|
Abstract
|
PURPOSE: The main aim of this study is to identify factors behind Finland having a poorer road traffic accident record compared to Sweden. Another aim is to study whether there are any benefits to using real disaggregate data.
METHODS: We use the term safety potential to describe how much safety would improve in Finland if the rate of a selected measure in Sweden existed in Finland as well. In our analyses we use population risk to compare safety as a main measure.
RESULTS: Comparison of the number of fatalities per population in 2009-2013 between Finland and Sweden showed that for Finland there is a safety potential of 99 yearly fatalities out of 248. The number of fatalities per vehicle kilometre in Finland is 30% higher than in Sweden and the number of motor vehicle kilometres per person 23% higher. The highest potential for fatality reduction is for cars, related mainly to head-on fatalities. Age groups 15-17 and 18-20 years were identified as having the greatest relative population risk in Finland: the safety potential among 15-17-year-olds is seven moped and motorcycle fatalities and among 18-20-year-olds 12 car fatalities annually. Finland having the Swedish fatality risk per person kilometre would prevent six bicycle and six pedestrian fatalities per year.
CONCLUSIONS: The extensive network of middle-barrier roads introduced in Sweden would probably offer the most extensive safety benefit for Finland also. Advanced use of disaggregated data provides more options than programmes created for analysing aggregate data. © 2016, The Author(s); published by Springer Verlag.
KEYWORDS: Bicycles; Bicyclists; Bicycling
Language: en |