ROAD SAFETY AUDITS

CE- 867
Urban Transportation System Evaluation
Term Project Report

By:

Muhammad Waqas Muneer

Registration # 206513
Syed Muaaz Ali Nadeem
Registration # 205813

National Institute of Transportation (NIT)

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering (SCEE)

National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan.

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Page No.

LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................................ii
LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................................iii
1. Introduction..............................................................................................................................4
1.1 General..............................................................................................................................4
1.2 Road Safety Issues in Pakistan..........................................................................................4
1.3 Defining Road Safety Audit..............................................................................................5
2. Literature Review....................................................................................................................5
2.1 Road Safety Audit in Context...........................................................................................5
2.2 General Scope of Road Safety Audit................................................................................6
2.3 Essential Elements of Road Safety Audit.........................................................................6
2.4 Types of Road Safety Audits............................................................................................7
2.5 Costs of conducting Road Safety Audits..........................................................................8
2.6 Benefits of the Road Safety Audit....................................................................................9
3. Methodology............................................................................................................................9
3.1 Selection of Projects for Audit..........................................................................................9
3.2 The Road Safety Audit Process......................................................................................10
3.2.1 Stages of a Road Safety Audit.....................................................................................10
3.2.2 Steps in Road Safety Audit.........................................................................................11
3.3 Undertaking the Road Safety Audit................................................................................14
4. Method to Quantify RSA data and Results............................................................................14
4.1 RSA Risk Assessment Tool...................................................................................................15
4.2 Questions...............................................................................................................................16
4.3 Weightage..............................................................................................................................16
4.4 RSA Risk Assessment Score.................................................................................................16
4.5 Risk Analysis Results............................................................................................................17
5. Conclusions and Recommendations......................................................................................17
5.1 Summary and Conclusions..............................................................................................17
5.2 Recommendations...........................................................................................................17
References......................................................................................................................................19

i|Page
LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 1- The RSA Procedure.......................................................................................................10

Figure 2- Eight-Step RSA Process................................................................................................13
Figure 3 - RSA Procedure..............................................................................................................13
Figure 4 - Risk Assessment Matrix...............................................................................................15

ii | P a g e
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Difference between RSA and a Traditional Safety Review.............................................7

Table 2- Type of RSA during different stages of each phase of the project...................................8
Table 3 - Minimum activities for RSA of each project phase.......................................................14

iii | P a g e
1. Introduction
1.1 General
Road safety is a multi-sectoral and multi-dimensional problem. It involves the development of
road infrastructure, provision of safer roads, law enforcement, provision of medical services,
public safety, urban development and land use planning and so forth. In other words, its scope
covers from the engineering aspects of road design to the provision of medical services (in case
of post-crash scenario).
Road users’ risk has increased due to urbanization and rapid traffic growth. With rising
motorization, expansion of road networks and growth in vehicle ownership, the risk has
increased even farther. Today road traffic accidents are one of the leading causes of death. As per
the commission of the Global Road Safety (2009), around 1.3 million people die on the roads
each year around the globe and up to 50 million people sustain non-fatal injuries. The situation is
about to worsen if the current crisis is not addressed, with global road traffic fatalities forecasted
to more than 2.4 million deaths per year by the year 2030, making it the fifth leading cause of
death.
In developing countries, accident rates and fatalities are alarmingly high and the situation is
expected to worsen. Fatalities are expected to increase by more than 80 percent in low and
middle-income countries, but decrease by nearly 30 percent in high-income countries (Kopits,
Cropper, 2003). Road safety is an economic development problem as road accidents
disproportionately affect the poor. Many crash victims are in the 15-40 age group, and their
death or serious injury usually leaves their dependents destitute. Governments of the poorer
countries have given up to counter this issue. They have assumed that only large amount of
funding can help in reducing the death rate. Governments of such countries must try to mitigate
this situation by adopting the proactive approach for road safety and should see the expenses on
road safety as an investment and not as a cost.
There exist two types of internationally recognized engineering approaches to counter road
safety problem- the Proactive and the Reactive approach. In many countries, adoption of reactive
approach could not gain significant success due to the absence of standard requirements needed
for such approach. Road safety audit is efficient, cost effective and a proactive safety
improvement tool. FHWA (2006) states that road safety audits are proactive as they can identify
potential crash occurrence and their severity level.
1.2 Road Safety Issues in Pakistan
According to Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS), over 9000 road accidents occur each year
since 2011 in which over 4500 people are killed on average. Road crash injuries are also reported
to be the second leading cause of disabilities in Pakistan, fifth overall cause of death and
eleventh cause of premature fatality. These crashes also result in economic losses. It is estimated
that total economic costs exceeds over 6 billion dollars annually. Therefore, road safety issue has

4|Page
emerged as a serious daily life concern at public and government level. Moreover, there is no
reliable data base and data base management system to record the crash history. To address this
issue, RSA appears to be a perfect solution for improving road safety in Pakistan, as basic and
reliable data on road crashes is yet to be collected.
RSA’s being proactive in nature have huge potential to improve the road safety situation and
achieve long-term safety goals at minimal cost (Hoque, 2004). The process of road safety audit
can thus play a vital part in achieving safer roads in Pakistan.
1.3 Defining Road Safety Audit
AUSTROADS (2002) defines road safety audit as “A formal examination of a proposed road or
traffic project, or an existing road, in which an independent, qualified team reports on the
project’s crash potential and overall safety performance”. According to Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA 2006), “Road Safety Audit (RSA) is the formal safety performance
examination of an existing or future road by an independent, multidisciplinary team. It
qualitatively evaluates and reports on potential road safety issues and identifies opportunities for
improvements in safety for all road users.”
From the above definitions, Road Safety Audit can be defined as the systematic approach for
evaluation of the existing or newly constructed roads by an independent audit team at different
stages of planning, design and operation to achieve safer roads.
Road Safety Audit is different from traditional safety review in a sense that it is conducted by the
team which is independent of the project itself. It also does not take crash history into
consideration. Whereas, crash investigation is a formal investigation of history of road along
existing roadways with the aim of identifying black spots, common accidents’ characteristics,
different trends in crashes, road safety related deficiencies and risk areas that have led to or could
lead to more accidents. It is also performed by competent and experienced professionals.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Road Safety Audit in Context
Road Safety Audit is a formal, systematic and independent assessment of the potential safety
issues associated with a new road plan. The examination should put equal emphasis on all road
users. This means that road safety auditors should consider drivers of motorized vehicles,
pedestrians, motor cyclists, cyclists, people with disabilities, and other road users.
The Road Safety Audit should not be simply a technical check on standards for highway design
principles, or a check on whether the project has been built in accordance with the design. Road
safety audit is in fact a proactive approach to make the roads safer. Technical reviews of this type
should be undertaken by competent professionals independent of the design team, and are
intended to minimize errors and design inconsistencies that lead to road crashes.

5|Page
2.2 General Scope of Road Safety Audit
Road safety audits should be undertaken during the planning and design process to minimize the
probability of crashes. The basic principles of auditing to reduce the number of crashes can be
applied to any existing road infrastructure whenever there is change in it alignment, signage,
marking or any other change and even if that change is temporary. Whilst some agencies limit
the auditing process on the basis of size and cost of the project, another criteria should be the
level and severity of potential crash occurrence. For example, a small scheme like new zebra
crossing on a road can cause significant conflict between different road user groups, whereas a
large drainage project may have little or no impact on road users.
2.3 Essential Elements of Road Safety Audit
According to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 2006), for a process to be considered as
a road safety audit, it should contain several essential elements. A brief description of each
element is given below:
 Formal Process
Road safety audit is a formal procedure and examines the design components and the
associated operational effects of a planned or existing roadway (or road network) from a
safety point of view.
 RSA Team Review
Road safety audit team contains team members (at least three auditors) who are
experienced in RSA process and have expertise in traffic, design, construction and
maintenance and safety background.
 Independent RSA Team
The team leader should not be involved in the project but must be independent of the
project.
 Qualified Team
The audit team must be experienced and have competences and qualifications specific to
the road safety audit.
 Focus on Road Safety Issues
The primary focus of the road safety audit is to identify potential road safety hazards that
arise due to some flaw in design.
 Includes All Road Users
The road safety audit considers all other potential road users.
 Proactive Nature
The road safety audit should be proactive in nature. The team should not only consider
post-crash scenarios, but also take into consideration of those circumstances which could
be a cause a potential crashes on roads.
 Field Reviews
Road safety audits should include day and night field reviews.
 Qualitative in nature

6|Page
 The primary outcomes of the road safety audit should be qualitative in nature. These
include lists of identified road safety related issues, relative risk assessments, and
recommended corrective measures.
Road safety audit and traditional safety review are two completely different procedures. It is
therefore essential to comprehend the difference between the road safety reviews and road safety
audits. Table 1 shows the basic differences between the two processes:
Table 1 - Difference between RSA and a Traditional Safety Review

Road Safety Audit Traditional Safety Review

Independent team. In-house team.

Performed by a team with multi-disciplinary Normally conducted by a team having expertise

backgrounds. only in safety and design procedures.

Takes all potential road users into

Often concentrates more on motorized traffic.
consideration.

Comprehensive, with human factors Standards compliance.

Always generates a formal report after the

Usually a formal report is not produced.
audit.

Formal response report, always Formal response report, sometimes

2.4 Types of Road Safety Audits

There are three basic forms of road safety audit:
1. Audit of an existing road
To check a road (or road network) for consistency and to ensure that road users do not meet any
unforeseen road safety issues.
2. Audit of a roadworks project at various stages of project life cycle
For auditing purpose, projects fall under three categories. A project is either in the pre-
construction phase, in the construction phase or in the post-construction phase. These phases are
further subdivided into different life cycle stages of the project such as strategic design, concept
design, detailed design, roadworks, pre-opening, finalization and existing road.
Road safety audits are usually performed at these main life cycle stages of a project. The table 2
describes each type of RSA during different stages of each project phase.

7|Page
 Table 2- Type of RSA during different stages of each phase of the project

Project Phase Type of RSA Project Stage Description

Performed when strategic design stage or feasibility stage is

Strategic design completed. The strategic design stage is where wide-ranging
alternatives for a planned project are identified.

Conducted once the concept design stage is completed. The

concept design stage is where different alternatives are
Pre-construction
Concept design reviewed for a planned project and a preferred choice is
selected. Concept design stage is also called the preliminary
design stage.

Conducted once the detailed design stage is completed. The

Detailed design detailed design stage is where a design is finalized to sufficient
details so that construction works can begin.

Conducted at the start of each stage of the roadworks where

changes affect traffic operations or travel route characteristics
Roadworks
during the construction stage of the project. Also known as
Construction road work traffic scheme stage.

Conducted directly after construction of the project and where

Pre-opening
possible before opening the road for the general public.

Conducted on an existing road some time after the completion

of the construction phase. It is generally conducted once
Finalization
typical road user patterns have developed after the recent
Post-construction construction. Also known as post-opening stage.

Conducted on an existing road where recently no construction

Existing road works were done.

3. Thematic audit
Thematic audits are focused on a particular aspect of a road. They are conducted to inspect road
safety concerns brought to attention by some road user group.
2.5 Costs of conducting Road Safety Audits
According to Vulcan et al., 1998, the costs of conducting road safety audit mainly include:

 The audit cost (mainly consultancy fee)

 Redesign code (if any)

8|Page
  Increased project cost (if any)
However, the cost of the audit can vary greatly and depends upon the size of the project and the
point in the life cycle of the project during which the audit is taking place. There can be direct
and indirect costs as a result of conducting road safety audits. The direct costs include the cost
that is paid to the auditor and the extra cost paid to the designer to include the recommendations
in the design. The research has shown that direct costs are estimated to be an average of 1% of
the total project costs. The costs of conducting will be lower if initial road safety audit is carried
out in earlier stages of the project.
2.6 Benefits of the Road Safety Audit
Road safety audits are most beneficial when conducted earlier in planning and design stages.
During the later stages of design, construction, and operation, economics are significantly
reduced since mitigation is typically much more costly.
The benefits of road safety audit are mainly the cost saved on crashes that have been prevented
as a result of applying the recommendations by the auditor. Road safety audits can likewise
decrease costs by recognizing road safety issues and rectifying them before schemes are built.
According to AUSTROADS, a RSA can:
• Minimize the risk (likelihood of occurrence as well as severity) of crashes on new and
existing roads.
• Increase the overall awareness of safe design.
• Reduce the overall life cycle cost of the project.
• Ensure the inclusion of all road users.

Belcher and Proctor (1990) recommend that road safety audits can provide improved safety in
the following ways:
• By eliminating accident-producing elements that are easily preventable at the planning
and design stages, such as inapt intersection design
• By diminishing the effects of safety hazards by the introduction of appropriate accident-
reducing features, such as traffic control devices, guard railing, anti-skid surfacing, and
delineation.
Studies have found that road safety audits result in 1%-3% reduction in injury cost savings. RSA
not only minimize the number of crashes and the need for remedial work but also leads to
improved standards and management practices.
3. Methodology
3.1 Selection of Projects for Audit
The size, type or class of the road is irrelevant for a project to be considered eligible for the
auditing process. It is not the scale of project that is important, but the level and severity of

9|Page
potential crashes that may occur (Kopelias, 2014). Therefore, a variety of projects such as major
highway schemes, minor improvements in existing infrastructure, traffic management schemes,
development schemes, and maintenance works are eligible for the road safety.
3.2 The Road Safety Audit Process
The road safety audit process comprises of different tasks and conducting the road safety audit is
only one part of the entire RSA process.
The general RSA process will include the following three main phases:
1. Commissioning a road safety audit. This process is undertaken by the project owner.
2. Conducting a road safety audit. The audit is conducted by the RSA team.
3. Implementing the recommended corrective measures into the project. This is undertaken
by the project sponsor.

Audit Scope Fieldwork

Objective Evaluation
Testing

Planning Assessment

Follow up Reporting

Audit Findings
Audit Response Communication
Verification Assessment Results

Figure 1- The RSA Procedure

3.2.1 Stages of a Road Safety Audit

A Road Safety Audit is conducted to find out potential road safety deficiencies and to propose
methods by which these identified issues can be reduced that could be the potential cause of road
accidents. Road Safety Audit can be performed on a proposed as well as on existing roads.
Traditionally, Road Safety Audit have been undertaken at the following four key stages in the
life-cycle of the project:

10 | P a g e
Stage 1 – Completion of Preliminary Design
Stage 2 – Completion of Detailed Design
Stage 3 – Completion of Construction
Stage 4 – Monitoring (on existing roads)
The complexity and the level of effort of the audit process varies with each stage during which
the audit is undertaken.
Stage 1 – Completion of Preliminary Design
Stage 1 Road Safety Audits are conducted at the completion of preliminary design during the
project feasibility stage. At this stage, all team members should visit the site together to inspect
the existing highway features and examine how the new highway improvement plan ties into the
existing highway.
Stage 2 – Completion of Detailed Design
Stage 2 Road Safety Audits are undertaken at completion of the detailed design plans. The Audit
Team will be able to consider general basic design principles and examine the layout plans,
position of road signs, proposed road markings and other issues. At the RSA Stage 2, all team
members should again visit the site, inspect the existing highway features and examine how the
proposed plans tie into the existing highway.
Stage 3 – Completion of Construction
The Stage 3 Road Safety Audit should be conducted when the construction works of the project
are completed and preferably prior to opening the road for road users. The Audit Team will
inspect the project site during daylight and during night, so that safety hazards that arise due to
poor visibility can also be identified. The representatives from different departments such as
Police, Local Authority, Maintenance agency should be invited by the Audit Team Leader to
accompany them during the site visit and offer their views. The audit team must pay attention to
the design changes which could have occurred during the construction process during this stage.
Stage 4 – Monitoring
Road Safety Audits can be performed on sections of exiting road network. Even though the road
may have been audit in the earlier stages (feasibility, planning and/or design), the use of road
changes over the period of time. The Road Safety audit of the existing road allows the safety
hazards to be identified before they can result in crashes.
3.2.2 Steps in Road Safety Audit
There are eight major steps involved in a road safety audit process which are briefly discussed
below:

11 | P a g e
Step 1: Identification of project to be audited
The first step is to identify the scheme or existing roadway to be audited and define the scope
and parameters for the auditing process.
The good candidates for RSA could be sites with high crash rates or where traffic patterns have
changed.
Step 2: Select RSA Team
The second step is to select the audit team that is expert in the field of Road Safety Audit. The
team must be independent, experienced and multidisciplinary. It must contain at least three team
members representing different organizations. The team should be expert in traffic operations,
geometric design and traffic safety.
Step 3: Conduct start-up meeting
The third step is to conduct a formal meeting. The meeting brings different stakeholders (project
sponsor, design team and the audit team) under one roof and enable them to discuss and review
all the information available about the project which helps to define the context and scope of the
audit.
Step 4: Perform field reviews
The aim of project data review is to gather project related information, gain overall insight, and
identify potential safety concerns. After that, a field review is prepared. The field visit is helpful
in gaining further information about the project. The information obtained by the field reviews
can further help to identify areas of safety concern.
Step 5: Prepare report of findings after conducting audit analysis
After conducting audit analysis, the safety deficiencies are identified and prioritized on the basis
of risk assessment and a formal report is prepared which contains recommendations for reducing
the severity of identified risks. The results on findings are then summarized and a formal RSA
report is prepared.
Step 6: Present findings to Project Owner
In step 6, audit team conducts a formal meeting with the project owner to clarify findings and
discuss safety concerns. They also provide their suggestions in order to assist the project owner
in making an informed decision.
Step 7: Prepare formal response
After the RSA findings, a formal response report is submitted. This report is then included in the
official project documents. This report contains suggestion and recommendation for mitigating

12 | P a g e
the hazardous road safety situation and advises the project owner or design team on what actions
they should take in order to improve the road safety.
Step 8: Incorporate findings
This final step aims to ensures that suggestions and recommended corrective measures are
implemented when appropriate.
The eight steps as recommended by FHWA to conduct an RSA are illustrated in the figure 2.

Figure 2- Eight-Step RSA Process.

The project owner/design team is responsible for identifying the existing or proposed road for the
road safety audit and the RSA team. The RSA team is mostly responsible for conducting the
audit and reporting on the findings. The project owner, design team and the RSA team
participate in the start-up meeting and in the findings meetings.
The figure 3 simplifies the actions involved in conducting an RSA into a three-step process:

Identify the road and the RSA Team

Conduct the RSA and report on findings

Follow up on RSA findings

Public Agency RSA Team 13 | P a g e

 Figure 3 - RSA Procedure
3.3 Undertaking the Road Safety Audit
Undertaking the road safety audit is the core of the RSA procedure. For each phase of the
project, the audit process can involve different activities.
The table 3 specifies the minimum number of activities that are involved in a road safety audit of
different phases of a project.
Table 3 - Minimum activities for RSA of each project phase

Project Phase Type of RSA Minimum Activities

Strategic design  View the site.

Pre-construction Concept design  Examine the project using the design plans.
Detailed design  Note down all the road safety issues.

 Examine the project using the construction plans.

 Visit the site and inspect the road features during
Roadworks
daylight and in night conditions.
 Note down all the road safety issues.
Construction
 Review the design plans.
 Visit the site and inspect the road features during
Pre-opening
daylight and in night conditions.
 Note down all the road safety issues.

Finalization  Visit the site and inspect the road features during
Post-construction daylight and in night conditions.
Existing road  Note down all the road safety issues.

4. Method to Quantify RSA data and Results

Road safety audits are an effective tool for proactively improving the future safety performance
of a roadway. But the study is limited in the context of benefits gained through recommendations
of road safety audit on existing roadways. A quantification tool will help highway authorities to
quantify the risk and issues on roadways before they can result in accidents.
It is difficult to quantify risk on roadways that do not have extensive crash histories associated
with them or the data is not properly registered for the reason of crashes. Usually multiple factors
are involved in crashes and can complicate the process of finding an appropriate solutions. So a

14 | P a g e
broad vision is required to analyze and quantify all the risky factors on a roadway segment that
are causing crashes.
In order to quantify RSA, following steps must be followed:
 Identification of Hazardous zones using past Crash Data
 Categorization of crash preventive measures (preventive tools)
 Questions related to each Category of crash prevention
 Assigning of different degrees of risk to corresponding questions (Lowest to Highest risk)
 Weightage of each question (Average of Crash Reduction Factors for single category)
 Percentage Weightage of different Categories of Crash prevention.
 Assessment of lowest to highest category in accordance with weightage.
 Calculation of potential Risk before and after intervention for every category.
 Calculation of percentage Crash Reduction for each category.
 Average of all percentages (of all categories) will give percentage crash reduction due to
RSA

4.1 RSA Risk Assessment Tool

While conducting the RSA procedure, the first step should be to identify and prioritize the safety
concerns. A relative risk assessment tool can be used to prioritize the safety issue. The issue that
has the highest severity and probability represent the highest risk and must be given priority in
rectification process. First the team must identify all the possible safety issues without
distinguishing them into major or minor ones. The second step should be to assign a risk rating to
each selected and safety issue. A risk assessment matrix can be developed using the severity and
likelihood of occurrence of each safety issue that could result in crash. The risk assessment can
make it easier for decision makers to adopt an appropriate solution to treat the road in order to
make it safer.
The figure 4 shows the risk assessment matrix. The studies have shown that 4 x 4 matrix is more
appropriate than 3 x 3 or 5 x 5, as it does not allow the users to choose and “middle ground” and
help them be more decisive.

Frequency of collision
Risk Category
Frequent Probable Occasional Rare

Fatal Very high High High Medium

Serious High High Medium Medium

Severity
Slight High Medium Medium Low

Damage Medium Medium Low Low

15 | P a g e
 Figure 4 - Risk Assessment Matrix

The approach of converting qualitative data into quantitative data can be used to quantify risks.
Different survey and questions can be prepared to obtain the results.

4.2 Questions

The selected safety issues can be phrased into questions and then we can assign them the risk
percentage score. This is the more objective approach and different surveys will be required to
obtain the reliable data. A scale of 0 – 100 can be choose and in survey form we can ask the
participants to allocate the score to each issue. For example, 85% score will represent a higher
risk rating.
In survey forms, the practitioners will be asked questions about following categories that can
have influence on making roads safer:

 Traffic signs
 Traffic control devices
 Sight distance
 Geometric design
 Pavement condition
 Presence of pedestrians

For each category, practitioners can be asked different question and to assign a risk rating.
Following this process we will get the average risk rating for each category.

4.3 Weightage

The weightage for each category reflects the importance attached by the decision makers to
various categories. The audit team can adopt different technique to obtain weightage for each
category. They can directly assign the weightage to each category using their own judgement or
can derive the weightage score using different techniques.
For derivation of weightage, the analysis of subjective evaluations of each category and their
overall impact on road safety can be done. A model can be developed by using the score
assigned by survey respondents to each category and by calibration of the model, relative
weights of different categories can be obtained.

4.4 RSA Risk Assessment Score

The overall score can be obtained by multiplying the summation of questions score and category
weight. This overall score represents the category risk rating score. The equation to calculate
category risk rating is given below:

16 | P a g e
Category risk rating=Σ ( Questions score ) × Category weight

The category risk ratings represent potential risk for each category.

4.5 Risk Analysis Results

Once the risk rating is developed, each safety issue can be assign a risk rating from A to F where
A is the lowest risk level and F is the highest risk level. Using the assigned ratings, the results
can compiled in a tabular form with potential risk and suggestions for safety improvement for
each selected issue.
The final analysis will include before and after risk score and crash reduction percentage for
improvement across each category. The audit team must include the crash reduction percentage
for each recommended improvement against each safety issue in its response report.
The audit team should provide the short term as well as long-term solutions for safety
improvements. Short-term solutions can be such as installation of signs, pavement markings or
removal of any roadside obstacle. The long-term solution can be redesign of curve or addition of
more lanes.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Summary and Conclusions
It has been observed in past few years that the number of crashes have increased manifold. The
negligence is not on the side of driver only rather it is also the highway agencies who are equally
or sometimes more responsible. In order to decrease the crash and casualty rate, transportation
engineers and experts must play there important part at first. There is a possibility of negligence
on the side of road users but the infrastructure should be in such a way that it can absorb the
mistakes of users resulting into safe and better roads with less crashes and less fatalities. This
overall concepts refers us to “Forgiving Roads”, where if a road user makes a mistake, he must
somehow avoid the crash, and if the vehicle still crashes, then that crash must be of less severity
so that people inside vehicle remain alive with as less possible damage and learns a good lesson
for the rest of their life. This is Engineering and Education both at the same time.
In order to make roads a safer place for users, “Road Safety Audits” serves as a sole purpose and
its implementation at different stages on a road network determines the overall life and finances
savings of Billions of dollars around the world. It has been observed that every road segment that
has been audited helps to achieve our purpose of fewer crashes and more life savings.
5.2 Recommendations
 RSA must be an integral part for all Highways at the preliminary stages of design and
construction in order to avoid the crashes.

17 | P a g e
 The roads where more crashes are being observed on daily basis and is resulting in a huge
life loss annually must be audited on priority basis and remedial interventions must be
prescribed in time to road agencies, so that more lives and finances can be saved.
 It should be observed with the passage of time the increase in traffic and its
corresponding effect with the no. of crashes on a particular road segment that was audited
or needs an audit, for proper infrastructure upgradation in time.
 The data for crashes and the reasons of crashes must be recorded effectively and precisely
so that improvements can be made wisely.
 Government and authorities should focus on this issue as a serious problem and must find
its solution with the help of RSA as it is becoming the leading cause of deaths and
injuries in our country.
 To some people RSA might look like a waste of time and money but it is an observed fact
all over the world that it results in long term life and cost savings to a very great extent.
 Design consultants of roadways must be enough competent to do RSA at the time of
design all by themselves, this will not only decrease the cost of an external audit team but
will also lead to fruitful time saving.
 Designers must be in a regular contact with the Resident Engineers (REs) in order to
check and see the problems at site during construction phase as it will give a more clearer
image and effective solutions in design for ensuring safety, that only be suggested if
designer is well aware of the site conditions and problems.
 The safety interventions must be economical, long lasting and effective so that a lot of
people can be benefited by these interventions.

18 | P a g e
References

 Commission for Global Road Safety Make Roads Safe report: A Decade of Action for Road
Safety, 2009.
 Kopits, Elizabeth; Cropper, Maureen. 2003. Traffic Fatalities and Economic Growth. Policy
Research Working Paper;No. 3035. World Bank, Washington, DC. © World Bank.
 AUSTROADS, Road Safety Audit, Second Edition, 2002.
 Hoque M. M., The Road to Road Safety: Issues and Initiatives in Bangladesh, Regional
Health Forum, Vol- 8, No. 1, p 45, 2004.
 FHWA Road Safety Audit Guidelines, 2006.
 AUSTROADS, Road Safety Audit (1994), Austroads, Sydney, Australia.
 AASHTO, “Highway Safety Design and Operations Guide, 1997.”
 The Institution of Highways & Transportation (IHT), UK, Guidelines for Road Safety Audit,
2008.
 Vardaki, Sophia, Fanis Papadimitriou, and Pantelis Kopelias. "Road safety audit on a major
freeway: implementing safety improvements", European Transport Research Review, 2014.
 Jones, Joshua Reid, "A Method to Quantify Road Safety Audit Data and Results" (2013). All
Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 1544.

19 | P a g e