All Transport
Better Regulation of Public-Private Partnerships for Transport Infrastructure
Roundtable Report, Policy Insights,
24 September 2013
- A mix of financing models spreads risks.
- A dedicated budget for PPPs, set in relation to the rate at which future liabilities will be accumulated, can provide such a limit.
- Explicit consideration of alternative financing arrangements should be employed in determining whether to proceed with PPP projects.
- It is recommended that governments require PPP projects to pass tests of affordability and to clear the hurdle rates of return generally applied to publicly financed transport projects.
- The expected cost of PPP projects should take account of cost inflation resulting from the propensity for projects to be renegotiated.
- At the individual project level, risks should be assigned to the party best able to manage them, along with rights to make related decisions.
- Assigning demand risk is not straightforward and risk sharing arrangements are therefore common.
- Continuity of resources and expertise is essential for addressing strategic behaviour and optimism bias more generally.
- Regulatory agencies are well placed to ensure transparency and accountability by publishing reports on the criteria employed to make decisions and publishing contracts.
Déclaration des Ministres sur le Financement des transports. Sommet annuel 2013
Summit Declaration,
22 May 2013
Sharing Road Safety: Developing an International Framework for Crash Modification Functions
Research Report, Policy Insights,
1 December 2012
- Road safety policies should undergo performance and efficiency evaluations. Such evaluations cannot be undertaken without Crash Modification Functions (CMFs). Evaluation processes should be documented to ensure they are transparent.
- Research conducted to develop CMFs should follow the guidance provided in this report and, in particular, provide specific information that describes the countermeasure under consideration, the safety issue being addressed and the roadway environment in which it was tested.
- It is recommended that an international group be composed under an existing organization (e.g. Transportation Research Board, World Road Association, etc.) to foster dialog among researchers and practitioners on CMF research and reporting standards with the aim of increasing transferability of results. Coordination of research across countries on top priority countermeasures should be considered.
- International cooperation should aim to capture documentation and reporting of CMF research in a widely available transnational database.
- A concerted effort should be made to publicize the benefits of decision-making based on CMFs. This should take the form of: presentations and workshops at transport, injury prevention and health conferences; press releases; letters to political leaders and senior bureaucrats.
Sharing Road Safety: Developing an International Framework for Crash Modification Functions
Policy Insights, Policy Brief,
31 May 2012
- Road safety policies should undergo performance and efficiency evaluation. Such evaluations cannot be undertaken without Crash Modification Functions (CMFs). Evaluation processes should be documented to ensure they are transparent.
- Research conducted to develop CMFs should follow the guidance provided in this report and, in particular, provide specific information that describes the countermeasure under consideration, the safety issue being addressed and the roadway environment in which it was tested.
- It is recommended that an international group be composed under an existing organization (e.g. Transportation Research Board, World Road Association, etc.) to foster dialog among researchers and practitioners on CMF research and reporting standards with the aim of increasing transferability of results. Coordination of research across countries on top priority countermeasures should be considered.
- International co-operation should aim to capture documentation and reporting of CMF research in a widely available transnational database.
- A concerted effort should be made to publicise the benefits of decision-making based on CMFs. This should take the form of presentations and workshops at transport, injury prevention and health conferences; press releases; letters to political leaders and senior bureaucrats.
Reporting on Serious Road Traffic Casualties
IRTAD, Policy Insights,
1 December 2011
- A complete picture of casualty totals from road crashes is needed to fully assess the consequences of road crashes and monitor progress.
- Injury information should complement information on fatal crashes to give a fuller picture of road crashes. Information on injuries should become more important for international comparisons.
- Police data should remain the main source for road crash statistics. However, because of underreporting problems and possible bias (for example with differing rates of reporting by vehicle type), police data should be complemented by hospital data, which are the next most useful source.
- The data from hospital emergency departments, available in some countries, should be monitored regularly and researched to determine if they might shed more light on road casualties.
- The assessment of the severity of injuries should preferably be done by medical professionals, and not by the police officer at the scene of the crash.
- Medical staff should be trained in order to systematically classify (road traffic) injuries using ICD International Classification of Diseases and to assess severities with indices such as the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) or the Maximum Abbreviated Injury (MAIS). This information -- without personal information -- should be made easily available for statistical purposes, policymaking and research.
- Besides police data and hospital data, other data sources are available. These have a limited value on their own, and cannot replace police or hospital data, but can be used to build a more balanced and comprehensive picture, to enrich the main data sources, and as a quality check.
- For linking data, the deterministic method is preferred if a unique personal identifier is available; otherwise the probabilistic method is a good alternative.
- The six assumptions needed to use the capture-recapture method must be considered carefully. Using this method combined with linking police and hospital data may be appropriate to give a fuller picture of road casualties.
- Having an internationally agreed definition of “serious” injuries will help the safety research community to better understand the consequences of road crashes and to monitor progress. Given the existing knowledge and practices, IRTAD proposes to define a ‘seriously injured road casualty’ as a person with injuries assessed at level 3 or more on the Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale i.e. "MAIS3+".
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3