The first ‘Decade of Action for Road Safety: 2011-2020’ (A/RES/64/255) called for a 50%
reduction in fatalities and major injuries. The call launched the five pillars for road safety, including road safety management, safe roads and mobility, safe vehicles, safe road users and post-crash care (See Figure 1). While all continents, except the African continent (+17%)
reduced fatalities, overall, the global reduction was no where near the 50% reduction aim, with an actual reduction between 2010 and 2021 of 5% (WHO, 2023).
Pillar 1: Road safety management | Pillar 2: Safer roads and mobility | Pillar 3: Safer vehicles | Pillar 4: Safer road users | Pillar 5: Post-crash response |
Figure 1 Safe Systems Approach Original Pillars (UN, 2011)
As it became clear that the aim of the first ‘Decade of Action for Road Safety: 2011-2020’ was
not going to be realized, the UN launched a second Decade of ‘Action for Road Safety: 2021-
2030’ ( UN General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/74?299). The five pillars (Figure 1)
were redefined, based on the experiences gained between 2011 and 2020. Figure 2 provides the improved pillars. While safe users, roads and vehicles, as well as post-crash care have not changed, the redefined pillars adapted safety management to multimodal transport and land-use planning.
Figure 2 Safe Systems Approach based on the Global Plan (WHO/UN, 2021)
While applying the safe systems approach in the African context, the Trans-Safe consortium ran into difficulties matching the interlinkages of the pillars in the safe systems approach to demonstration projects that related to multiple pillars.
The consortium reimagining the pillars, creating a hierarchical framework (see Figure 3). At the centre is the physically vulnerable user, who is (in most cases) educated and compliant but may make errors at times. The latter is one of the main road safety risks This vulnerable user exists in an environment with multiple modes and land-uses that are, in the best-case scenario, well planned and implemented. However, when planning or implementation fails, the environment contributes to the road safety risk.
The environment is partly defined by a roads and roadside context, which again may vary in quality. While best-practice examples have maintained infrastructure that supports the needs of all modes, in the African context this is often not the case. Especially, non-motorized transport users are often ‘stranded’ with no infrastructure, increasing the road safety risk. The interaction and potential conflict with motorized transport, the various types of vehicles and their speeds further contributes to the road safety risk. Of course, appropriate speeds and mode interaction can combat this. In the unfortunate case a road crash occurs, post-crash medical care can reduce the negative impact, by swift action by trained individuals. The latter also includes the mental care for road users, in the case they have experienced or witnessed a road crash. Any road safety intervention, from user education and infrastructure implementation to post-crash care, will touch on multiple layers of the reimagined safe systems approach framework (Vanderschuren and Mwaura, 2023).
Figure 3 The Safe Systems Approach Reimagined (Vanderschuren and Mwaura, 2023).
Comments