)
|y3Title=United-States (NHTSA 2010-2019)
|y4Title=EU-28 (including UK)
|y5Title=EU-28 (EU – 28 states, including UK)
|y6Title=EU-28 (CARE/Commission, provisional data, including UK)
|y7Title=European union (post Brexit Members) (Eurostat)
|y8Title=European union (estimated, 2019)
|yAxisMin=0
|yGrid=1
|xGrid=1 }}
|-
| colspan=2 |
* EU: Source EU<ref>
SÉCURITÉ ROUTIÈRE:
Quelle est la situation dans votre pays?
ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/pdf/statistics/dacota/scoreboard_2015_en.pdf
D'après des données CARE/Eurostat
</ref>
* EU28, ETSC.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://etsc.eu/11th-annual-road-safety-performance-index-pin-report-2/|title=11th Annual Road Safety Performance Index (PIN) Report - ETSC|last=SemiColonWeb|website=etsc.eu|access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/11-PIN-annual-report-background-tables.xlsx |title=Archived copy |access-date=22 February 2018 |archive-date=22 February 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180222165251/http://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/11-PIN-annual-report-background-tables.xlsx |url-status=dead }}</ref>
* EU, 2010–2017 provisional data<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-18-2762_en.htm|title=European Commission - PRESS RELEASES - Press release - 2017 road safety statistics: What is behind the figures?|website=europa.eu|language=en|access-date=25 September 2018}}</ref>
* EU, 2010–1018, source Eurostat.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tran_sf_roadse/default/table?lang=en |title=Persons killed in road accidents by sex (source: CARE) |date=17 June 2021 |website=Eurostat}}</ref>
* EU, 2019, estimated.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/transport/media/news/2020-06-11-road-safety-statistics-2019_en|title = Road safety: Europe's roads are getting safer but progress remains too slow|date = 10 June 2020}}</ref>
* United-States: Source OCDE/ITF<ref name="IRTAD">Base de donénes IRTAD_CASUAL_BY_AGE stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=IRTAD_CASUAL_BY_AGE</ref> for 1990, 2000 and 2010–2015 period (killed after 30 days)
* United States, Sources IIHS.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/general-statistics/fatalityfacts/overview-of-fatality-facts|title=General statistics|work=IIHS|access-date=25 September 2018}}</ref>
* United States, 2010–2019, Sources NHTSA.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/Publication/813060 |author=National Center for Statistics and Analysis |date=December 2020 |title=Overview of motor vehicle crashes in 2019. (Traffic Safety Facts Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 813 060) |publisher=[[National Highway Traffic Safety Administration]] (NHTSA)}}</ref>
|}

=== Traveled distance effect ===
In some countries, the safety is computed mixing two metrics: the fatalities and the traveled distance, to establish fatalities by traveled distance.

{| class="wikitable"
!US Fatalities vs VMT
!US Fatalities compared to VMT
|-
|{{Graph:Chart|width=300|height=150
|xAxisTitle=Vehicle Miles Traveled (Billions) for one year
|yAxisTitle=Killed (yearly)
|legend=Killed on road
|type=line
|x=3095,	3026,	2988,	2969,	2950,	2967,	2957,	2977,	3031,	3014,	2989,	2965,	2890,	2856,	2796,	2747,	2690,	2628,	2552,	2484,	2423,	2358
|y1=,,,,,,,, 41259,	42708,	43510,	42836,	42884,	43005,	42196,	41945,	41717,	41501,	42013,	42065,	41817,	40716
|y2= 		,,	,	,	,	,	33883,	37423,	41259
|y3= 	35092	,32744,	32893,	33782,	32479,	32999,	33883,	
|y4=34045,	33286,	32868,	32659,	32450,	32637,	32527,	32747,	33341,	33154,	32879,	32615,	,	
|y5=,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	42840,	41940,	41205,	40350,	39420,	38280,	37260,	36345,	35370
|y6=,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	,	43384,	42228,	41191,	40086,
|y7=40235,	39338,	38844,	38597,	38350,	38571,	38441,	38701,	39403,	39182,	38857,	38545,	37570,	37128,	36348,	35711,	34970,	34164,	,	,	,

|colors=#ae3C01,#7171fe,#019A37,#808e8e01,#80264460,#808e5a55,#80264460
|y1Title=Killed (1994–2007)									
|y2Title=Killed (2007–2009)
|y3Title=Killed (2009–2015)
|y4Title=11 Killed by billon VMT
|y5Title=15 Killed by billon VMT
|y6Title=17 Killed by billon VMT
|y7Title=13 Killed by billon VMT
}}
|{{Graph:Chart|width=280|height=120
|xAxisTitle=Miles travelled (millions)
|yAxisTitle=VMT by fatalities
|legend="VMT by fatalities" by VMT
|type=line
|xAxisFormat=s
|yAxisFormat=s
|x=1330074,1409163,1476567,1548213,1529133,1520857,1550271,1592481,1649106,1716768,1774762,1838240,1924327,2025586,2107040,2147501,2172214,2239828,2296585,2357588,2422775,2482202,2560373,2625367,2691335,2749803,2781462,2855756,2890893,2962513,2989807,3014116,3032399,2973509,2977591,2966506,2946131,2969433,2988280,3025656,3095373,3166200

|y1=298507.46268656716,309597.52321981423,308641.97530864197,307692.3076923077,299401.19760479045,297619.04761904763,314465.40880503145,362318.84057971014,387596.89922480617,387596.89922480617,404858.29959514167,398406.3745019921,414937.75933609955,431034.4827586207,462962.9629629629,480769.23076923075,523560.2094240838,571428.5714285715,571428.5714285715,578034.6820809249,578034.6820809249,591715.976331361,609756.0975609757,632911.3924050633,645161.2903225806,653594.7712418301,657894.7368421053,662251.655629139,675675.6756756757,689655.1724137932,684931.5068493151,704225.3521126761,735294.1176470588,793650.7936507936,877192.9824561405,900900.9009009008,909090.9090909091,877192.9824561405,909090.9090909091,925925.9259259258,869565.2173913044,847457.6271186441
|y2=266014,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,633240
|colors=#ae3C01,#7171fe,#019A37,#FeFe01,#4674C0,#FeAaA5
|y1Title=VMT per fatalities × 1000							
|y2Title=VMT÷5
}}
|-
| In the US, between 1994 and 2007, VMT increased by 28% while fatalities remains stable (6%) variation <br />
Between 2007 and 2009, VMT decreased by 2% while fatalities decreased by 20% <br />
Since 2009 (to 2015), VMT increased by 4%, while fatalities increased by 3%, 
| In the US, Distance safely traveled by fatalities increase with distance increase.
|-
| * Source NHTSA.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx|title=FARS Encyclopedia|first=National Highway Traffic Safety|last=Administration|website=www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov|access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref>
|
|-
!UK Fatalities vs VMT
!UK VMT compared to fatalities 
|-
|{{Graph:Chart|width=280|height=120
|xAxisTitle=Vkm traveled (billions)
|yAxisTitle=Fatalities (people×1000)
|legend=Fatalities by VMT
|type=line
|xAxisFormat=s
|yAxisFormat=s
|x=0,,,,,46.5,53.1,58.9,60.8,64.9,69.7,77,80.8,80.3,93,104.2,112.3,122.4,128.3,136.3,152.3,162.7,172.9,180,187.7,192.5,200.5,212,222.5,234,229.7,231.7,243.5,246.8,256.5,255.9,271.9,276.9,284.5,288.1,303.1,309.7,325.3,350.5,375.7,406.9,410.8,411.6,412.1,412.3,421.5,429.7,441.1,450.3,458.5,467,466.2,472.6,483.7,486.7,493.9,493.9,501.1,505.4,500.6,495.8,487.9,488.9,487.1,488.8,501.5,509.7,520.9
|y1=,,,,,,5.012,,,,,,,,,,6.97,,,,,,7.985
|y2=,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,7.985,,,,7.499,,,,,,,,,,5.953,,,,,,,,,,5.217,,,,,,,3.599,3.421,3.423,3.409,3.45,3.431,3.508,3.221,3.201,3.172,2.946,
|y3=,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2.946,2.538,2.222,1.857,1.901,1.754
|y4=,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1.754,1.713,1.775,1.732,1.792
|y5=0,,,,,0.2325,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2.6045
|y6=0,,,,,0.465,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,5.209
|y7=0,,,,,0.930,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,7.01,
|y8=0,,,,,1.86,,,,,,3.08,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,8.02,8.48,
|y9=0,,,,,0.13950,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1.5627
|colors=#ae3C01,#ce6a65,#7171fe,#019A37,#808e8e01,#80264460,#80264460,#808e5a55,#808e8e01
|y1Title=Fatalities (1950–1966)						
|y2Title=Fatalities (1966–2007)					
|y3Title=Fatalities (2007–2012)					
|y4Title=Fatalities (2012–2016)		
|y5Title=5 fatalities by billion km			
|y6Title=10 fatalities by billion km			
|y7Title=20 fatalities by billion km			
|y8Title=40 fatalities by billion km			
|y9Title=3 fatalities by billion km			
}}
|{{Graph:Chart|width=280|height=120
|xAxisTitle=vkm traveled (billions)
|yAxisTitle=VMT by fatalities × 2000
|legend="VMT by fatalities" by VMT
|type=line
|xAxisFormat=s
|yAxisFormat=s
|x=,,,,,46.5,53.1,58.9,60.8,64.9,69.7,77,80.8,80.3,93,104.2,112.3,122.4,128.3,136.3,152.3,162.7,172.9,180,187.7,192.5,200.5,212,222.5,234,229.7,231.7,243.5,246.8,256.5,255.9,271.9,276.9,284.5,288.1,303.1,309.7,325.3,350.5,375.7,406.9,410.8,411.6,412.1,412.3,421.5,429.7,441.1,450.3,458.5,467,466.2,472.6,483.7,486.7,493.9,493.9,501.1,505.4,500.6,495.8,487.9,488.9,487.1,488.8,501.5,509.7,520.9
|y1=,,,,,,21.1891460494812,,,,,,,,,,32.2238163558106,,,,,,43.3061991233563,,,,53.4737965062008,,,,,,,,,,91.3488997144297,,,,,,,,,,157.485144719187,,,,,,,250.236176715754,268.05027769658,272.860064271107,273.511293634497,273.971014492754,281.958612649373,277.480045610034,306.674945669047,308.591065292096,315.952080706179,343.109300746775,394.483845547675,446.264626462646,525.471190091546,514.36086270384,555.416191562144,570.694687682428,565.070422535211,588.568129330254,581.361607142857
|y2=,,,,,46.5,53.1,58.9,60.8,64.9,69.7,77,80.8,80.3,93,104.2,112.3,122.4,128.3,136.3,152.3,162.7,172.9,180,187.7,192.5,200.5,212,222.5,234,229.7,231.7,243.5,246.8,256.5,255.9,271.9,276.9,284.5,288.1,303.1,309.7,325.3,350.5,375.7,406.9,410.8,411.6,412.1,412.3,421.5,429.7,441.1,450.3,458.5,467,466.2,472.6,483.7,486.7,493.9,493.9,501.1,505.4,500.6,495.8,487.9,488.9,487.1,488.8,501.5,509.7,520.9
|colors=#ae3C01,#7171fe,#019A37,#FeFe01,#4674C0,#FeAaA5
|y1Title=VMT per fatalities× 2000					
|y2Title=VMT (scale 1)
}}
|-
|Till 1966, in the UK, fatalities have increased in the same time that traveled distance increased.
Since 1966, fatalities have decreased in the same time that traveled distance increased.
|In the UK, traveled distance by fatalities has regularly increased, even when traveled distance decreased.
|}
<!-- Year,1926,1930,1940,1941,1949,1950,1951,1952,1953,1954,1955,1956,1957,1958,1959,1960,1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966,1967,1968,1969,1970,1971,1972,1973,1974,1975,1976,1977,1978,1979,1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,1986,1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011,2012,2013,2014,2015,2016
b,km,,,,,46.5,53.1,58.9,60.8,64.9,69.7,77,80.8,80.3,93,104.2,112.3,122.4,128.3,136.3,152.3,162.7,172.9,180,187.7,192.5,200.5,212,222.5,234,229.7,231.7,243.5,246.8,256.5,255.9,271.9,276.9,284.5,288.1,303.1,309.7,325.3,350.5,375.7,406.9,410.8,411.6,412.1,412.3,421.5,429.7,441.1,450.3,458.5,467,466.2,472.6,483.7,486.7,493.9,493.9,501.1,505.4,500.6,495.8,487.9,488.9,487.1,488.8,501.5,509.7,520.9
2 -->

According to the BITRE, traveled distance has a limited impact on death trend from OECD countries.<ref name="bitre.gov.au"/>

== Road traffic safety professional societies ==
[[Institute of Transportation Engineers]]: An international educational and scientific association of transportation professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs.

[[National Association of City Transportation Officials]]

[[International Municipal Signal Association]]: A traffic standard organization.

== Road traffic safety guide and reference manuals ==

=== Signalized Intersections Informational Guide ===
Published by the Federal Highway Association of the [[United States Department of Transportation|U.S. Department of Transportation]].<ref>Signalized Intersections Informational Guide (dot.gov)</ref>

== Advocacy groups ==
[[The Automobile Association]] was established in 1905 in the United Kingdom to help motorists avoid [[police]] [[speed trap]]s.<ref name=hist>{{cite web|url=http://www.theaa.com/aboutaa/history.html|title=About us|publisher=The AA|access-date=26 February 2010}}</ref> They became involved in other safety issues and also erected thousands of roadside warning signs.<ref name=hist/>

The [[Pedestrians Association]] (now known as Living Streets) in the United Kingdom was formed in 1929 to press for better road safety. Other groups have been active in other countries.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}}

The International Road Federation has an issue area and working group dedicated to road safety. They work with their membership to advocate measures that improve road safety through infrastructure and cooperation with other international organizations.<ref>[http://www.irfnet.ch/roadsafety.php?id=35&title=Introduction IRF Road Safety] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110830181656/http://www.irfnet.ch/roadsafety.php?id=35&title=Introduction |date=30 August 2011 }}.</ref>

Motoring [[advocacy groups]] including the Association of British Drivers (UK), Speed cameras.org<ref name=sporg>{{cite web|url=http://www.speedcameras.org/speed_camera_facts.php |title=Speed cameras.org |publisher=Speed cameras.org |access-date=9 April 2012}}</ref> (UK), [[National Motorists Association]] (US/Canada) argue that the strict enforcement of [[speed limits]] does not necessarily result in safer driving, and may even have negative effect on road safety in general. [[SafeSpeed|Safe Speed]] was a UK group set up specifically to campaign against the use of [[Speed cameras]].

Together for Safer Roads (TSR) is a coalition that brings together global private sector companies, across industries, to collaborate on improving road safety. TSR brings together members' knowledge, data, technology, and global networks to focus on five road safety areas with the goal of bringing about the greatest impact globally and within local communities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.togetherforsaferroads.org/about-us/|title=About Us – TogetherForSaferRoads|website=www.togetherforsaferroads.org|access-date=3 November 2016|archive-date=4 November 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161104005824/http://www.togetherforsaferroads.org/about-us/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In 1965, [[Ralph Nader]] put pressure on car manufacturers in his book ''[[Unsafe at Any Speed]]'', detailing resistance by car manufacturers to the introduction of safety features such as seat belts, and their general reluctance to spend money on improving safety. The GM President [[James Roche (General Motors)|James Roche]] was later forced to appear before a [[United States Senate]] subcommittee, and to apologize to Nader for the company's campaign of harassment and intimidation. Nader later successfully sued GM for excessive [[invasion of privacy]].<ref name="nader-v-general-motors">{{cite web|url=http://courtroomcast.lexisnexis.com/acf_cases/9243-nader-v-general-motors-corp-|title=Legal Audio Opinions and Courtroom Video - LexisNexis Courtroom Cast|website=lawschool.courtroomview.com|access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref>

[[RoadPeace]] was formed in 1991 in the United Kingdom to advocate for better road safety and founded [[World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims]] in 1993 which received support from the [[United Nations General Assembly]] in 2005.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.worlddayofremembrance.org/about-world-day|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090616132042/http://www.worlddayofremembrance.org/about-world-day|url-status=dead|archive-date=16 June 2009|title=about|work=World Day of Remembrance|access-date=26 February 2010}}</ref><ref name="UN_ARES605_page3">{{UN document |docid=A-RES-60-5 |type=Resolution |body=General Assembly |session=60 |resolution_number=5 |highlight=rect_178,418_823,509 |page=3 |accessdate=9 July 2008|date=26 October 2005|title=Improving global road safety}}</ref>

==See also==
{{div col}}
* {{annotated link|AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety}} (in the US)
* {{annotated link|Assured clear distance ahead}}
* {{annotated link|Bollard}}
* {{annotated link|Cyclability}}
* {{annotated link|Defensive driving}}
* {{annotated link|Driving under the influence}}
* {{annotated link|EuroRAP}}
* {{annotated link|Fatality Analysis Reporting System}}
* {{annotated link|Geometric design of roads}}
* {{annotated link|Highway Safety Manual}}
* {{annotated link|Humanity & Inclusion}}
* {{annotated link|ISO 39001}}
* {{annotated link|Jersey barrier}}
* {{annotated link|List of countries by traffic-related death rate}}
* {{annotated link|Motonormativity}}
* {{annotated link|National Highway Traffic Safety Administration}}
* {{annotated link|National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act}}
* {{annotated link|Reported Road Casualties Great Britain|''Reported Road Casualties Great Britain''}}
* {{annotated link|Road Safe America}}
* {{annotated link|Road surface marking}}
* {{annotated link|Traffic#Rules of the road|Rules of the road}}
* {{annotated link|Speed limit}}
* {{annotated link|Traffic break}}
* {{annotated link|Traffic collision}}
* {{annotated link|Traffic psychology}}
* {{annotated link|Traffic sign}}
* {{annotated link|Transportation safety in the United States}}
* {{annotated link|Turning Point (2009 American film)|''Turning Point'' (2009 American film)}}
* {{annotated link|United Nations Road Safety Collaboration}}
* {{annotated link|Walkability}}
* {{annotated link|Walking audit}}
* {{annotated link|Work-related road safety in the United States}}
{{div col end}}

==Notes and references==
===Notes===
{{reflist|group=Note|colwidth=20em}}

===References===
{{Reflist|30em}}

===Sources===
* {{anchor|Dft2013a}} {{cite web|url=https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/index.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130317194649/http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/index.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=17 March 2013|title=Global status report on road safety 2013|author=World Health Organization|year=2013|access-date=15 March 2013|author-link=World Health Organization}}
* {{anchor|Dft2008a}} {{cite web|url=http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/221549/227755/rrcgb2008.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101011130324/http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/221549/227755/rrcgb2008.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-date=11 October 2010|title=Reported Road Casualties Great Britain: 2008 Annual Report|work=Road Casualties Great Britain|author=Department for Transport|year=2008|access-date=9 January 2010|author-link=Department for Transport}}
*{{Cite book|author1=Mayer Hillman|author2=John Adams|author3=John Whitelegg|title=One False Move: a study of children's independent mobility|publisher=[[Policy Studies Institute]]|orig-year=1991|year=2000|isbn=978-0-85374-494-8|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/onefalsemovestud0000hill}}
*{{Cite book|author=Robert Davis|title=Death on the Streets: Cars and the mythology of road safety|publisher=Leading Edge Press|year=1993|isbn=978-0-948135-46-0}}
*{{Cite book|author=John Adams|title=Risk|publisher=UCL Press|year=1995|isbn=978-1-85728-068-5}}
*{{Cite book|author=Leonard Evans|title=Traffic Safety|publisher=Science Serving Society|year=2004|isbn=978-0-9754871-0-5}}

== External links ==
{{Commons category|Road transport safety}}
* [https://www.who.int/health-topics/road-safety WHO road traffic injuries]
* [http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/102731/102989.pdf Mortality from Road Crashes in 193 Countries: A Comparison with Other Leading Causes of Death], [[University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute]],February 2014
* [https://roadsafetycanada.com/ Road Safety Canada]
* [https://roadsafetycanada.com/ Driving School]

{{traffic law}}
{{Road types}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Traffic Safety}}
[[Category:Road transport|Safety]]
[[Category:Road safety| ]]