Public Transport Vehicles

There is a wide variety of vehicles used for the transportation of passengers and their goods on roads such bicycle rickshaws, motorised rickshaws, cars (including taxis), mini-vans, buses and trucks.

Each vehicle type has its own specific safety problems, but one issue in common is that crashes involving such vehicles often result in multiple injuries and deaths (up to 80 or more in some regions with overloaded buses).

Another common issue is that there is danger not only when moving around the road network, but also when picking-up or dropping-off passengers, and extra care needs to be taken at such locations.

Fares are often low, so operators of public transport often work long hours to stay in business. They might also drive at fast speeds to compete with other operators, and may make sudden and frequent stops to pick up passengers.

Public transport vehicles produce dangers for those who ride in (or on) them, but also may be of risk to other road users. This is particularly so as the size of the vehicle increases.

Although driver and vehicle defects have a significant role in public transport vehicle crashes, there are many road related factors that also influence risk. It is often easier and cheaper to improve safety through a change to the road environment than it is to change driver behaviour, so improvements in the road system are an important means of improving road safety.

Road related contributing factors to crashes include:

  • High speeds
  • Lack of facilities at drop-off and pick-up points (especially for pedestrians)
  • Uncontrolled movements and turns, especially at intersections and access points
  • Lack of separation of vehicles or road users of different size (e.g. lack of facilities for pedestrians and cyclists)
  • Lack of separation for vehicles travelling in different directions (e.g. lack of median barriers)
  • Lack of advanced warning of hazards
  • Inadequate information to enable road users to negotiate the roadway safely
  • Presence of hazards, particularly at the roadside (e.g. utility poles and trees)
  • Poor road surface
Safer Roads
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Central Turning Lane Full Length
Low
10-25%
Delineation
Low
10-25%
Intersection - Delineation
Low
10-25%
Central Hatching
Low
10-25%
Rumble Strips
Low
10-25%
Median Crossing Upgrade
Low to medium
25-40%
Skid Resistance
Low to medium
25-40%
Roadside Safety - Hazard Removal
Low to medium
25-40%
Intersection - Turn Lanes (Signalised)
Low to medium
10-25%
Intersection - Turn Lanes (Unsignalised)
Low to medium
10-25%
Parking Improvements
Low to medium
10-25%
Regulate Roadside Commercial Activity
Low to medium
10-25%
Intersection - Signalise
Medium
25-40%
Railway Crossing
Medium
60% or more
One Way Network
Medium
25-40%
Roadside Safety - Barriers
Medium
40-60%
Shoulder Sealing
Medium
25-40%
Speed Management
Medium
25-40%
Road Surface Rehabilitation
Medium
25-40%
Traffic Calming
Medium to high
25-40%
Lane Widening
Medium to high
25-40%
Median Barrier
Medium to high
60% or more
Restrict/Combine Direct Access Points
Medium to high
25-40%
Intersection - Roundabout
Medium to high
60% or more
Additional Lane
High
25-40%
Intersection - Grade Separation
High
25-40%
Realignment - Horizontal
High
25-40%
Realignment - Vertical
High
10-25%
Duplication
High
25-40%
Service Road
High
25-40%
Safer Vehicles
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Motor Vehicle Standards
Low
60% or more
Safer People
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Enforcement
Low
60% or more
Addressing Alcohol and Other Drugs
Low
60% or more
Education
Low
60% or more
Safe Speed
Low
60% or more
Publicity
Low
60% or more
Emergency Response
Medium
40-60%
Licensing
Medium
40-60%

Safer Roads

Safer Roads
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Central Turning Lane Full Length
Low
10-25%
Delineation
Low
10-25%
Intersection - Delineation
Low
10-25%
Central Hatching
Low
10-25%
Rumble Strips
Low
10-25%
Median Crossing Upgrade
Low to medium
25-40%
Skid Resistance
Low to medium
25-40%
Roadside Safety - Hazard Removal
Low to medium
25-40%
Intersection - Turn Lanes (Signalised)
Low to medium
10-25%
Intersection - Turn Lanes (Unsignalised)
Low to medium
10-25%
Parking Improvements
Low to medium
10-25%
Regulate Roadside Commercial Activity
Low to medium
10-25%
Intersection - Signalise
Medium
25-40%
Railway Crossing
Medium
60% or more
One Way Network
Medium
25-40%
Roadside Safety - Barriers
Medium
40-60%
Shoulder Sealing
Medium
25-40%
Speed Management
Medium
25-40%
Road Surface Rehabilitation
Medium
25-40%
Traffic Calming
Medium to high
25-40%
Lane Widening
Medium to high
25-40%
Median Barrier
Medium to high
60% or more
Restrict/Combine Direct Access Points
Medium to high
25-40%
Intersection - Roundabout
Medium to high
60% or more
Additional Lane
High
25-40%
Intersection - Grade Separation
High
25-40%
Realignment - Horizontal
High
25-40%
Realignment - Vertical
High
10-25%
Duplication
High
25-40%
Service Road
High
25-40%

Safer Vehicles

Safer Vehicles
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Motor Vehicle Standards
Low
60% or more

Safer People

Safer People
Estimated cost
Casualty Reduction
Enforcement
Low
60% or more
Addressing Alcohol and Other Drugs
Low
60% or more
Education
Low
60% or more
Safe Speed
Low
60% or more
Publicity
Low
60% or more
Emergency Response
Medium
40-60%
Licensing
Medium
40-60%

Did you know?

If provided with overtaking lanes, drivers will be less likely to make dangerous overtaking attempts.

Tell me more

Latest Case Studies

See practical examples of how deaths and serious injuries have been prevented.

Read more

Related Images

Related Case Study

Central Hatching in Malaysia

The iRAP Malaysia pilot project, completed in 2008, recommended that [http://toolkit.irap.org/defaul...

Read more