Publications

The WHO, World Bank, FIA Foundation and Global Road Safety Partnership (GRSP) produced a series of good practice manuals, following the publication of the World report on road traffic injury prevention in 2004, which provide guidance on implementation of interventions to address specific risk factors in road safety. The topics covered in the initial series of manuals were: helmets (2006), drinking and driving (2007), speed management (2008), seat-belts and child restraints (2009), data systems (2010), pedestrian safety (2013), road safety legislation (2013), powered two- and three-wheeler safety (2017) and cyclist safety (2020).

Since the series of manuals was first published, the scientific evidence base relating to various risk factors and the effectiveness of interventions have continued expanding. Contemporary research has refined our knowledge about specific risk factors, such as distracted driving, and vehicle impact speed and risk of death for pedestrians. New issues and practices have arisen, such as a tropical helmet standard and an anti-braking control standard for motorcycles. New and existing interventions have been implemented and evaluated, with increasing application in LMICs. Research attention and policy response have also increasingly been applied to emerging road safety issues including e-bikes, drugs other than alcohol, fleet safety, urban mobility, micro mobility options, air and noise pollution, public transport and technological advances.

As a result of these developments, the good practice manuals required revision so that they can continue to be key references for road safety policy implementation and research. This is particularly important, given the emphasis placed on road safety within the framework of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and because of the global impetus to reduce road deaths and injuries, resulting from the declaration of the two United Nations’ Decades of Action for Road Safety (2011–2020 and 2021– 2030). The manuals have been revised to reflect these developments as they continue to be valuable resources providing evidence-based and cost-effective solutions to save lives and reduce injuries.

The management of speed remains one of the biggest challenges facing road safety practitioners around the world and calls for a concerted, long-term, multidisciplinary response. The speed at which a vehicle travels directly influences the risk of a crash as well as the severity of injuries sustained, and the likelihood of death resulting from that crash. This manual advocates for a strong and strategic approach to creating a Safe System, with speed management at its heart. Reducing motor vehicle speeds in areas where the road user mix includes a high volume of vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians and cyclists, and on non-divided rural roads, is especially important.

Road safety is a global health and economic issue that disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Precise data is crucial for understanding the full scope of the problem and developing effective interventions, but LMICs struggle to collect comprehensive data due to limited resources, underdeveloped health systems, and inconsistent data collection processes.

To overcome reporting gaps, three major global statistical models are utilized: The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Status Reports on Road Safety (GSRRS), and WHO Global Health Estimates (GHE). However, discrepancies exist among these models and between them and official country statistics. They often estimate significantly higher road traffic fatalities and injuries than official LMIC statistics.

This GRSF study identifies the reasons behind statistical discrepancies and outlines strategies to strengthen modeling efforts. This involved qualitative research, a systematic review of national data availability, and four case studies in Brazil, Cambodia, Ethiopia, and Tanzania.

Key findings include:

• National decision-makers recognize the issue of underreporting but tend to dismiss higher estimates by global statistical models.
• Most countries use WHO GSRRS estimates.
• National health surveys and censuses in LMICs often contain relevant information, and minor modifications can greatly improve their usage for such measurements.
• Incorporating national health survey data into global statistical models can help resolve discrepancies and increase confidence in estimates.

Recommendations include:

• Integrating epidemiological data sources into global statistical models (GBD, GHE, GSRRS) to reduce discrepancies and increase confidence in their estimates.
• Including relevant questions in upcoming national data collections to facilitate epidemiological measurements of road traffic injuries.
• Encouraging local involvement in data production for better estimates.
• Enhancing coordination between the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and the World Health Organization to improve estimates and reduce inconsistencies.

To achieve the goal of the Second United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety (reducing road traffic fatalities and injuries by 50% by 2030), substantial resources need to be allocated to road safety and accurate reporting and statistical estimates are required.

What is the real cost of speeding on people and the environment? These 6 graphs tell the story ⌵︎

The impacts of speed on the safety of road users, on congestion, on pollution, and on total costs of road travel are broadly misunderstood: often based on wrong assumptions, with effects taken as self-evident, failure to consider multiple impacts, externalization of costs by many stakeholders, and under-estimation of impacts (especially economic costs of higher speeds). The purpose of this brief note is to provide information on these relationships relevant to fundamental road transport policies, design, and operation. Well-established evidence shows the importance of managing travel speeds for road safety, for efficiency, for improved inclusion, and for greenhouse gas (GHG) and other emissions. Thus, speed management is a strong policy lever for the breadth of issues which must be addressed for sustainable mobility.

Reduced speeds of travel represent a major, yet under-appreciated, opportunity to improve safety, climate change impacts of travel, health, inclusion, the economy, and in some circumstances, congestion. Speed management can be achieved through a range of interventions including road infrastructure and vehicle technology, as well as enforcement and promotion.

The six graphs presented in this note tell a powerful story, across the range of these benefits of speed management.

This publication is also available in:

Spanish

Vietnamese 

This guide has been prepared to assist a jurisdiction to determine the level of readiness to move to automated enforcement (AE). Speed cameras enforcing speed limits are a common application of AE and there are many systemic legal and operational elements that must be in place before AE can be effective. For example, an accurate image of a speeding vehicle, in the absence of robust driver licensing and vehicle registration systems, is of little road safety value. Importantly, automated speed enforcement should be considered as one part of a comprehensive speed management approach that includes road infrastructure and roadside policing as well. The management of speed is a fundamental element of the Safe System.

Aims of this document:

• To briefly identify the powerful practical value of AE in saving lives and reducing injuries.

• To identify issues and criteria to be considered before commencing automated enforcement. To identify steps to be taken to achieve readiness for automated enforcement. To identify issues to improve existing automated enforcement systems.

• To provide a checklist to ensure adequate consideration is given to issues to assess readiness to implement an AE system or improve an existing system.

Other illegal behaviours, including disobeying a red light signal, mobile or cellular phone use, incorrect lane use, and non-restraint use can also be detected using an automated enforcement approach. However, this document applies specifically to automated speed enforcement, because speed management requires significant attention worldwide and plays a critical role in reducing road traffic deaths and injuries.

Document also available in French, Portuguese, Vietnamese and Spanish.

Significant research has been undertaken on how changes in speed limit—for example, the introduction of 30 kilometers per hour, or kph (20 miles per hour, or mph) speed limits—impact safety both when combined with, and without "traffic-calming" engineering treatments such as speed humps or raised platforms. However, most of the studies have been conducted in Australia or countries in Western Europe, with almost no recorded studies from Asia, Africa, the Americas, and Eastern Europe. Though it may be reasonable, a well-developed infrastructural environment such as that found in Korea would expect similar results as that of the western countries, a study originating in Asia could have a strong demonstration effect and prove very convincing for many Asian countries.

With this in mind, the main aim of this study is to present the findings from Korea’s reduced speed limits on safety performance and to support the establishment of suitable speed-management strategies based on a quantitative data-driven approach. The scope of the project was as follows:

1. Evaluate the effectiveness of the reduced speed limits in terms of crash reduction through a before-after study.
2. Examine if the speed limit change had different effects across different crash types, user types, and crash severities.
3. Evaluate the impact of speed limit change on transit speed through a before-after assessment.
4. Develop appropriate and actionable recommendations for departments of transportation in developing countries.

To start, this report first provides a brief literature review on the concept of Safe System speed limits, and the effect of speed limit reductions as part of speed management in several countries, followed by a brief description of the evaluation methods for the before-after assessment. This is followed by a summary of the findings, a set of recommendations, limitations of this study, and finally, a capsule of future research that could be undertaken to either extend or follow up on the study.