Jon Masters ITS International Editor
What price can be put on the value of a life? How much should be spent on preventing untimely deaths? Difficult questions such as these help to put the comparatively small costs of ITS systems into context. While monetary analysis may seem cold and inhumane in consideration of road casualties, death and costly clear-up are often the stark reality transportation authorities are dealing with.
This month of ITS International contains numerous examples of large benefits to be gained from relatively modest investment in ITS systems, of enforcement and traffic management – and not just for reasons of road safety.
What price would London’s organising committee and delivery authorities put now on the importance of transportation for the 2012 Olympic Games? Transport was a massively important consideration – a central plank of London’s bid to host the Games and a vital part of policy and planning initiated after the bid was won. How valuable this now looks in retrospect, how wise it was to plan the transportation aspects of an inner-city Olympics in great detail. And how important to observe that systems of ITS played a vital role behind the scenes.
London enjoyed the benefits of an extensive public transportation network, aided by a campaign of advice and information for travellers on how to get around during the Games. But while the communications programme helped to reduce peak traffic flows, successful management of London’s Olympic and Paralympic Route Network came down to ITS systems of traffic modelling and control. The cost of this, at circa £10 million, appears excellent value compared to the £6.5 billion invested in upgrading transportation infrastructure.
In the US, Lee County in Florida has put values to benefits accrued from retiming of traffic signals. The county’s investment is now significantly greater than the roughly $360,000 spent on devising new signal plans, as the county’s Department of Transportation has gone on to deploy advanced real-time traffic monitoring for further optimising its control systems. Even with this additional investment taken into account, total costs are unlikely to come close to the overall fuel, time and emissions savings calculated for motorists in the cities of Fort Myers and Bonita Springs.
It is with regard to road safety, however, where the benefits truly add up. Taking nothing away from efforts in Lee County and elsewhere, the value of saving a life ought to outweigh reductions in travel time and fuel consumption. Certainly, the safety benefits coming from programmes of enforcement exceed the costs involved. Cost-benefit analysis carried out by economist John Dunham Associates for ATS in North America shows savings up to 10-fold the cost of every individual red-light enforcement camera in US cities, accumulating the costs prevented for many different agencies and organisations affected by road casualties.
Of course none of this can adequately account for the emotional cost of lives affected by road fatalities. Local government transportation authorities need no reminding of the devastating results of accidents caused by excessive speeds – or red light running. But they and their political masters might observe examples of best practice where enforcement of speed limits and red lights is savings lives. In France, a highly reliable enforcing system allowing no ‘wriggle room’ for offenders has helped to radically change driver behaviour. In Sweden also, a concerted campaign of road safety education and engineering measures – including enforcement – is ‘changing mindsets’.
In each case the engineers’ work is backed up by strong political intent; no more so than in the City of Edmonton in Canada. Edmonton now stands as a world leader in urban road safety thanks to a political commitment to the city’s engineers and their scientific approach to road safety. Edmonton’s programme is self-funding, the benefits invaluable.
This month of ITS International contains numerous examples of large benefits to be gained from relatively modest investment in ITS systems, of enforcement and traffic management – and not just for reasons of road safety.
What price would London’s organising committee and delivery authorities put now on the importance of transportation for the 2012 Olympic Games? Transport was a massively important consideration – a central plank of London’s bid to host the Games and a vital part of policy and planning initiated after the bid was won. How valuable this now looks in retrospect, how wise it was to plan the transportation aspects of an inner-city Olympics in great detail. And how important to observe that systems of ITS played a vital role behind the scenes.
London enjoyed the benefits of an extensive public transportation network, aided by a campaign of advice and information for travellers on how to get around during the Games. But while the communications programme helped to reduce peak traffic flows, successful management of London’s Olympic and Paralympic Route Network came down to ITS systems of traffic modelling and control. The cost of this, at circa £10 million, appears excellent value compared to the £6.5 billion invested in upgrading transportation infrastructure.
In the US, Lee County in Florida has put values to benefits accrued from retiming of traffic signals. The county’s investment is now significantly greater than the roughly $360,000 spent on devising new signal plans, as the county’s Department of Transportation has gone on to deploy advanced real-time traffic monitoring for further optimising its control systems. Even with this additional investment taken into account, total costs are unlikely to come close to the overall fuel, time and emissions savings calculated for motorists in the cities of Fort Myers and Bonita Springs.
It is with regard to road safety, however, where the benefits truly add up. Taking nothing away from efforts in Lee County and elsewhere, the value of saving a life ought to outweigh reductions in travel time and fuel consumption. Certainly, the safety benefits coming from programmes of enforcement exceed the costs involved. Cost-benefit analysis carried out by economist John Dunham Associates for ATS in North America shows savings up to 10-fold the cost of every individual red-light enforcement camera in US cities, accumulating the costs prevented for many different agencies and organisations affected by road casualties.
Of course none of this can adequately account for the emotional cost of lives affected by road fatalities. Local government transportation authorities need no reminding of the devastating results of accidents caused by excessive speeds – or red light running. But they and their political masters might observe examples of best practice where enforcement of speed limits and red lights is savings lives. In France, a highly reliable enforcing system allowing no ‘wriggle room’ for offenders has helped to radically change driver behaviour. In Sweden also, a concerted campaign of road safety education and engineering measures – including enforcement – is ‘changing mindsets’.
In each case the engineers’ work is backed up by strong political intent; no more so than in the City of Edmonton in Canada. Edmonton now stands as a world leader in urban road safety thanks to a political commitment to the city’s engineers and their scientific approach to road safety. Edmonton’s programme is self-funding, the benefits invaluable.
