Irish roads the sixth safest in the European Union, says report

Iwannahurl

Ireland is now the 6th best performing country among EU Member States in terms of road deaths. Source: RTE News.

Irish roads have been named the sixth safest in the European Union, according to a new report.

Between 2001 and 2010 the number of people killed on the roads here fell by 48%.

This was just short of the EU target of 50%, which only eight member states achieved, according to the report by the European Transport Council.

Ireland's reduction was above the EU average.

Ireland is now sixth behind Sweden, the UK, Malta, The Netherlands and Germany in terms of road safety.

Ireland was among the best performers when it came to saving lives on rural roads and of pedestrians and motorbike users.

However, it was below average when it came to reducing deaths of cyclists.

The report estimated that there has been more than 100,000 fewer deaths on EU roads since 2001 and that the savings to society are worth around €176 billion.

The Road Safety Authority has described the reduction as remarkable.

RSA Chief Executive Noel Brett says that Irish road users have become an example to the rest of Europe but he warned against complacency.

He says there is still a big gap between Ireland and the safest countries in Europe and that efforts to make the roads safer need to continue.

The European Transport Council has set a new target of a further 50% reduction in road deaths by 2020.

I'm sure there must be a few caveats, but still worth a nod of approval, no?

serfboard

Saw that report alright. The thing that jumped out at me was this

there has been more than 100,000 fewer deaths on EU roads since 2001

That's an amazing number. Think New York's Twin Towers 30 times over.

L1011

Now if they'd reposition their "safety cameras" to places with data from the last few years rather than the 1990s, they might get it down further. Rather than having them placed on bypassed roads that were once high casualty or places were the last serious accident happened over 20 years ago...

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

Now if they'd reposition their "safety cameras" to places with data from the last few years rather than the 1990s, they might get it down further. Rather than having them placed on bypassed roads that were once high casualty or places were the last serious accident happened over 20 years ago...

My hunch is that the speed/safety cameras are placed where deaths occurred previously in order to increase public acceptance of the programme.

Personally, I think the only justification they need is that speed surveillance has been proven effective in reducing road casualties.

Therefore the speed/safety cameras should be placed where motorists are likely to break the speed limit, ie anywhere and everywhere.

Another hunch I have is that 2011 is going to be the safest year on record. I sincerely hope I'm not wrong.

We've come a long way from the 1970s, when the number of cars on the road was half what it is now and fifty people a month were dying on the roads.

Every little helps, IMO. Speed surveillance, driver education, random breath testing, better roads, better cars, etc. Given the huge number of lives saved, injuries prevented and tragedies averted cynicism is in no way justified.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

My hunch is that the speed/safety cameras are placed where deaths occurred previously in order to increase public acceptance of the programme.

Which is ridiculous as for a HUGE amount of positions they site them in the deaths occurred on an older design of road.



Better roads are responsible for more of the reduction than any other individual factor - take a look at old EuroRAP reports to see this.

veryangryman

MYOB wrote: »

Better roads are responsible for more of the reduction than any other individual factor - take a look at old EuroRAP reports to see this.

Exactly

Why are the RSA so reluctant to acknowledge the following...

1. Road deaths (usually) occur due to head-on collisions.
2. Head on collissions usually happen on busier single carriageway roads
3. Most of the busier single carriageways have been Dualled up

Ergo less head on collisions, less deaths

Why isnt this the first thing they list? What do they have to lose not saying this? Are they complete morons - what>?

SeanW

veryangryman wrote: »

Exactly

Why are the RSA so reluctant to acknowledge the following...

1. Road deaths (usually) occur due to head-on collisions.
2. Head on collissions usually happen on busier single carriageway roads
3. Most of the busier single carriageways have been Dualled up

Ergo less head on collisions, less deaths

Why isnt this the first thing they list? What do they have to lose not saying this? Are they complete morons - what>?

Because the RSAs self-appointed mission is to drown motorists in red tape. Speed cameras on dual carriageways, "graduated" driver licensing with a byzantine set of rules, annual NCTs, they're only interested in making motoring as difficult, expensive and frustrating as possible. That's all.

THAT is why they almost never - if at all - discuss the safety advantages of an increased motorway and dual carriageway network.

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

Better roads are responsible for more of the reduction than any other individual factor - take a look at old EuroRAP reports to see this.

veryangryman wrote: »

1. Road deaths (usually) occur due to head-on collisions.

2. Head on collissions usually happen on busier single carriageway roads

3. Most of the busier single carriageways have been Dualled up

Do you have authoritative sources for those specific claims? Publication title(s) & date(s), link(s), etc...

Iwannahurl

SeanW wrote: »

Because the RSAs self-appointed mission is to drown motorists in red tape. Speed cameras on dual carriageways, "graduated" driver licensing with a byzantine set of rules, annual NCTs, they're only interested in making motoring as difficult, expensive and frustrating as possible. That's all.

THAT is why they almost never - if at all - discuss the safety advantages of an increased motorway and dual carriageway network.

Such ill-informed ranting. I should have anticipated it, even if this isn't the Motors forum!

1. The RSA is not self-appointed. It was set up by an Act of the Oireachtas in 2006. Its statutory responsibilities are set out in that legislation.

2. The RSA has no involvement in the National Car Test. An NCT is required every two years, not annually.

3. In its Road Safety Strategy 2007-2012 the RSA clearly acknowledges and credits the safety dividend in terms of reduced road deaths due to the contruction of motorways and upgrading/remediation of other roads. On RTE1 News recently, Noel Brett, CEO of the RSA, specifically mentioned the improved safety of better roads.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Do you have authoritative sources for those specific claims? Publication title(s) & date(s), link(s), etc...

As I said - take a look at the old EuroRAP reports. Look at the roads with the highest accident figures. They've nearly all been replaced.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Such ill-informed ranting. I should have anticipated it, even if this isn't the Motors forum!

2. The RSA has no involvement in the National Car Test. An NCT is req.

You may want to get a little bit more up to date on this also.

The RSA are responsible for the NCT system, and tests are now annual for vehicles over ten years old

Its a good idea to check you aren't the ill-informed one before accusing someone of ranting, just as its a good idea to read what you're directed to before asking for the information contained within. But I can also anticipate that you'll not do this.

L1011

Because I know full well you won't actually look at the EuroRAP stuff, here's some bits from it

2008 top 5 most dangerous roads in the Republic and their status in 2011:

1: N1 Dundalk to Border. Replaced
2: M50 to Ashbourne. Replaced
3: N21 Tralee to Castleisland. Replaced or improved online
4: N25 Waterford to Kilmeaden. Replaced.
5: N52 South of Mullingar to Tyrrellspass. Vast majority of this has been replaced, final section to be done this year by online.

If you go back further you see the same pattern. The roads on which the most deaths happened have been either massively improved or outright replaced.

AugustusMinimus

It is actually staggering that we have such a low death rate for a number of reason.

1. We have the highest rate of car ownership in Europe. Given that the rate of deaths is per population, you would expect a high figure given we drive more than any other nation.

2. Per population, we have the largest amount of used roads in Europe. Our population is spread very evenly accross the island. It means that more people in this country are using sub par roads on average in comparison to other countries. Our lack of urbanisation also means that fewer people are driving each day in cities where the speed limits are much slower.

3. The state of our roads. After two bad winters, it's is presently pot hole city out there. The road surface of R and L roads is a border line disgrace. Our signage is god awful too. In most countries, severe bends etc are signed very well. Haphazard in this country.

Einhard

It's also kind of staggering that, even in a thread on the reduction of road deaths, the RSA is singled out for vitriol and condemnation, and not for praise and commendation. What is with Irish people and their distaste for any kind of authority?

road_high

MYOB wrote: »

Because I know full well you won't actually look at the EuroRAP stuff, here's some bits from it

2008 top 5 most dangerous roads in the Republic and their status in 2011:

1: N1 Dundalk to Border. Replaced
2: M50 to Ashbourne. Replaced
3: N21 Tralee to Castleisland. Replaced or improved online
4: N25 Waterford to Kilmeaden. Replaced.
5: N52 South of Mullingar to Tyrrellspass. Vast majority of this has been replaced, final section to be done this year by online.

If you go back further you see the same pattern. The roads on which the most deaths happened have been either massively improved or outright replaced.

Yes, very true indeed. The old N1/8/9 especially were real death traps. We regularly had MAJOR collisions on those involving multiple vehicles and HGVs on an all too frequent basis. I can think back of crashes where whole families were killed . Thankfully much of these old stretches are gone. There were some awful collsions on the old N8 over the years despite it being a reasonably good road for the most part. Parts of the N11 were awful too. Unfortunately one or two still remain there.

mike65

Malta is a surprise in that list, I was led to believe (by Dev no less I think!) that they are pretty mad drivers on rather narrow roads.

As for the drop well its a mixed bag of reasons one of which hasn't been mentioned - the recession! Fewer journeys at peaks times as compared to 2001 I would imagine, and those journeys that are made will tend to be shorter (nipping to the shop/school rather than commuting)

L1011

mfitzy wrote: »

Yes, very true indeed. The old N1/8/9 especially were real death traps. We regularly had MAJOR collisions on those involving multiple vehicles and HGVs on an all too frequent basis. I can think back of crashes where whole families were killed . Thankfully much of these old stretches are gone. There were some awful collsions on the old N8 over the years despite it being a reasonably good road for the most part. Parts of the N11 were awful too. Unfortunately one or two still remain there.

The N11 gap and the N2 at Slane alone as two schemes would cause another noticeable drop in collision statistics.

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

As I said - take a look at the old EuroRAP reports. Look at the roads with the highest accident figures. They've nearly all been replaced.

You may want to get a little bit more up to date on this also.

The RSA are responsible for the NCT system, and tests are now annual for vehicles over ten years old

Its a good idea to check you aren't the ill-informed one before accusing someone of ranting, just as its a good idea to read what you're directed to before asking for the information contained within. But I can also anticipate that you'll not do this.

Well, I stand corrected on the NCT. I was under the impression that it was run by the National Car Testing Service, and the annual test for cars over ten years old hadn't come to my notice (yet, since I'm not directly affected).

I was looking for an authoritative source for this specific claim that you made:

MYOB wrote: »

Better roads are responsible for more of the reduction than any other individual factor - take a look at old EuroRAP reports to see this.

You are stating categorically that better roads have saved more lives than any other individual factor. What is the direct, categorical evidence for that specific claim?

The "complete morons" in the RSA, who "almost never - if at all - discuss the safety advantages of an increased motorway and dual carriageway network" state the following in their Road Safety Strategy:

It is estimated that Major Road Building Programmes may save 50 lives a year when completed in 2010. This is supported by recent studies on the newly completed M1 from Dublin to Dundalk where the number of fatalities has fallen dramatically with the new motorway while traffic has grown two and a half times in eight years, well ahead of expectations. In the 3 years before the motorway was completed 12 fatalities occurred on the route. The 3 years after the motorway was completed have seen 2 fatalities.

Perhaps that 50 lives saved a year is bigger than the reduction due to any other factors. I'd like to see some direct evidence for that though.

Iwannahurl

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

It is actually staggering that we have such a low death rate for a number of reason.

1. We have the highest rate of car ownership in Europe. Given that the rate of deaths is per population, you would expect a high figure given we drive more than any other nation.

2. Per population, we have the largest amount of used roads in Europe. Our population is spread very evenly accross the island. It means that more people in this country are using sub par roads on average in comparison to other countries. Our lack of urbanisation also means that fewer people are driving each day in cities where the speed limits are much slower.

3. The state of our roads. After two bad winters, it's is presently pot hole city out there. The road surface of R and L roads is a border line disgrace. Our signage is god awful too. In most countries, severe bends etc are signed very well. Haphazard in this country.

I'm, er, not up to speed on the car ownership rates either. Not too many years ago it was quite a different situation, IIRC. Can you post a link? Ditto re total kilometres driven. All very useful info.

The number of fatalities was much higher in the 1970s, however, when there was half the number of car registrations as now.

AugustusMinimus

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm, er, not up to speed on the car ownership rates either. Not too many years ago it was quite a different situation, IIRC. Can you post a link? Ditto re total kilometres driven. All very useful info.

The number of fatalities was much higher in the 1970s, however, when there was half the number of car registrations as now.

1. According to this list, only Italy seriously ranks above Ireland. Finland, Germany and Austria are also ahead, but please note that the Ireland figure is a 2006 figures, while the rest are 2008 and 2010.


2.



Just look at the effort you've made me put in. Sweden is a freak as the country has such a small population compared to it's size. I would imagine given that as the majority of the population live in the south and given that the north is tundra, then most car journeys are done on a section of roads, far less than the total Km of roads in the country.

I have no idea why Latvia and Lithuania has such length of roads compared to their populations.

All info found at http://www.irfnet.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=262%3Aeuropean-road-statistics-2009&catid=17&Itemid=30

BTW, we have a hell of a lot of road to look after compared to our population. Just look at how little road the UK has to it's population. This means that looking after their network is easier as it should take up a smaller percentage of the countries GDP per person.

No info for Greece or Cyprus btw.

Iwannahurl

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

1. According to this list, only Italy seriously ranks above Ireland. Finland, Germany and Austria are also ahead, but please note that the Ireland figure is a 2006 figures, while the rest are 2008 and 2010.


2.

http://i55.tinypic.com/s3opdd.jpg

Just look at the effort you've made me put in. Sweden is a freak as the country has such a small population compared to it's size. I would imagine given that as the majority of the population live in the south and given that the north is tundra, then most car journeys are done on a section of roads, far less than the total Km of roads in the country.

I have no idea why Latvia and Lithuania has such length of roads compared to their populations.

All info found at http://www.irfnet.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=262%3Aeuropean-road-statistics-2009&catid=17&Itemid=30

BTW, we have a hell of a lot of road to look after compared to our population. Just look at how little road the UK has to it's population. This means that looking after their network is easier as it should take up a smaller percentage of the countries GDP per person.

No info for Greece or Cyprus btw.

Thanks.

Your work is not done yet! What about car ownership rates, and kilometres driven?

AugustusMinimus

Wiki (best I could find) on car ownership rates. Forgot to post link originally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_vehicles_per_capita


On the average kilometers driven. I can't find anything on it. It's an often thrown out statistic though. I have no reason not to believe it given our shocking public transport system and due to the sheer volume of commuter towns, which have been filling up over the past 15 years.

Iwannahurl

I should have looked more closely at the link you posted earlier.

The 2007 data for car ownership per thousand inhabitants in the EU27 is given here: http://www.irfnet.eu/images/stories/Statistics/2009/6._Passenger_Transport.pdf

Looks like Ireland is 16th in the table, which is what I thought (ie my recollection was that our car ownership rates are lower than many countries in the EU, though our level of car use, and car dependence is higher than many). I'm told that we have the lowest rate of "active commuting", for example, though I have no source for that statement.

I suspect that we crept up the table a fair bit in the Celtic Casino years. It would be interesting to see the trend 2001-2011.

overshoot

was looking through that euroRap the shocking thing was in star rating, 50% of our "other roads" (non motorway) got 1 star, germany - 0%, GB about 2%, NI 5%. Take that to secondary single and its a whopping 75% of the road network gets 1*
http://www.eurorap.org/library/pdfs/20080519_IRLAND_RESULTS.pdf
(page 18 for that part)

marmurr1916

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

1. According to this list, only Italy seriously ranks above Ireland. Finland, Germany and Austria are also ahead, but please note that the Ireland figure is a 2006 figures, while the rest are 2008 and 2010.


2.



Just look at the effort you've made me put in. Sweden is a freak as the country has such a small population compared to it's size. I would imagine given that as the majority of the population live in the south and given that the north is tundra, then most car journeys are done on a section of roads, far less than the total Km of roads in the country.

I have no idea why Latvia and Lithuania has such length of roads compared to their populations.

All info found at http://www.irfnet.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=262%3Aeuropean-road-statistics-2009&catid=17&Itemid=30

BTW, we have a hell of a lot of road to look after compared to our population. Just look at how little road the UK has to it's population. This means that looking after their network is easier as it should take up a smaller percentage of the countries GDP per person.

No info for Greece or Cyprus btw.

Thanks for that information. I always suspected Ireland had far more roads per head of population than other countries.

Part of the reason is that historical settlement patterns in rural Ireland meant that there was a very dispersed population, served by numerous small roads.

A quick look at any reasonably detailed pre-Famine Ordnance Survey map will show numerous small clusters of houses (cláchans) across large areas of rural Ireland, with a maze of small roads.

Unfortunately, nearly all of these small roads were surfaced after roads began to be tarmacked, unlike in other countries where many very minor roads were left as gravel or other unsealed surfaces.

If Ireland had done this, the remaining, smaller, network of roads could have been given more attention and maintained to a higher standard.

As for road safety, one of the factors is improved roads, another is improved cars.

Thanks to various scrappage schemes and the boom years (RIP), the age of the Irish 'national fleet' is relatively young and modern cars have better safety features, leading to reduced accidents and increased survival rates.

Advances in medical techniques and technology have also improved survival rates.

Improved enforcement has played a role as has better driving behaviour. I would say that drink driving was probably much more widespread in the 1970s than today and random breath testing helps get drink drivers off the road.

Overall, improved roads have clearly played a crucial part in reducing the accident rates on Irish roads, but other factors have contributed too.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Perhaps that 50 lives saved a year is bigger than the reduction due to any other factors. I'd like to see some direct evidence for that though.

Do some simple maths. For any other factor to be bigger it'd need to be 51, then add in estimated numbers for the others. Then compare to the reduction in road deaths.

There has only been a ~120 death drop per annum since 2003 when the road network had a tiny % of DC and hundreds of kilometre less of improvements to non-DC N roads.

Its fairly obvious to anyone who's done junior cert maths (and who is willing to let go of an obsession with speed enforcement).

murphaph

Perhaps a bit OT but I've just come back home (to Germany) from 2 weeks driving in and around Campania/Lazio in Italy and I can safely say I will NEVER drive there again.

Ireland is positively saintly in comparison to these morons who overtake INTO oncoming traffic and only survive because the oncoming traffic is looking out for them and swerves over to avoid. I saw numerous fender benders and basically ALL the cars are dented beyond belief. They treat driving a motor vehicle (because the 2 wheelers are just as suicidal) like a game. They allow minors to ride mopeds clearly far too young and there is only a helmet requirement for vehicles above 50cc....but I saw LOADS of sports bike riders going sans helmet (I'm a biker too-I would NEVER pull some of the stuff I saw these idiots pull) and the police doing absolutely nothing (Police drove just as badly, 2 feet from back bumper etc.).

Speed limits are obviously not enforced whatsoever-virtually all traffic in an 80 zone does 110, on the 130 motorways you'd see people driving as fast as their cars will go. Ireland should take pride that the high death rate is/was largely due to crappy roads whereas in Southern Italy etc. it's due to moronic driving and a fatally flawed mentality.

We can do better, but we should be happy overall that we are heading in the right direction-others are not I believe.

niloc1951

murphaph wrote: »

Perhaps a bit OT but I've just come back home (to Germany) from 2 weeks driving in and around Campania/Lazio in Italy and I can safely say I will NEVER drive there again.

Ireland is positively saintly in comparison to these morons who overtake INTO oncoming traffic and only survive because the oncoming traffic is looking out for them and swerves over to avoid. I saw numerous fender benders and basically ALL the cars are dented beyond belief. They treat driving a motor vehicle (because the 2 wheelers are just as suicidal) like a game. They allow minors to ride mopeds clearly far too young and there is only a helmet requirement for vehicles above 50cc....but I saw LOADS of sports bike riders going sans helmet (I'm a biker too-I would NEVER pull some of the stuff I saw these idiots pull) and the police doing absolutely nothing (Police drove just as badly, 2 feet from back bumper etc.).

Speed limits are obviously not enforced whatsoever-virtually all traffic in an 80 zone does 110, on the 130 motorways you'd see people driving as fast as their cars will go. Ireland should take pride that the high death rate is/was largely due to crappy roads whereas in Southern Italy etc. it's due to moronic driving and a fatally flawed mentality.

We can do better, but we should be happy overall that we are heading in the right direction-others are not I believe.

Apologies to the OT police
'DEAD' right, I had the same experience last year when we toured down the Adriatic coast to Bari, across to Salerno and back up the Mediteranian coast, they're absolutely crazy and the roads nearly shook the camper apart.

We have promised ourselves that if we have any reason to go south of Pisa in the future we will either fly or leave the camper in the north and take the train.

nordydan

murphaph wrote: »

Perhaps a bit OT but I've just come back home (to Germany) from 2 weeks driving in and around Campania/Lazio in Italy and I can safely say I will NEVER drive there again.

Ireland is positively saintly in comparison to these morons who overtake INTO oncoming traffic and only survive because the oncoming traffic is looking out for them and swerves over to avoid. I saw numerous fender benders and basically ALL the cars are dented beyond belief. They treat driving a motor vehicle (because the 2 wheelers are just as suicidal) like a game. They allow minors to ride mopeds clearly far too young and there is only a helmet requirement for vehicles above 50cc....but I saw LOADS of sports bike riders going sans helmet (I'm a biker too-I would NEVER pull some of the stuff I saw these idiots pull) and the police doing absolutely nothing (Police drove just as badly, 2 feet from back bumper etc.).

Speed limits are obviously not enforced whatsoever-virtually all traffic in an 80 zone does 110, on the 130 motorways you'd see people driving as fast as their cars will go. Ireland should take pride that the high death rate is/was largely due to crappy roads whereas in Southern Italy etc. it's due to moronic driving and a fatally flawed mentality.

We can do better, but we should be happy overall that we are heading in the right direction-others are not I believe.

Likewise in Sicily in 2009, just swap the placenames around but same story

KevR

Interesting that three countries that drive on the left rank in the top six. Especially when you consider that the vast majority of EU countries drive on the right.

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

Interesting that three countries that drive on the left rank in the top six. Especially when you consider that the vast majority of EU countries drive on the right.

Interesting point. Any theories?

Brian CivilEng

I remember reading a report somewhere that there was no statistically significant benefit to driving on the left, but I can't find it after a quick google. Some theories put forward is that driving on the left is safer for right handed people as they use their strong hand on the wheel when they change gear. So since 83% of people are right handed then driving on the left should be safer. Also apparently people have a slightly stronger vision on one side (right eyed maybe), and more people see better on their right than on their left. However there doesn't seem to be any major studies showing that one side is safer than the other.

mike65

on a related matter

UK road deaths drop below 2000 pa for first time (typical, just as Ireland gets its act together the UK moves the goalposts!)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/30/road-deaths-fall-record-low

The number of people killed annually on the roads in Britain has fallen below 2,000 for the first time since records began in 1926, government statistics show.

The death toll for 2010 was 1,857, as against 2,222 in 2009, a 16% drop and the seventh consecutive annual fall, the Department for Transport statistics showed. There was an 8% reduction in the broader statistic of people killed or seriously injured, which stood at 22,660 last year.

Although deaths and injuries fell significantly for motorists, pedestrians and motorcyclists, the number of cyclists killed rose for a third consecutive year. Deaths rose by 7% from 104 in 2009 to 111 last year, although the DfT says the number of cyclists rose by just 0.5%. The cycling casualty rate is, however, well down on the average annual death rate of 186 during 1994 to 1998.

Brian CivilEng

We should keep aiming for the UK standard, what they have achieved there is impressive. That's not to belittle our achievements either, we are heading in the right direction.

KevR

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Interesting point. Any theories?

I believe that driving on the left is slightly safer because of the bit in bold.

abitofacomedian wrote: »

I remember reading a report somewhere that there was no statistically significant benefit to driving on the left, but I can't find it after a quick google. Some theories put forward is that driving on the left is safer for right handed people as they use their strong hand on the wheel when they change gear. So since 83% of people are right handed then driving on the left should be safer. Also apparently people have a slightly stronger vision on one side (right eyed maybe), and more people see better on their right than on their left. However there doesn't seem to be any major studies showing that one side is safer than the other.

AugustusMinimus

In addition, there is also a tendency for right handed people to turn left instead of right in case of an emergency.

THis is why the towers on aircraft carriers are always on the right. The Japanese had them on the left in WW2 and quickly learned of their mistake.

This would of course lead to cars in right hand drive countries turning into oncoming traffic.

ardmacha

breakingnews today..

Some 90 people lost their lives on Irish roads during the first six months of the year, according to the latest figures from An Garda Síochána and the Road Safety Authority (RSA).

This represents a 9 per cent reduction on road fatalities for the same period last year when 99 people died.

The figures showed road deaths involving drivers, passengers and pedestrians were substantially down on the same period in 2010.

Driver deaths, which typically represent half of all road deaths, fell from 49 in 2010 to 45 this year, a drop of 8 per cent. The number of pedestrian deaths has also fallen from 24 to 20, a 16 per cent decrease.

However, the number of motorcyclists and cyclists killed on the roads has increased.

Eight motorcyclists were killed on the roads since the beginning of the year, one more than the same period last year and two cyclists died, compared to none last year.

April saw the lowest road deaths ever recorded in a single month with nine lives lost.

Road deaths in May, typically a high risk month because of the bank holiday weekend, were 60 per cent lower this year with 11 deaths compared to 28 in 2010.

Gardaí said two in five of all road deaths take place between Friday midnight and Sunday midnight.

Despite this reduction, both agencies said the number of young people dying on the roads remained a cause for “significant concern”.

One third (30) of road users killed to date were aged between 16 and 25 .

Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar said: “The Government road safety strategy 2007 to 2012 set a goal for no more than 21 lives lost on our roads per month by 2012.

“This target was achieved two years running, in 2009 and 2010, which had the lowest number of road deaths ever recorded. Now we are asking every road user to set their own personal target to keep up this life-saving behaviour and prevent needless deaths on our roads,” he said.

“It’s not impossible. If we continue the behaviour we have seen over the past six months, we could save as many as 30 lives this year.”

The RSA urged road users to “redouble their efforts to prevent further suffering and tragedy as a result of deaths on our roads”.

RSA chairman Gay Byrne said: “The people of Ireland have shown what can be achieved when road safety is prioritised. But our work is far from over. 90 lives have been lost on our roads so far this year in unnecessary, preventable tragedies. Even more tragic is the number of young people still being killed on our roads.”

Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan said: "Gardaí are working closely with our partner agencies to further reduce deaths and serious injury and we will continue to target our enforcement activity at areas where fatalities are more likely to occur.

NITransport

I would just like to remind ppl that our average mileage is almost double that of those in the uk yet our accident rate is only ever so slightly higher than that of the uk residents! Therefore we mustened be bad drivers!

Leonard Hofstadter

Considering the absolutely appalling standard of driving that most Irish motorists have; non existant lane discipline, especially on three lane roads, the apparent lack of indicators in most cars, people driving in the wrong lane coming up to roundabouts and junctions, people changing lane without warning and the number of morons who drive ridiculuously slowly, forcing the rest of us normal people to overtake and drive on the wrong side of the road, to have had only 90 fatalities so far this year is a stunning achievement.

Isn't it amazing what happens when we invest in decent roads?

If we built even more motorways, educated people about how to drive properly (usage of indicators, not to drive too slowly for the conditions and of course lane discipline) because Irish people quite frankly are terrible drivers, we will get the numbers down even more.

There are still roads which have an appalling level of accidents, and are national primary routes, such as Slane, the N11 bit, and of course Cork-Limerick and Limerick-Waterford are still dreadful roads for the most part, both also have accident blackspots, so if these get sorted we can bring the numbers down even more.

I don't fully agree with the new compulsory training for drivers, but something had to be done, and it is a hell of a lot better than what went before, so the RSA does deserve credit for finally doing something about making people pass a proper driving test and have proper training before they can pass the said test.

sama_kaffee

You do see some of the most awful driving in Ireland. the last ten years on the road have been pretty shocking. especially 2000 to 2008.

But there has been a huge improvement over the last 1 - 2 years, for obvious reasons,

i see a lot less appalling stuff now, less of the retarded overtaking:), and less of the retarded tail-gating.:)

so fair play to drivers on irish roads for slowly starting to get their act together, and using their brain a little bit.

KevR

There is bound to be more people cycling these days with petrol/diesel being so expensive. If cyclists now account for a bigger portion of all road users than they did before then it is likely that the number of cyclists involved in serious accidents will increase further.

Iwannahurl

KevR wrote: »

There is bound to be more people cycling these days with petrol/diesel being so expensive. If cyclists now account for a bigger portion of all road users than they did before then it is likely that the number of cyclists involved in serious accidents will increase further.

Not necessarily: http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Campaigns/CTC_Safety_in_Numbers.pdf

KevR

Never really thought of it that way. Thanks

Iwannahurl

It's a question of proportion, I suppose.

The number of cyclists killed and injured in the Netherlands, for example, is higher than in countries with low numbers of cyclists. But that's because they have huge numbers of people cycling all the time.

Cycling is inherently safe, however, and the benefits far outweigh the risks. If everyone cycled in Ireland instead of driving, there would of course be numerically more cyclists in the road casualty stats, but the profile would be very different I reckon. Fewer deaths and disabling injuries I would imagine, and a vast increase in grazed knees and broken collar bones.

Pure fantasy of course, given the nature and extent of this nation's car dependence.

galwaycyclist

I'm cross posting this from the
cycle lanes thread on commuting and transport. apologies if it has already been raised here.

The matter of state agencies and in particular the Garda claiming credit for recent falls in road deaths is tendentious. Following such claims to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, Cyclist.ie sent them a letter in 2009 pointing out other factors. Unfortunately its not up on the Cyclist.ie website but I found a copy so I've chopped the key section

The effect of fuel price on traffic accidents
In the US, researchers have compared the average prices of gasoline with the number of fatal traffic accidents between 1985 to 2006. They found that for each 10% increase in gas prices, fatal traffic accidents declined 2.3%. They also found that the level of fatalities decreased by over twice as much (by 6%) in the younger range of drivers who tend to drive more recklessly. Based on this observed effect of fuel prices, it was being predicted that for 2008 the US would experience the lowest traffic fatalities since 1961. The Associated Press quotes a director of the US National Safety council as stating "When the economy is in the tank and fuel prices are high, you typically see a decline in miles driven and traffic deaths". In the US, the chief executive of Mothers Against Drunk Driving has also credited high gas prices with helping to curb drunk driving. Between July 2007 and July 2008, Irish petrol prices increased by 13% percent from 117.8c to 133.5c. Diesel prices went up by 32% in the same period from 109c to 143.8c. This was against a background of fuel prices that have been rising since 2004. Given the trend seen elsewhere, it is reasonable to ask if this was something that would also be likely influence Irish driver behaviour?

Reduced economic activity
The recent drop in fuel prices might have been expected to reverse any associated downward trends in road deaths. However, Ireland has now moved into a pronounced economic downturn. In road safety research, it is a long established observation that road deaths tend to track indicators of economic activity such as employment rates.

Time series studies in the following countries are reported to have found a correlation between upward and downward trends employment rates and similar trends in road deaths: the U.S. (1948-1987), Sweden (1962-1987), West Germany (1960-1983), Finland (1965-1983), Canada (1960-1986), United Kingdom (1960-1985), Netherlands (1968-1986), Switzerland (1967-1994).

Experts on traffic safety and driver behaviour such as Prof. Gerald Wilde of Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario and Prof. Rudiger Trimpop of the German University of Jena have proposed that this effect is due to an increase in the relative costs of crashes. When money is scarce, even a small accident can be a financial burden because costs of insurance repairs etc have risen relative to real income.
Simultaneously the benefits expected from risky behaviour are reduced, because time is worth less money. There is less to be gained from behaviours like driving fast, driving through a red or amber light or breaking the rules in other ways.

In Ireland, the Live Register reportedly saw the biggest 12-month increase since records began in 1967 with an unadjusted increase of 120,987 or 71% in the year to December 2008. Again given the trends seen in other countries, it is reasonable to ask if this was something that would also be expected to affect Irish driver behaviour?

serfboard

As well as all the other reasons, younger people "who tend to drive more recklessly" and who made up a third of the deaths, are more likely to be unemployed, or to have emigrated and therefore are either not physically here or can't afford to drive now.

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I'm cross posting this from the
cycle lanes thread on commuting and transport. apologies if it has already been raised here.

The matter of state agencies and in particular the Garda claiming credit for recent falls in road deaths is tendentious. Following such claims to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights, Cyclist.ie sent them a letter in 2009 pointing out other factors. Unfortunately its not up on the Cyclist.ie website but I found a copy so I've chopped the key section

1. The secular trend in Irish road deaths has been generally downward since the 1970s.

2. In the 1970s, when there were only half the number of vehicle registrations as we have now, there were fifty people a month dying on the roads.

3. With regard to fuel price, how have those studies controlled for fuel costs as a proportion of income? Also, is it only an in-country phenomenon, or do between-country comparisons reveal anything?

galwaycyclist

Iwannahurl wrote: »

1. The secular trend in Irish road deaths has been generally downward since the 1970s.

2. In the 1970s, when there were only half the number of vehicle registrations as we have now, there were fifty people a month dying on the roads.

There is an established international pattern of road deaths eventually reducing with increasing national wealth/vehicle registrations. This is sometimes referred to as Smeeds Law.

There is a paper by Professor John Adams examining Smeeds Law here
http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/smeed's%20law.pdf

Most developed societies find ways to reduce the number of road deaths.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

3. With regard to fuel price, how have those studies controlled for fuel costs as a proportion of income? Also, is it only an in-country phenomenon, or do between-country comparisons reveal anything?

I don't have time to review the research on this point but the sources were as follows:

Effect of fuel prices on traffic accidents:
· Study: As gas prices go up, auto deaths drop By Joan Lowy, Associated Press 11th July 2008
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-07-11-960390037_x.htm

· Traffic deaths fall as gas prices climb: As economy slumps, people are venturing out less, Associated Press July 22, 2008
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25801898/

Effects of economic activity on road deaths:

· Traffic calming: a promise unfulfilled· By: Gerald J.S. Wilde 9th September 1999
http://www.drivers.com/article/303/ See section entitled: Macro-economic effects upon the fatal traffic accident rate per capita

· Safe & Sustainable Transport: A Matter of Quality Assurance, European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2003
http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/europe/ecmt/pubpdf/03SafeSust.pdf

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

There is an established international pattern of road deaths eventually reducing with increasing national wealth/vehicle registrations. This is sometimes referred to as Smeeds Law.

[...]

Traffic deaths fall as gas prices climb: As economy slumps, people are venturing out less, Associated Press July 22, 2008
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25801898/

Contradictory "laws", it would appear. Which is the real one?

galwaycyclist

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Contradictory "laws", it would appear. Which is the real one?

Why can't they both be "real"? They involve very different time periods.

Iwannahurl

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Why can't they both be "real"? They involve very different time periods.

So does the evidence show that road deaths decrease over long time periods as economies gradually improve, but increase during boom periods?

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So does the evidence show that road deaths decrease over long time periods as economies gradually improve, but increase during boom periods?

Boom periods, people tend to not care aboout cost of fuel etc so drive more, hence more cars on road, more accidents.

Bust - people do check their wallets and dont take as many journeys.

Sounds fairly straightforward to me.