--- category: literaturenote citekey: organizationeuropeanstatusreportroad2009 title: "European status report on road safety: towards safer roads and healthier transport choices" authors: "Organization, World Health; others" year: 2009 date: 2009-00-00 2009 zotero_key: JABR37BB zotero_storage: N8I2NF5W collections: statistika folder: 001_artiklid firstAuthor: "Organization, World Health" status: converted --- ![](_page_0_Picture_0.jpeg) European status report on road safety Towards safer roads and healthier transport choices ![](_page_0_Picture_3.jpeg) # European status report on road safety Towards safer roads and healthier transport choices ![](_page_2_Picture_2.jpeg) #### **Abstract** This report presents the status of road safety in the WHO European Region and provides a baseline assessment of how far 49 countries have come in implementing the recommendations of the World report on road traffi c injury prevention. In the Region, road crashes result annually in 120 000 deaths, 2.4 million injuries and a great economic burden, which may be up to 3% of a country's gross domestic product. Road traffi c injuries are the leading cause of death among people 5–29 years old. Vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists and users of motorized two-wheelers constitute 39% of all road traffi c injury fatalities, with pedestrians being more at risk in the eastern part of the Region. Countries diff er greatly in mortality rates for road traffi c injuries; the average in low- and middle-income countries is twice that in high-income countries. Countries' policy responses in providing road safety for their citizens have diff ered. This report proposes the following areas of action: narrow the gap between countries with the lowest and highest mortality rates; provide better protection for vulnerable road users; develop a well-resourced multisectoral road safety strategy in each country; design and enforce comprehensive legislation; and develop and implement healthier transport policies. In addition, country profi les on the current status of road safety are presented for the 49 participating countries. #### **Keywords** Accidents, traffi c – statistics and numerical data Accidents, traffi c – economics Safety management – organization and administration Wounds and injuries – prevention and control Europe ISBN 978 92 890 4176 8 Suggested citation: European status report on road safety: towards safer roads and healthier transport choices. Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2009. Address requests about publications of the WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe to: Publications WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe Scherfi gsvej 8 DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Alternatively, complete an online request form for documentation, health information, or for permission to quote or translate, on the Regional Offi ce web site (http://www.euro.who.int/ pubrequest). #### **© World Health Organization 2009** All rights reserved. The Regional Offi ce for Europe of the World Health Organization welcomes requests for permission to reproduce or translate its publications, in part or in full. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specifi c companies or of certain manufacturers' products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. Text editing: David Breuer Design and layout: L'IV Com Sàrl, Le-Mont-sur-Lausanne, Switzerland Cover mural: ©Artist, John Sakars; photography of mural: ©Claudia Aubertin-Vedova/Studio Southwest Printed by Servizi Tipografi ci Carlo Colombo, Rome, Italy Made possible through funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies. # Contents | Acknowledgements | v | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Foreword | vi | | Executive summary | vii | | 1. Introduction
1.1 Road traffi c injuries: a health priority
1.2 Rising inequality in the Region
1.3 Road traffi c injuries and other transport-related health effects
1.4 International institutional response
1.5 Why this survey?
1.6 Objectives
1.7 Structure of the report | 1
1
3
4
5
6
7
7 | | 2. Methods | 9 | | 3. Findings
3.1 Great inequality in fatal and non-fatal road traffi c injuries in the Region
3.2 Very many non-fatal injuries
3.3 Vulnerable road users are at risk
3.4 Health information systems need to be improved
3.5 The economic costs of road traffi c injuries
3.6 Lead agency and national strategy on road safety
3.6.1 More countries need a national strategy for road safety
3.6.2 Expenditure on road safety varies greatly, and this expenditure is far less
than the costs of road traffi c injuries
3.7 Legislation on and enforcement of risk factors
3.7.1 Speed control needs to be improved and more widespread
3.7.2 Controlling drink–driving is a priority
3.7.3 Wearing helmets
3.7.4 There is much room for improvement in wearing seat-belts and using child car restraints
3.7.5 Better legislation and enforcement are needed
3.8 Road safety management
3.8.1 Better transport and urban policy to improve mobility and road safety
3.8.2 Other aspects of road safety management | 11
11
13
13
15
16
17
17
19
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
24
28 | | 4. Conclusions
4.1 Key fi ndings
4.2 Key actions | 29
29
31 | | 5. References | 33 | | 6. Country profi les | 35 | | Annexes | | 137 | |-----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Annex 1. | Explanatory notes for Annexes 2–13 | 138 | | Annex 2. | Indicators explored in the questionnaire developed for the Global status report | | | | on road safety | 142 | | Annex 3. | General information, vehicles, road traffi c deaths and proportions of road user deaths | | | | by type and road traffi c injuries for countries in the WHO European Region | 144 | | Annex 4. | Mortality rates for road traffi c injuries per 100 000 population by gross | | | | national income per person in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 146 | | Annex 5. | Sample objectives from national strategies implemented in countries in the | | | | WHO European Region | 147 | | Annex 6. | Estimated economic costs of one death in selected countries | | | | in the WHO European Region | 149 | | Annex 7. | Drinking and driving laws, enforcement and road traffi c deaths attributed | | | | to alcohol in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 150 | | Annex 8. | Seat-belt and child restraint laws, enforcement and wearing rates in countries | | | | in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 152 | | Annex 9. | Speed limit laws and enforcement in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 153 | | Annex 10. | Helmet laws, enforcement and wearing rates in countries | | | | in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 154 | | Annex 11. | Road safety management, strategies and policies in countries | | | | in the WHO European Region | 156 | | Annex 12. | Prehospital post-crash care systems in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | 160 | | Annex 13. | National data coordinators and survey respondents in countries | | | | in the WHO European Region | 161 | # Acknowledgements Many international experts and WHO staff have contributed to developing this report. WHO gratefully acknowledges the contributions made to this report by the following people. Francesco Zambon, Dinesh Sethi and Francesca Racioppi wrote the report. Dinesh Sethi and Francesco Zambon provided coordination for developing it. Francesco Zambon conducted the statistical analysis and compiled country profi les. Francesco Mitis provided comments on drafts and contributed to sections of the report. Manuela Gallitto provided administrative support. Rimma Kuznetsova provided administrative support, contributed to compiling country profi les and statistical annexes and helped in obtaining photographs. Nicoletta Di Tanno helped in obtaining photographs. Maria Charnaya helped with editing drafts and contributed to sections. Luigi Migliorini and Tatiana Kolpakova provided support and commented on drafts. Tamitza Toroyan, Margie Peden and Etienne Krug provided support for the coordination of the project and commented on drafts. Kidist Bartholomeos helped with data processing. Alison Harvey contributed to the country profi les. Meleckidzedeck Khayesi and Matts-Ake Belin commented on drafts. Steven Lauwers helped to obtain photographs. The following external peer reviewers provided very helpful comments: Dinesh Mohan, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India; María Seguí-Gómez, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain; Elizabeth Towner, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom; and Heather Ward, University College London, United Kingdom. Country-level data could not have been obtained without the invaluable support of: the heads and staff of WHO country offi ces; the national data coordinators (Annex 13); all respondents and attendees of the consensus meetings in countries (Annex 13); and government offi cials who cleared the information for inclusion in the report. The report also benefi ted from the contributions of the following people: David Breuer, who edited the report; graphic designers from L'IV Com Sàrl, who produced the design and layout; Tatiana Alekseeva, for information used in Box 9 on *The happy road of childhood*; John Sakars, artist for the mural reproduced on the cover and graciously on loan from Welland Centennial Secondary School, Ontario, Canada; and Claudia Aubertin-Vedova/ Studio Southwest for the photograph of the mural. Finally, the World Health Organization wishes to thank Bloomberg Philanthropies for its generous fi nancial support for the development and publication of this report. # Foreword Road traffi c injuries are a major public health problem in the WHO European Region and cause the premature deaths of some 120 000 people every year. They are the leading cause of death in children and young adults aged 5 to 29 years. In addition to these deaths, about 2.4 million people are estimated to be so seriously injured as to require hospital admission each year. This is a strain on the resources of health systems as they strive to provide quality emergency trauma services while faced with other competing priorities. In addition to the pain and suffering experienced by the families of loved ones, road traffi c injuries cause a substantial economic loss to society: up to 3% of the gross domestic product of any given country. The evidence that road traffi c injuries can be prevented is compelling, which makes the current situation all the more unacceptable. Countries that have invested in road safety for many decades have shown that effective strategies can reduce the size of the loss. Much of the evidence for effective prevention is summarized in the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention* and the accompanying *Preventing road traffi c injury: a public health perspective for Europe*, which were launched on World Health Day 2004. These reports and the accompanying advocacy activities helped to raise global awareness of the problem and called on policy-makers and practitioners to take evidence-based action against this leading cause of death and disability. Further, the contents of these reports informed the methodology used in a WHO global assessment of road safety. The present publication uses a standard survey methodology, allowing policy-makers for the fi rst time to make a thorough assessment of the road safety situation in 49 participating countries. It provides an important baseline for the progress made in implementing the actions proposed in the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention*. It provides both a regional overview and detailed country profi les. It shows that many countries in the European Region use multisectoral strategies that have consistently lowered the mortality from road traffi c injuries. Yet this achievement is uneven across the Region and the higher mortality rates suggest that many low- and middle-income countries need to make a stronger effort to make roads safer for their citizens. The publication also highlights the plight of vulnerable road users, especially pedestrians in the east of the Region and motorized two-wheelers in the south. By providing a baseline assessment of what has been done in countries, this publication aims to mobilize efforts in the whole Region and highlights future actions to fi ll the gaps. These actions consist of both healthier transport policies and multisectoral evidence-based strategies to prevent this leading cause of death and disability. Tackling road safety is an investment in a healthier and more equitable future for our citizens. > Marc Danzon WHO Regional Director for Europe # Executive summary # **Key fi ndings** In 2004, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Bank jointly launched the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention*. The report provided evidence on the magnitude of the burden of road traffi c injuries and on how to tackle road safety and recommended several actions for countries to implement. In 2008, WHO undertook a project to assess the status of road safety globally and to determine whether countries are implementing the recommendations of the *World report on road traffic injury prevention*. The survey used a standardized method with a questionnaire administered to representatives of the health, transport, justice and education sectors, academia and nongovernmental organizations. The project has led to the publication of the *Global status report on road safety*, which provides global results and regional reports from each of the six WHO regions. This publication reports in detail on the results from 49 participating countries in the WHO European Region. The survey has provided numerous key fi ndings for the Region. #### **Large-scale problem** Annually, road crashes result in almost 120 000 fatalities and 2.4 million injuries in the Region. Road traffi c injuries represent the leading cause of death among adolescents and young adults. #### **Great inequality in fatal and non-fatal road traffi c injuries in the Region** Mortality rates for road traffi c injuries differ widely between countries in the Region, with rates being twice as high in low- and middle-income countries as in high-income countries. Mortality rates in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) are up to four times higher than those of the Nordic countries. Trends have been falling in many high-income countries but not in low- and middleincome countries, many of which are in the CIS. #### **Vulnerable road users are at risk** Pedestrians, cyclists and users of motorized two-wheelers constitute 39% of all deaths in road crashes. They are more likely to be more seriously injured. The proportion of pedestrians involved in road crashes is highest in CIS countries. High vehicle speeds and urban design place these road users at increased risk. #### **Costs of road traffi c injuries severely burden countries' economies** The health service costs of treating the people injured and disabled by road crashes are very high as are the costs borne by families, communities and society at large due to forgone production. The economic burden of road crashes is as much as 3% of gross domestic product. #### **National strategies on road safety often fail to set measurable targets** About one third of the countries surveyed do not have a national, multisectoral strategy on road safety. Even the countries that do are not always able to set measurable targets that can be properly monitored and evaluated. #### **Enforcement of laws on vehicle speed, drink–driving and use of seat-belts, child car restraints and helmets is unsatisfactory in many countries** Many countries have inadequate legislation to control speed in urban areas, drink–driving and the use of helmets (for riders of motorized twowheelers), seat-belts and child car restraints. Even well-designed legislation has no effect if it is not properly enforced. In most countries in the Region, the current enforcement of speed control, drink–driving and use of helmets, seatbelts and child car restraints is reported as not being effective enough. #### **Policies on walking and cycling and public transport services are not always factored into strategies on road safety and on transport systems** Only one third of the countries are implementing national policies on both public transport and walking and cycling. Even fewer countries have introduced measures to better manage private car use. This is of concern given the potential ill health associated with physical inactivity and environmental harm. # **Recommendations for action** Based on these fi ndings, the following areas of action are proposed, built on those proposed in the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention*. #### **Inequality in road traffi c injury deaths should be narrowed** More attention needs to be given to road safety throughout the Region. Some highincome countries have shown sustained political commitment and developed innovative strategies and technologies for reducing road traffic deaths and serious injuries. Countries with poorer road safety records need to take up this experience. #### **Vulnerable road users need better protection** Governments need to protect all road users and not neglect the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and riders of motorized two-wheelers. Road safety stakeholders need to work together to implement evidence-based action to guarantee better protection, especially in low- and middle-income countries. #### **More countries need a well-resourced multisectoral road safety body to take forward a strategy for safety** Such a body should involve all stakeholders in developing a multisectoral strategy that clearly designates responsibilities and authority as to who should do what, where and when. #### **Better enactment and enforcement of legislation on road safety could save lives** Governments need to ensure that comprehensive laws cover the main risk factors of speed, drink–driving and use of helmets (for riders of motorized two-wheelers), seat-belts and child car restraints. Enforcement of such legislation needs to be improved. This requires well-publicized enforcement campaigns, perceived certainty of being apprehended and severity and promptness of punishment for violations. Many countries need to put this winning combination in place. #### **Sustainable transport policies present a large untapped opportunity for health and environmental gains** Sustainable transport policies represent an important opportunity for contributing to achieving other public health and environmental goals. More countries could reap the multiple benefits of investing in policies that promote public transport, cycling and walking. Land-use and transport policies that encourage such modes of transport will provide multiple health gains by reducing injuries, decreasing respiratory illness, preventing noncommunicable disease through physical activity and mitigating the negative effects of climate change. Making roads safer for vulnerable road users will help to encourage greater mobility with walking and cycling. One way of achieving this is by implementing transport policies that integrate road safety with environmental and health concerns. The report provides 49 country profi les on road safety that include data collected in the survey and can serve as a tool for assessing the road safety situation and stimulating debate and action nationally and can act as a baseline for future reference, assessment and monitoring. ![](_page_11_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_12_Picture_0.jpeg) # **1.1 Road traffi c injuries: a health priority** Road traffi c injuries are a major public health problem in the 53 countries of the WHO European Region. The annual death toll from road traffi c injury is estimated to be 129 000 according to WHO's Global Burden of Disease project for 2004 (Table 1) *(1)*. In addition, road crashes injure more than 2.4 million people each year *(2)*. The problem is especially severe for people aged 5–29 years, for whom road traffi c injuries are the leading cause of death (Table 1). Males are more likely to die than females from road traffi c injury; they make up three fourths of road traffi c deaths *(3*–*5)*. Underlying these stark statistics but less well described are the many more who suffer a temporary or permanent disability from their injury and the families emotionally devastated by the loss of loved ones. Many people may be driven into poverty by the loss of a family breadwinner or by the prolonged health and social care required for people with disabilities *(6)*. The costs of care and rehabilitation are considerable, and societal costs have been estimated at up to 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) *(7,8)*. Nevertheless, many effective preventive strategies exist, and many European countries are among the safest in the world *(2)*. There is therefore potential to take up the challenge and reduce the burden of road traffi c injuries by applying lessons of good practice. A good startingpoint for this is to understand the baseline situation, which is one purpose of this report. ![](_page_12_Picture_5.jpeg) Table 1. Number of deaths for leading causes by age group in the WHO European Region, 2004 | Rank | 0–4 years | 5–14 years | 15–29 years | 30–44 years | 45–69 years | 70+ years | Total | |------|-------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | 1 | Perinatal causes
87 500 | Road traffi c injuries
4180 | Road traffi c injuries
39 300 | Ischaemic heart
disease
56 900 | Ischaemic heart
disease
679 400 | Ischaemic heart
disease
1 554 600 | Ischaemic heart
disease
2 295 600 | | 2 | Lower respiratory
infections
34 500 | Drowning
2430 | Self-infl icted injuries
29 500 | Self-infl icted injuries
41 000 | Cerebrovascular
disease
314 900 | Cerebrovascular
disease
1 020 200 | Cerebrovascular
disease
1 363 600 | | 3 | Diarrhoeal diseases
32 400 | Lower respiratory
infections
1930 | Violence
14 900 | Poisoning
33 600 | Trachea, bronchus,
lung cancer
190 900 | Chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease
176 300 | Trachea, bronchus,
lung cancer
370 700 | | 4 | Congenital anomalies
25 800 | Leukaemia
1680 | Poisoning
14 100 | Road traffi c injuries
33 200 | Cirrhosis of the liver
112 400 | Trachea, bronchus,
lung cancer
168 900 | Colon and rectum
cancer
238 100 | | 5 | Meningitis
5360 | Congenital anomalies
1390 | HIV/AIDS
7010 | Tuberculosis
28 900 | Colon and rectum
cancer
83 500 | Colon and rectum
cancer
148 300 | Lower respiratory
infections
234 700 | | 6 | Upper respiratory
infections
3000 | Self-infl icted injuries
1280 | Tuberculosis
7000 | Cirrhosis of the liver
27 400 | Breast cancer
75 200 | Lower respiratory
infections
139 300 | Chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease
233 800 | | 7 | Drowning
2470 | Lymphomas, multiple
myeloma
700 | Drowning
6570 | Cerebrovascular
disease
23 000 | Stomach cancer
65 400 | Hypertensive heart
disease
130 700 | Cirrhosis of the liver
184 900 | | 8 | Road traffi c injuries
1740 | Epilepsy
650 | Ischaemic heart
disease
4610 | Violence
22 600 | Self-infl icted injuries
57 500 | Alzheimer and other
types of dementia
128 400 | Hypertensive heart
disease
179 000 | | 9 | HIV/AIDS
1660 | Violence
640 | Cerebrovascular
disease
4380 | HIV/AIDS
13 700 | Chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease
54 600 | Diabetes mellitus
106 700 | Breast cancer
158 400 | | 10 | Endocrine disorders
1650 | Cerebrovascular
disease
590 | Leukaemia
4250 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
10 700 | Poisoning
52 300 | Stomach cancer
82 000 | Diabetes mellitus
155 400 | | 11 | Poisoning
1140 | Endocrine disorders
590 | Cirrhosis of the liver
3800 | Breast cancer
10 300 | Lower respiratory
infections
46 800 | Prostate cancer
77 100 | Stomach cancer
155 100 | | 12 | Fire
1080 | Poisoning
560 | War and confl ict
3700 | Trachea, bronchus,
lung cancer
10 200 | Hypertensive heart
disease
45 100 | Breast cancer
72 500 | Self-infl icted injuries
150 500 | | 13 | Leukaemia
970 | Falls
530 | Falls
3590 | Lower respiratory
infections
9400 | Diabetes mellitus
42 800 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
68 600 | Alzheimer and other
types of dementia
137 400 | | 14 | Hepatitis B
950 | War and confl ict
470 | Drug use disorders
3010 | Drowning
9000 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
39 800 | Nephritis and
nephrosis
53 100 | Road traffi c injuries
129 100 | | 15 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
780 | Upper respiratory
infections
430 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
2740 | Falls
7900 | Pancreas cancer
39 100 | Pancreas cancer
51 600 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
122 900 | | 16 | Epilepsy
730 | Fire
430 | Lower respiratory
infections
2730 | Drug use disorders
7500 | Road traffi c injuries
36 500 | Lymphomas, multiple
myeloma
44 700 | Poisoning
107 000 | | 17 | Violence
690 | Meningitis
390 | Epilepsy
2310 | Stomach cancer
6800 | Tuberculosis
33 600 | Falls
44 600 | Prostate cancer
97 300 | | 18 | Iron-defi ciency
anaemia
680 | Nephritis and
nephrosis
350 | Nephritis and
nephrosis
2200 | Colon and rectum
cancer
5500 | Mouth and oropharynx
cancer
33 300 | Bladder cancer
43 100 | Pancreas cancer
93 300 | | 19 | Falls
660 | Infl ammatory heart
diseases
270 | Congenital anomalies
2120 | Fires
5300 | Lymphomas, multiple
myeloma
27 300 | Cirrhosis of the liver
41 100 | Perinatal causes
87 600 | | 20 | Hepatitis C
560 | Diarrhoeal diseases
260 | Lymphomas, multiple
myeloma
2090 | Alcohol use disorders
5200 | Liver cancer
27 100 | Liver cancer
35 500 | Nephritis and
nephrosis
80 300 | *Source*: The global burden of disease: 2004 update *(1)*. ![](_page_14_Picture_0.jpeg) # **1.2 Rising inequality in the Region** The burden of road traffic injuries is unequal in the Region. Whereas mortality rates from road traffic injuries have declined overall in the Region, this is in stark contrast to the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS1 ), which have the highest rates (Fig. 1). In the CIS, mortality rates peaked in the early 1990s and, after an initial fall, are climbing again. This differs from the European Union (EU), where rates are falling, making the gap even wider *(9,10)*. Even the EU has great inequality, with the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden) having far lower death rates than the Baltic countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) and those of southern Europe. In the Region, the age groups most at risk as pedestrians are children and older people, and young males are most at risk as car occupants or riders of motorized two-wheelers *(2,7,11)*. Socioeconomic determinants are important, and even high-income countries in Europe have described a widening gap, with the children of deprived families at much greater risk than the children of affl uent families *(12,13)*. Exposure to hazardous traffi c situations in unsafe environments and unsafe vehicles and less access to safety equipment and emergency trauma services are some of the factors that put lower-income people at greater risk. Further, many countries in Europe have undergone political and economic transition, and road infrastructure, vehicle safety and regulatory practices have not kept up with motorization *(14)*. In addition, risk factors such as alcohol and speed need to be taken into account *(4)*. 1 CIS countries consisted of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan at the time the data were collected. Fig. 1. Mortality rates from road traffi c injuries per 100 000 population, WHO European Region, CIS and EU, 1980–2006 ![](_page_15_Figure_1.jpeg) Those 27 countries that now make up the EU. *Source*: European Health for All database *(10)*. # **1.3 Road traffi c injuries and other transport-related health effects** Road transport is essential to human and societal development because people and goods need to move and access needs to be provided to jobs, education, health care and other services and amenities. However, it also exposes people to the risk of road traffi c injuries, and the number of deaths due to road traffi c injuries would continue to increase *Photo © Istockphoto* if left unchecked *(15)*. This would add to the burden of other transport-related health effects such as respiratory illness and the ill health related to physical inactivity and climate change. For example, the level of transport-related air pollution is a major public health concern in most countries in the Region, where air pollution contributes to a similar number of deaths to those arising from road traffi c injuries *(16)*. In addition, transport-related emissions of gases that cause climate change may contribute to extreme weather events with harmful effects on human health *(17)*. There are other effects on health, including pervasive annoyance induced by road traffi c noise and constraints on the development of neighbourhood support networks. By discouraging the use of safe cycling and walking for transport, this contributes to cardiovascular disease, diabetes and obesity. These disproportionately affect urban poor people, living in areas with higher levels of pollution and fewer options for safe physical activity *(18*–*20)*. Taken together, these transport-related health effects add to the high burden and cost of road traffi c injuries, strengthening the case for implementing sustainable transport strategies to reduce such illnesses and costs. Arguments for addressing road safety should therefore take into account the additional non-injury health benefi ts such actions would bring (Box 1). Conversely, more sustainable transport strategies that promote walking and cycling need to address the issue of safety for these vulnerable road users *(2)*. As a response to the concern about the environmental and health threats of climate change, speed-reduction policies that aim to reduce greenhouse gases will also make roads safer (Box 2). # **1.4 International institutional response** Road safety has moved up the political agenda in recent years, and intergovernmental bodies have launched several policy initiatives *(23,24)*. The launch of the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention* by WHO and the World Bank on World Health Day 2004 *(4)* refocused attention on the plight of victims of road crashes and proposed a multisectoral and evidencebased approach to preventing road traffi c injury (see below). A companion publication *Preventing road traffi c injury: a public health perspective for Europe (2)* was also released that describes the burden of road traffi c injuries and urges action in the context of transport policies in the WHO European Region. World Health Assembly resolution WHA57.10 on road safety and health calls upon Member States to mobilize public health action to reduce the burden of road traffi c injuries. These actions require a multisectoral response from transport, justice, health, industry and civil society. #### Box 1. Addressing road safety as part of sustainable transport policy The Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme (THE PEP) addresses road safety as a key factor in overall policies on sustainable transport systems. In terms of health effects, this has the additional contribution of promoting transport policies that, in addition to road safety, also work towards reducing emissions of noise and air pollutants and providing conditions that promote walking and cycling. THE PEP promotes strategies developed to improve road safety that also take into account these other health effects to deliver multiple health benefi ts. Such broader approaches are more costeffective investments than those focusing on a single health outcome. For example, maintaining speeds below 30 km/h to reduce death or serious injury saves on both the costs of avoided injuries and also on the costs resulting from ill health due to air pollution, noise and the barrier effect of fear of unsafe roads, which prevents walking and cycling. *Source*: THE PEP – Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme *(21)*. #### Box 2. Speed reduction and transport demand management beyond road safety: opportunities for multiple benefi ts The EU energy and climate package targets a 20% overall reduction in greenhouse gases by 2020 and highlights the need for the transport sector to contribute actively. In the EU, growing transport volumes have raised emissions by 27% between 1990 and 2006 (excluding the international aviation and marine sectors) *(22)*. Reducing speed by enforcing speed limits and using intelligent speed assistance devices can contribute to reducing CO2 emissions and saving lives. The same applies to policies to manage the demand for transport. Interestingly, these measures are increasingly featured in the portfolio of policies considered as part of the strategy to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, noise and air pollutants *(22)*. The United Nations General Assembly has passed several resolutions calling on governments to address the global road safety issue (Box 3). WHO Regional Committee for Europe resolution RC55/R9 on the prevention of injuries provides a public health framework for prevention in the European Region. Further, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, the International Transport Forum and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development all undertake work on road safety. The EU European Road Safety Action Programme *(25)* urges the EU countries to halve road crash fatalities by 2010 compared with 2000 through a combination of measures, including better vehicle safety with both active and passive measures, improving road infrastructure and safer road user behaviour through licensing, regulations and enforcement. At the national level, there have been innovative approaches such as the Zero Vision approach in Sweden (Box 4). # **1.5 Why this survey?** To address the state of global road safety and to evaluate whether Member States have implemented the recommendations of the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)* (Box 5), WHO undertook a project on a global status report on road safety. This survey assesses whether actions proposed in the *World report on road traffic injury prevention* are being implemented in 178 countries. The *Global status report on road safety (5)* was launched on 15 June 2009 in New York. Six regional reports have also ![](_page_17_Picture_3.jpeg) ## Box 3. United Nations General Assembly resolution A/Res/62/244 on improving global road safety The United Nations resolution on improving global road safety in March 2008 reaffi rms the importance of addressing global road safety and invites Member States to participate in developing the *Global status report on road safety (5)*. It also welcomes the offer by the Government of the Russian Federation to host the United Nations Ministerial Summit on Road Safety in Moscow in 2009. The Summit aims to bring together delegations of ministers and representatives working on transport, health, education, safety and traffi c-related law enforcement issues *(23)*. Ministers from all Member States will have an opportunity to discuss progress in implementing the recommendations developed by the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)* and the United Nations General Assembly resolutions on improving global road safety. The Summit will be an opportunity for Member States to exchange information and best practices. Further, if the delegates adopt the proposed Decade of Action, this will prove to be a further catalyst for change. #### Box 4. The Zero Vision approach The Zero Vision envisages a future in which no one is killed or seriously injured on the roads and originated in Sweden. The main tenet of the Zero Vision policy is the belief that human failure is inevitable. It emphasizes the principle that speed and safety are not tradable. This means that policy-makers must do everything within their control to ensure that road crashes do not result in fatality or serious injury. The policy has thus focused on developing road infrastructure design to mitigate the consequences of road crashes and on measures to reduce the transfer of energy on impact, mainly by limiting speed. The approach now has a strong foothold in Sweden's national road safety system and has been adopted by other European countries. The new design of some of the roads allows for greater safety and mobility. Finally, although Zero Vision does place great responsibility on road builders and managers, it still recognizes the importance of other approaches and, among other things, works to improve vehicle safety and legislation. *Source*: Racioppi et al. *(2)*. been developed, and this publication describes the survey and its results in the WHO European Region. This report is primarily intended for European policymakers and practitioners concerned with road safety and mobility from diverse sectors such as health, transport, justice and land use. # **1.6 Objectives** This publication describes the state of road safety in European Member States by using standardized methods. The objectives of the project were: - to assess the status of road safety in European Member States as measured against a core set of road safety indicators; - to defi ne the gaps in road safety nationally and in the WHO European Region; - to help countries identify the key priorities for intervention; - to stimulate road safety activities at a national level; and - to provide a baseline to monitor progress in the future. # **1.7 Structure of the report** This report has two main parts. The fi rst part briefl y describes the key fi ndings in the European Region and their implications. After discussing the methods, key fi ndings of the main report are presented as follows: - data on fatal and non-fatal injuries; - economic costs of road traffic injuries; - lead agency and national strategy on road safety; #### Box 5. Recommendations of the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention* The *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)* calls for a "systems approach" to road safety that examines the component parts of the system (infrastructure, vehicle and road user) in developing strategies for prevention. To help countries achieve progress in road safety, the report provides six universal recommendations. - Identify a lead agency in government to guide the national road traffi c safety effort. - Assess the problem, policies and institutional settings relating to road traffi c injury and the capacity for road traffi c injury prevention in each country. - Prepare a national road safety strategy and plan of action. - Allocate fi nancial and human resources to address the problem. - Implement specifi c actions to prevent road crashes, minimize injuries and their consequences and evaluate the impact of these actions. - Support the development of national capacity and international cooperation. - legislation on and enforcement of risk factors; and - road safety management. These are followed by conclusions and key actions. This publication includes detailed country profi les of road safety for each of the 49 participating countries with some explanatory notes on methods. Each two-page country profi le tabulates data obtained in the survey assessing road safety nationally and sets a baseline for future follow-up. National experts, researchers and policy-makers can use the profi les as a resource for country-specifi c action and studies. Country profi les can be used for international comparison, but there are limitations due to differences in definitions, surveillance, costing and other methods between countries. Annexes 3–12 provide results for each country for most of the variables. ![](_page_19_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_20_Picture_0.jpeg) A self-administered questionnaire was developed using the content of the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)* as a basis for selecting items. An international panel of experts advised on the questionnaire design for the survey and the data collection methods. The questionnaire was used: - to collect data on the burden of injuries, exposure to risk and vehicle and infrastructure standards; - to defi ne the institutional framework for road safety; - to gather information on the economic costs of road traffic injuries; - to record legislation and the enforcement of measures to control some of the main risk factors such as speed, alcohol and safety equipment; - to identify road safety management; and - to describe pre-hospital care. Annex 2 describes the indicators in more detail. Fig. 2 shows the methods for data processing. The health or transport ministries nominated national data coordinators in the 49 responding Member States (92% of the Region's Member States). Each national data coordinator was trained in the standard methods and facilitated a consensus meeting of a multisectoral group of up to eight road safety experts. The methods stipulated that experts be selected from the health, transport and enforcement sectors, and membership by academia and nongovernmental organizations was encouraged. Each respondent was asked to fi ll in the questionnaire before the meeting and then discuss each answer at the consensus meeting so that each country would have one offi cial response. Data collection commenced in March 2008 and was completed in September 2008. The Regional Data Coordinator validated the data in consultation with the national data coordinator, and a fi nal completed questionnaire was agreed on. These data were then used for processing and inclusion in the report. Annex 13 lists the national data coordinators and expert panels. Annex 3 lists the participating countries, together with relevant demographic, economic a n d d e v e l o p m e n t indicators. Fig. 2. Methods of the survey ![](_page_20_Figure_14.jpeg) ![](_page_21_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_22_Picture_0.jpeg) # **3.1 Great inequality in fatal and non-fatal road traffi c injuries in the Region** The study shows that 120 000 people die annually in road crashes in the Region, confirming other estimates *(1)*. The mortality rate from road traffi c injuries in the Region is 13.4 per 100 000 population, lower than the global rate of 18.8 per 100 000 population *(4)*. However, there is great inequality in the Region, as shown by the mortality rates in Fig. 31 (these data have been modelled for some countries to correct for differences in defi nition and completeness). The rate in low- and middle-income countries is 18.7 per 100 000 population, twice as high as that in high-income countries (7.9 per 100 000 population). The Nordic countries have some of the lowest mortality rates in the Region and in the world (average 5.7 per 100 000 population). In contrast, the average mortality rate in CIS countries (21.8 per 100 000 population) is nearly four times higher. Kazakhstan has by far the highest mortality rate in the Region (30.6 per 100 000 population), followed by other CIS countries such as the Russian Federation (25.2 per 100 000 population) and Kyrgyzstan (22.8 per 100 000 population). Among the EU countries, Lithuania and Latvia have the highest mortality rates (22.4 and 17.9 per 100 000 population respectively). Most countries in the western part of the Region have downward trends, as the graphs presenting trend data in the country profiles show. However, such decreasing trends are not consistent among countries in the eastern part of the Region, where mortality rates are increasing or remain unchanged. Men account for 80% of young adult fatalities. The risk among young adults aged 20–24 years is fi ve times greater in Estonia and Lithuania than in Norway. Similarly high mortality rates among young adults are reported in the southern part of the Region, in such countries as Croatia, Greece, Montenegro and Slovenia. The Russian Federation, Ukraine and Kazakhstan make up 23% of the population of the Region but account for 43% of the regional burden of road traffi c fatalities. With its 36 000 victims,2 the Russian Federation has the highest death toll in numbers in the Region. 1 Annex 3 presents the number of fatalities adjusted for the 30-day defi nition of road traffi c death and the modelled mortality rates. Annex 1 presents detailed information on the modelled data. 2 The Russian Federation reported 33 308 victims dying within 7 days of the crash; 35 972 2 The Russian Federation reported 33 308 victims dying within 7 days of the crash; 35 972 is the adjusted number of victims dying within 30 days (see Annex 1). Fig. 3. Mortality rates from road traffi c injuries per 100 000 population, WHO European Regiona,b ![](_page_23_Figure_1.jpeg) Income levels are those defi ned by the World Bank. Modelled mortality rates. Annex 1 presents details on modelling. MKD is the International Organization for Standardization abbreviation for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; this is used in fi gures throughout this publication. # **3.2 Very many non-fatal injuries** Every year 2.4 million people are injured in road crashes in the Region. Thus, for every fatality about 20 people are injured. Comparing this at the country level, the ratio of non-fatal injuries for every fatality ranges from 80 in the United Kingdom to 8 in the Russian Federation and 4 in Ukraine (see Annex 3 and country profiles). This may be due to gross underreporting of non-fatal road traffi c injuries in some countries but also because of wide inconsistencies in how countries defi ne injuries. Some countries defi ne road traffi c injuries as all those requiring treatment in emergency departments, whereas other countries classify injuries as those requiring hospitalization. Despite the large number of non-fatal injuries, little is known about the temporary and permanent consequences of these injuries. Due to the costs of health care, social welfare payments, production loss and the large number of injuries, the costs of non-fatal injuries tend to be higher than the costs of fatalities at the country level. # **3.3 Vulnerable road users are at risk** Vulnerable road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and users of motorized two-wheelers, are at greater risk of serious injury in road crashes because they do not have a protective shell. Fig. 4 shows the distribution of deaths by road user categories for the European Region, the CIS and the EU. For the Region as a whole, vulnerable road users account for 39% of road traffi c deaths. This is slightly less than the global fi gure of 46% *(5)*. The distribution of vulnerable road users within the Region differs notably. In the EU, the largest proportions of victims are motorized two-wheeler riders and cyclists. Greece, Malta, Cyprus, Italy and France have the highest proportions of deaths of motorized two-wheeler users among victims of road crashes, exceeding 1 in 4 deaths (Annex 3). This is partly because of the greater use of motorized twowheelers in these countries, especially in urban areas, and because the licensing age for drivers is less than 18 years *(26,27)*. The CIS has the highest proportion of pedestrian fatalities: 37% of all road deaths. Ukraine, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan have the highest shares of pedestrian victims in the Region (56%, 44% and 43%, respectively). One reason is the fact that urban design in many CIS cities dates back to when motorized traffic was very limited and professional drivers did most driving. Improvements in road infrastructure, driver training and enforcement have failed to adapt to the increase in motorization. The needs of ![](_page_24_Figure_6.jpeg) ![](_page_24_Figure_7.jpeg) vulnerable road users have not yet been properly taken into account. For example, most CIS countries still have urban speed limits of 60 km/h (see section 3.7.1). This finding is reflected somewhat in Fig. 5, showing that the proportion of pedestrians killed increases as the gross national income per person decreases. This is partly explained by greater exposure as pedestrians in low- and middle-income countries, which rely less on car transport, but also because of less investment in infrastructure and other measures promoting pedestrian safety than in high-income countries. Fig. 5. Pedestrians as a proportion of total road traffic deaths, by gross national income per person, WHO European Regiona ![](_page_25_Figure_4.jpeg) \* The International Organization for Standardization acronyms are used in this figure: ALB: Albania; ARM. Armenia; AUT: Austria: AZE: Azerbaijan; BEL: Belgium; BiH: Bosnia and Herzegovina; BLR: Belanus; BUL: Bulgaira; RCP: Coratia; CPP: Opprus; CZH: Ecesh Republic; CPU: Germany; EST: Estonia: FINE Finland; FRA: France; ECO: Georgia: GRE: Greece; HUN: Hungary; ICE: Iceland; IRE: Ireland; ISR: Israel; ITAL: Haly; KAZ: Kazakhstan; KGZ: Kyrgostan; LVA: Latvia; LTU: Lithusnia; MDA: Republic of Moldova; MKO: The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; MLT: Malta; MME: Montenegor; NET: Netherlands; NOR: Norway; POL: Poland; POR: Portugal; ROM: Komania; RUS: Russian Federation; SMR: San Marino; SPA: Spain; SRB: Serbia; SVK: Slovakia; SVN: Slovenia; SWE: Sweden; SWI: Switzerland; TRU: Turkmenistan; TUR: Turkcy; TUK: Tajikistan; UKR: Ukraine; UMK: United Kingdom. Gross national income per person is from World Bank data for 2007 # Key actions to protect vulnerable road users ✓ A maximum urban speed limit of 50 km/h should be set. ✓ Local authorities should be empowered to lower the speed limit in residential areas to 30 km/h. ✓ Police need to strictly enforce speed limits. ✓ Comprehensive laws requiring helmet use for all riders of all motorized two-wheelers need to be passed and enforced. ✓ Town planners and road engineers need to invest in infrastructure such as pedestrian-only zones, traffic-calming measures, upgrading marked pedestrian crossings, pedestrian bridges and underpasses and cycle lanes. # **3.4 Health information systems need to be improved** Although all countries surveyed collect data on road traffi c injuries, the quality of these data varies. Seven countries (14%) do not have readily available basic statistics on the sex and age of victims or trend data on fatalities and cannot provide any additional information besides death. Further, uniformity of terms is limited. For example, 10 of 49 countries apply defi nitions different from the international standard of road crash deaths as those occurring within 30 days, but instead use death at the scene or within 7 days of the crash (Annex 3). Similarly, 10% of deaths in CIS countries are not categorized by road user type. This makes international comparisons diffi cult. Even among countries with good data, there are discrepancies between health sector data from death certifi cation and hospitalization compared with police reports. ![](_page_26_Figure_3.jpeg) # 3.5 The economic costs of road traffic injuries Road traffic deaths and injuries have vast costs. Data are collected using several methods, but 14 of the countries use a similar method.3 This shows that the economic burden per person of road traffic injuries varies greatly across the Region and is usually higher in countries with higher income (Fig. 6). There could, however, still be differences in interpreting definitions. This limits the reliability of comparison between countries. Although these are rough estimates, their greatest value is in comparing within-country costs of road traffic injuries with expenditure on strategies for prevention (see section 3.6.2). The estimated economic burden of road traffic injury ranges from 0.4% to 3.1% of GDP. Some countries also reported estimated costs per death in an attempt to express the cost of a human life in monetary terms (Annex 6). Fig. 6. Costs (in euros) of road traffic deaths and injuries per person, gross output method, selected countries in the WHO European Regiona ![](_page_27_Figure_6.jpeg) <sup>a Data have been adjusted for inflation, applying, where necessary, a proper inflation or discount rate and using 2007 as the base year. Conversion to euros was performed using the exchange rate of 31 July 2008. # Key actions to improve costing More countries in Europe need to conduct national costing studies on road crashes. These should include both direct and indirect costs. Standardized definitions and methods are needed to make data more comprehensible and comparable. 3 Gross output method: the cost components can be divided into the costs of resources consumed because of a crash (properly damage costs, health care costs and administration costs) and costs resulting from a tess of future output (absence from work, long-term disability or death). Economic costs reported by countries were adjusted for inflation using 2007 as a base year and converted into exrs at the exchange rate on 31 July 2008. # **3.6 Lead agency and national strategy on road safety** #### **3.6.1 More countries need a national strategy for road safety** A lead agency on road safety has been proposed as being important for coordinating a multisectoral response *(4)*. Ninety per cent of the countries surveyed have a lead agency (Table 2). Generally, these are either interministerial bodies or operate within a single ministry. In the latter case, almost all the lead agencies operate within the transport ministry, except for CIS countries, where the lead agencies operate within the interior ministry. Only 76% of the countries surveyed have a multisectoral and multidisciplinary strategy on road safety, as recommended by the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)*. One quarter either have no strategy or have a strategy that does not engage other parties. Fewer lowand middle-income countries than highincome countries have a multisectoral strategy or a funded road safety agency (Table 2). Box 6 presents an example from Norway's Ministry of Transport and Communications, which effectively coordinates road safety efforts through interagency activities and joint planning. Setting short- and long-term targets using a measurable indicator helps road safety agencies and bodies in measuring and monitoring the implementation of a strategy. For example, all EU countries have agreed to implement the 50% reduction in road traffi c injury deaths by 2010 compared with 2000 as highlighted in the European Road Safety Action Programme *(25)*. Having such a target has proven to be a useful stimulus for action, and a mid-term review *(29)* concluded that countries needed more concerted action to achieve the reduction in mortality. However, many other countries in the Region do not have easily measurable targets (Annex 5), creating diffi culty in monitoring and evaluating implementation. Further, some national strategies do not have clear budgets indicating how certain activities will be funded. Israel's national strategy *(30)* presents a good example of a budget plan (Box 7). Table 2. Lead agency and national strategy on road safety by country income level | | | Low and | | Total | |------------------------|-------------|------------------|----|-------| | | High income | middle
income | n | % | | Lead agency | | | | | | Interministerial | 7 | 11 | 18 | 37 | | Within government | 13 | 7 | 20 | 41 | | Other | 3 | 3 | 6 | 12 | | No agency | 2 | 3 | 5 | 10 | | Total | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | Agency funded | | | | | | Yes | 22 | 15 | 37 | 85 | | No | 1 | 6 | 7 | 15 | | Countries with agency | 23 | 21 | 44 | 100 | | National strategy | | | | | | Yes, formally approved | 22 | 13 | 35 | 72 | | Yes, not endorsed | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | | Multiple | 2 | 6 | 8 | 16 | | No | 0 | 4 | 4 | 8 | | Total | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | #### Box 6. Lead agency: the example of Norway Norway's Ministry of Transport and Communications has assumed the role of an agency that effectively coordinates and oversees national road safety efforts through a multisectoral, integrated approach. By employing the help of national and local bodies (such as the police, Ministry of Education and Research, Ministry of Health and Care Services, Public Roads Administration, nongovernmental organizations and schools) it has made effi cient use of all available resources. The Liaison Committee for Traffi c Safety and the National Road Safety Forum provide all parties with an opportunity to draw on each other's qualifi cations and experiences through exchange and dissemination of information. To ensure cooperation between various levels of government, the Public Roads Administration has developed a road safety handbook and guidelines to be used by the municipalities. Similarly, the Ministry of Transport and Communications supports nongovernmental organizations, such as the Norwegian Council for Road Safety, in their educational work in schools and kindergartens. Finally, the Public Roads Administration has been developing guidelines requiring safe transport services to be used within the Administration, and private companies can adopt them. *Source*: *Vision, strategy and targets for road traffi c safety in Norway 2006*–*2015* (*28)*. #### Box 7. Cost–benefi t analysis as the basis for road safety measures: the case of Israel Israel's National Road Safety Plan contains a good example of a straightforward fi nancing strategy. Right from the start, the authors of the Plan acknowledge the signifi cance of responsible resource allocation and a detailed budget breakdown to the success of road safety activities. They designate two separate agencies to carry out the proposed activities. The National Road Safety Authority is responsible for implementing and fi nancing all the existing activities and upgrading urban road safety. The Israel National Roads Company is responsible for upgrading the interurban safety infrastructure. The two agencies have separate annual budgets, which are, in turn, broken down and earmarked for specifi c activities. The Authority's budget comes from two sources: the government and the compulsory insurance fee for all vehicles. The latter is said to be offset by the eventual reduction in insurance costs (due to the decrease in road crashes), which will result in reimbursement for drivers. The Israel National Roads Company receives funding from the national budget. A detailed cost–benefi t analysis is provided for each agency's activity and serves to justify the proposed road safety measures. *Source*: *The national road safety plan. Major elements of the plan (30)*. ![](_page_29_Figure_6.jpeg) #### **3.6.2 Expenditure on road safety varies greatly, and this expenditure is far less than the costs of road traffi c injuries** Reported government expenditure on national road safety strategies varies greatly across the Region. Countries in the Region on average spend 8.5 per person on implementing road safety strategies, but this varies widely.41Comparing countries' expenditure on road safety strategies is unreliable unless identical methods have been used. The countries surveyed differed considerably in the methods used. Nevertheless, the expenditure on road safety is much less than the costs incurred from road crashes (Table 3). Cost–benefi t analysis can help to make a case for investing in road safety (Box 8). #### Box 8. Road safety: the use of cost–benefi t analysis in Switzerland An effective approach to advocating for and implementing a road safety strategy is to measure the potential economic benefi ts. The use of cost–benefi t analysis helped policy-makers in assessing the feasibility of Via Sicura, Switzerland's road safety action programme *(31)*. The action programme outlines the costs associated with implementation, their allocation and the eventual savings that would accrue both to the private and public domains. A comprehensive table details the benefi ts of the programme (in the number of lives saved and injuries prevented) and the average road crash cost avoided. It shows that the estimated expenditure is far lower than the expected economic benefi ts. Knowing this allows policy-makers to charge private individuals for some of the costs; these are expected to be offset later by reductions in insurance premiums and thus contribute to the budget for implementing the plan. *Source*: *Via sicura. Federal action programme for greater road safety (31)*. Table 3. Expenditure on implementing national strategies on road safety versus the costs of road crashes in selected countries in the WHO European Regiona | | Expenditure on national strategy per
person (euros) | Costs of road crashes per person
(euros) | |---------|--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | Iceland | 12 | 821 | | Norway | 23 | 770 | | Israel | 15 | 208 | | France | 38 | 194 | | Poland | 17 | 148 | | Estonia | 12 | 113 | | Latvia | 3 | 87 | These calculations are based on the gross output method. The cost components can be divided into the costs of resources consumed because of a crash (property damage costs, health care costs and administration costs) and costs resulting from a loss of future output (absence from work, long-term disability or death). Economic costs reported by countries were adjusted for infl ation using 2007 as a base year and converted into euros at the exchange rate on 31 July 2008. ![](_page_30_Figure_9.jpeg) 4 Government expenditure on national strategies was adjusted for infl ation using 2007 as a base year and converted into euros at the exchange rate on 31 July 2008. # **3.7 Legislation on and enforcement of risk factors** The *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (4)* identifies high speed, drink–driving and disregard for the use of seat-belts, child car restraints and helmets (for riders of motorized twowheelers) as major factors for road traffi c injuries. Legislation is an effective way to discourage risky behaviour and increase road safety. Nevertheless, legislative measures alone are not enough to curb non-compliant behaviour. To be more effective, these measures should be well publicized and consistently enforced. Effective enforcement requires ensuring that the perceived risk of punishment for violations remains high by making the penalties suffi ciently severe and imposing them quickly and efficiently. Table 4 summarizes legislative measures in countries that address these risk factors. Table 4. Legislation on risk factors for road traffi c injuries and its perceived level of enforcement by country income level as classifi ed by the World Bank | | High income
Low and middle income | | | Total | | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|------|------|-------|--| | | n=25 | n=24 | n=49 | % | | | Legislation on speed | | | | | | | Countries with an urban speed limit ≤50 km/h | 24 | 9 | 33 | 67 | | | Countries reporting speed-limit enforcement ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 2 | 6 | 8 | 19a | | | Countries not allowing local authorities to modify national speed limits | 3 | 7 | 10 | 20 | | | Countries with a national urban speed limit ≤50 km/h and that allow local authorities to reduce it | 21 | 9 | 30 | 61 | | | Countries with a national urban speed limit ≤50 km/h and enforcement ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 2 | 2 | 4 | 8 | | | Drink–driving | | | | | | | Countries with national or subnational laws on drink–driving | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | | Countries with a drink–driving law that imposes blood or breath alcohol concentration ≤0.05 g/dl | 22 | 20 | 42 | 86 | | | Countries with no alcohol limit stipulated | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | | | Countries with drink–driving enforcement ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 6 | 9 | 15 | 34a | | | Countries that have lower blood alcohol concentration limits for young or novice drivers | 6 | 5 | 11 | 22 | | | Data available on crashes attributable to alcohol | 20 | 20 | 40 | 82 | | | Helmet use for riders of motorized two-wheelers | | | | | | | Countries with national or subnational laws | 25 | 23 | 48 | 98 | | | Countries with a helmet law that applies to all riders, all road types and all engine types with no
exceptions | 12 | 15 | 27 | 55 | | | Countries with a helmet law applying to all riders and all engines without exceptions and requiring
helmets to meet standards | 8 | 3 | 11 | 22 | | | Countries with the above plus enforcement ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 7 | 0 | 7 | 16a | | | Countries with no data on helmet-wearing rates | 8 | 20 | 28 | 57 | | | Seat-belt use | | | | | | | Countries with national or subnational laws | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | | Countries in which all car occupants are required to use seat-belts | 25 | 19 | 44 | 90 | | | Countries with comprehensive law and enforcement ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 9 | 5 | 14 | 31a | | | Countries with no data on rates of seat-belt use, front seats | 2 | 18 | 20 | 41 | | | Countries with no data on rates of seat-belt use, rear seats | 2 | 20 | 22 | 45 | | | Child car restraints | | | | | | | Countries with legislation on child car restraints | 25 | 17 | 42 | 86 | | | Countries with enforcement of child car restraint law ≥8 (scale of 1 to 10) | 7 | 3 | 10 | 26a | | These percentages are computed on countries where a consensus on the effectiveness of law enforcement was reached. #### **3.7.1 Speed control needs to be improved and more widespread** Controlling speed in densely populated urban environments is a critical factor in reducing mortality among vulnerable road users. In this survey, legislative measures for speed control are considered comprehensive if they limit speed in urban areas to 50 km/h or less and allow local authorities to reduce it. The survey results show that only two thirds of countries in the Region have an urban speed limit ≤50 km/h (Table 4). All CIS countries have an urban speed limit of 60 km/h, except for Uzbekistan, in which the urban speed limit is 70 km/h. In one fi fth of the countries, local authorities are not allowed to modify the speed limit, such as lowering it to calm traffi c around schools or in residential areas. The effectiveness of speed control enforcement was reported as suboptimal in the Region, with only 8% of the countries being satisfi ed with it (>8 on a scale of 1 to 10). This suggests that greater priority needs to be given to changing and enforcing speed control laws to protect all road users. ## **3.7.2 Controlling drink–driving is a priority** Driving under the infl uence of alcohol is an important risk factor for road traffi c injuries and deaths. A blood alcohol concentration of or less than 0.05 g/dl is the recommended limit. The crash risk for young and novice drivers starts to increase substantially at lower blood alcohol concentrations than for more experienced drivers, and a limit of 0.02g/dl is recommended for young drivers. The survey found that, whereas all countries in the Region have legislation that prohibits driving under the infl uence of alcohol, three countries have not set a blood alcohol concentration limit. In Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, enforcing legislation is diffi cult without a legally mandated blood alcohol concentration limit. Four countries still have a legal blood alcohol concentration limit of 0.08 g/dl: Armenia, Ireland, Malta and the United Kingdom. Twenty-one countries (43%) have set the blood alcohol concentration limit for young and novice drivers at ≤0.02 g/dl. Many countries (66%) reported that enforcement was suboptimal (≤7 on a scale of 1 to 10). Many countries (82%) have data on the proportion of injuries or deaths attributable to drink–driving. Although intercountry comparisons cannot be made as different methods are used, these data highlight that drink–driving is a severe hazard in the Region. For example, in Estonia 48% of all road traffi c deaths are attributed to drink–driving (see country profi le and Annex 7). ![](_page_32_Figure_9.jpeg) ![](_page_32_Figure_10.jpeg) # Moving forward #### **3.7.3 Wearing helmets** Wearing helmets protects the brain and face from serious injury if motorized two-wheelers crash and can save life. A comprehensive law on helmet use applies to all riders of all motorized two-wheelers on all roads and irrespective of age, religion or engine size. This survey found that only half the countries in the Region have such a law. Further, only 21 countries (43%) conduct surveys on the use of helmets to monitor implementation. Universal helmet use has been reported as achieved only in Norway and Switzerland; in other countries, such as the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, almost no one is reported to wear a helmet (Annex 10). *Photo © Istockphoto* *Photo © Istockphoto* # Key actions **on wearing helmets** - 4 **All countries should enact a comprehensive law requiring helmet usage for all riders of all ages on all types of motorized two-wheelers.** - 4 **Better enforcement of helmet wearing is needed in many countries.** - 4 **More countries should collect data on helmet wearing to better monitor enforcement.** # Key actions **to improve use of seat-belts and restraints** - 4 **Seat-belt laws should also be compulsory for rear-seat passengers.** - 4 **Better enforcement of seat-belt wearing is needed in most countries.** - 4 **More countries need to enact legislation requiring the use of child car restraints, and enforcement needs to be much improved in most countries.** - 4 **More countries need to conduct surveys on seat-belt usage to monitor enforcement.** #### **3.7.4 There is much room for improvement in wearing seat-belts and using child car restraints** Seat-belt use is the most effective way to reduce the chance of injury or death for both front and rear car occupants. The survey found that all countries in the Region have legislation mandating the use of seat-belts, but 10% have not yet made the use of seat-belts compulsory in rear seats (Table 4). These are low- and middle-income countries. Estimates of seat-belt usage are available for most countries (65%). These range from 98% in France to 30% in Albania for frontseat occupants. Less than one third of countries report seat-belt wearing rates higher than 90% (Annex 8). The rate of seat-belt use among rear-seat passengers is as low as one ninth that among frontseat occupants (Annex 8). Enforcement was reported as suboptimal (≤7 on a scale of 1 to 10) in 71% of countries. Of the CIS countries, only the Russian Federation has data on the use of seatbelts: 33% among front-seat occupants. Using child car restraints is mandatory in all high-income countries, but legislation is lacking in 30% of low- and middleincome countries (Table 4). Even in the countries with legislation on child car restraints, the level of enforcement is considered ineffective in the great majority. Box 9 describes a newspaper published in the Russian Federation that is used as a communication tool specifically dedicated to improving the knowledge of children and their parents on road safety. Such tools are only successful if they are part of a communication campaign that accompanies enforcement. #### Box 9. Tools to communicate with children and carers ![](_page_34_Picture_1.jpeg) The happy road of childhood is a newspaper dedicated to preventing road traffi c injuries among children. The biweekly newspaper is published in the Russian Federation and has a circulation of 30 000 copies. It serves as a creative and accessible tool for targeting a population group that is most vulnerable to road traffi c injuries. The newspaper offers several approaches to educating readers about the problem and protecting children from road traffi c injuries. Parents can receive advice on teaching their children about safety behaviour; teachers are offered tips on how to incorporate road safety education into their curriculum; and most importantly, the newspaper organizes engaging activities for the children themselves. The Ministry of Education and the State Automobile Inspection of the Russian Federation have recommended the newspaper to the regional authorities as an educational tool. *Source*: [The happy road of childhood] [web site] *(32)*. #### **3.7.5 Better legislation and enforcement are needed** In this survey, comprehensive legislation for all five main risk factors was considered as having an urban speed limit ≤50 km/h (and with local authorities authorized to modify this), a blood alcohol concentration while driving of ≤0.05 g/dl, compulsory helmet use for all riders of all motorized two-wheelers on any road and compulsory seat-belt or child car restraint use for all occupants. The great majority of countries (86%) have legislation on speed limits, drink– driving and use of seat-belts, child restraints and helmets. However, less than one third have comprehensive laws that control all fi ve risk factors together. Further, only three countries reported that legislation on all fi ve issues is being effectively enforced (≥8 on a scale of 1 to 10). ![](_page_34_Figure_8.jpeg) # **3.8 Road safety management** #### **3.8.1 Better transport and urban policy to improve mobility and road safety** Government policies on transport and fi scal matters determine the modes of transport people use and therefore infl uence exposure to different types of risk as well as environmental damage. For example, policies can encourage non-motorized modes of transport by investing in safe bicycling and pedestrian facilities (such as bicycle lanes, foot paths, pedestrianized areas and street crossings), discouraging the use of private cars (such as by introducing congestion charges and increased fuel prices as disincentives) and investing in public transport. This survey found that car ownership in the Region is high, with an average of 3.4 private cars for every 10 people. It ranges from more than 6 cars per 10 people in countries such as Iceland, Italy and Malta to less than 1 per 10 people in countries such as Albania, Azerbaijan and Tajikistan, suggesting that dependence on private cars varies widely (Fig. 7). Car ownership is correlated with gross national income. ![](_page_35_Picture_5.jpeg) Fig. 7. Passenger car ownership per 1000 population, WHO European Region, 2008 or most recent year availablea ![](_page_36_Figure_1.jpeg) Income levels are those defi ned by the World Bank. The Czech Republic, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom reported data for 2006. Estonia, France, Georgia, Italy, Kazakhstan, Romania, Turkey and Turkmenistan reported data for 2008. All other countries in the fi gure reported data for 2007. The fi gure for the European Region is an average. Only 41% of countries have national policies on walking and/or cycling (Fig. 8) In some countries the municipalities are responsible for these. Among the countries that have national policies on walking and/or cycling, the most frequently implemented measures are bicycle lanes and traffi c-calming interventions (Fig. 9). A good example of this is Finland, where active government intervention has successfully achieved safer conditions for pedestrians and cyclists (Box 10). Nearly two thirds of countries have national policies promoting investment in public transport. A large proportion of countries have subsidized pricing of public transport services (94%) and investment in improving the frequency and coverage of public transport services (71%). However, only a quarter of respondents have policies with disincentives aimed at discouraging private car use. An example of such a policy is the London congestion charge (Box 11), which has reduced road traffi c but has also encouraged cycling, public transport use and walking. Fig. 8. Countries with policies on walking and/or cycling and on public transporta ![](_page_37_Figure_3.jpeg) Fig. 9. Policies to promote walking and/or cycling and public transport ![](_page_37_Figure_5.jpeg) The proportions are based on a total of 20 countries. The proportions are based on a total of 31 countries. Policies to promote public transport among countries with national policies on public transportb ![](_page_37_Figure_8.jpeg) ![](_page_38_Picture_1.jpeg) #### Box 10. Protecting pedestrians and cyclists in Finland Providing safer conditions for pedestrians and cyclists is an integral part of ensuring the sustainability of Finland's road safety management plan (33). The measures proposed are ambitious but realistic and have made dramatic improvement. These include: decreasing the speed limit in busy pedestrian areas to 30 km/h, developing road design features to curb traffic speed, making road signs and markings more understandable for motorists, creating more pedestrian-friendly environments, designating and improving pedestrian, cyclist and school routes, pursuing integrated land-use planning to efficiently reconcile busy urban areas and heavy-traffic networks, developing educational campaigns for children and fostering productive cooperation between local authorities and the Finnish Road Administration to ensure that these actions are taken. Provisional evaluation of the programme shows very promising results. ## Box 11. Congestion charge: a disincentive for car use in London The London congestion charge was introduced in 2003. Cars are charged to enter a zone in the city centre (34). There has also been investment to improve public transport and road infrastructure generally, partly funded by revenue raised from the charge. The charge has resulted in reduced motorized traffic in and around the charging zone. It has also increased cycle journeys by 20%, reduced road crashes by 7% and improved air quality. There has also been an increase in walking as a result of the increased number of journeys in public transport and an increase in the number of journeys on foot. This simple intervention has had beneficial effects on public health, and the overall benefits have outweighed the costs. Other cities are introducing similar measures elsewhere in the Region, such as Manchester, Milan and Stockholm. # 3.8.2 Other aspects of road safety management As emphasized in the World report on road traffic injury prevention (4), road safety audits are key in identifying and reducing the potential of the road network to lead to road crashes. Similarly, vehicle safety checks are also important. Most countries in the Region have periodic inspections to ensure that motor vehicles fulfil minimum safety standards and to check for the installation of seat-belts (Table 5). These checks are lacking on motorized two-wheelers in 9 of the 25 high-income countries. Less than two thirds of the countries perform regular road safety audits on either new or existing road projects. Another aspect of road and vehicle management relates to vehicle insurance systems. Great progress has been made in this, and Armenia, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan are the only countries in the Region that do not have compulsory vehicle insurance. Table 5. Road safety management and policies by country income | | High income | Low and middle | То | tal | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|----------------|------|-----| | | | income | n=49 | % | | Countries performing formal road safety audits on new and existing road | ads | | | | | Yes | 9 | 22 | 31 | 63 | | No | 16 | 2 | 18 | 37 | | Total | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | Countries with a compulsory vehicle insurance system | | | | | | Yes | 25 | 21 | 46 | 94 | | No No | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6 | | Total | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | Countries with car manufacturers in the country | | | | | | Yes | 16 | 10 | 26 | 53 | | Standard on fuel consumption | 7 | 6 | 13 | 50 | | Seat-belt installation required (all seats) | 15 | 8 | 23 | 88 | | No | 9 | 14 | 23 | 47 | | Total | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | Countries with periodic vehicle inspections for: | | | | | | Motorcars | 25 | 23 | 48 | 98 | | Motorized two-wheelers | 16 | 23 | 39 | 80 | | Minibuses, pick-up trucks, vans | 25 | 23 | 48 | 98 | | Lorries | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | | Buses | 25 | 24 | 49 | 100 | # Key actions to improve road safety management More countries need to check for vehicle safety in motorized two-wheelers. More attention needs to be paid to road safety audits. Compulsory vehicle insurance needs to be implemented in the countries that do not yet have it. ![](_page_40_Picture_0.jpeg) This survey is the fi rst comprehensive assessment of policies and practices in road safety across the WHO European Region. Responses from national data coordinators in 49 of the 53 Member States have been collated. These show great disparities in the Region in the scale of the problem and that governments could do much more to improve road safety. The survey encouraged intersectoral work because respondents from different sectors came together and reached consensus for their country response. For some countries, this occurred for the fi rst time. Regular assessments such as this will help governments and intergovernmental bodies in measuring progress towards fulfi lling the goal of improving road safety in the Region. This survey thus represents an important baseline of data collated using standardized methods involving different sectors and can be used for future comparisons. Some limitations of the survey methods need to be considered, such as differences in interpretation of the terms used in various countries, which may limit the reliability of comparisons between countries. Self-administered questionnaires may be susceptible to subjectivity and bias, although this was minimized by using a consensus panel in each country. Further, the requirement for national-level data may limit capturing some of the actions enacted locally, especially those related to regulatory and enforcement practices. In addition, this survey did not collect exposure data. Despite these minor limitations, the survey has led to some important fi ndings relevant to policy-makers and practitioners concerned with reducing the burden of road traffi c injuries. These are summarized below. # **4.1 Key fi ndings** This survey has shown that road traffi c injuries cause 120 000 deaths and 2.4 million injuries annually in the Region, confi rming data from other sources *(1)*. Many of these deaths and injuries can be prevented. Despite the great achievements of some countries in the Region, others continue to have staggeringly high mortality rates from road traffi c injuries, and some countries have an upward trend. A systems approach, strong coordination among stakeholders, clearly outlined responsibilities, accountability and effective law enforcement are all key factors present in countries that show the best performance in road safety management. The results that this survey has produced can be translated into some key fi ndings and areas for action. #### **1. Road traffi c injuries remain a major problem, and the vast disparities between countries need to be addressed** Road traffi c injuries are a public health threat throughout the Region and the leading cause of death among people aged 5–29 years. Mortality rates for road traffi c injuries differ widely between countries, with rates being twice as high in low- and middle-income countries as in high-income countries in the Region. Mortality rates in the CIS countries are up to 4 times higher than those in the Nordic countries. Trends have been falling in many high-income countries but not in low- and middle-income countries, many of which are in the CIS. #### **2. Vulnerable road users account for a large proportion of road traffi c injuries** Pedestrians, cyclists and riders of motorized two-wheelers constitute 39% of all road traffi c deaths in the WHO European Region. They are more likely to be more seriously injured. The proportion of pedestrians involved in road crashes is highest in the CIS countries. Rapid road traffi c and urban design put these road users at increased risk. ![](_page_41_Picture_4.jpeg) #### **3. Some countries have inadequate information systems to measure the scale and costs of road traffi c injuries** Fourteen per cent of the countries in the WHO European Region do not have readily available basic statistics on road traffi c injuries. Many more do not collect information according to standard defi nitions. Reliable statistics are essential for assessing the scale of the problem, targeting those at risk and monitoring the implementation of national road safety strategies and achievement of targets. Methods for costing studies, when these have been done, vary considerably. #### **4. Institutional frameworks for road safety are weak in many countries** Many countries do not have a multisectoral body in charge of road safety (10%) or have one but this is not funded to conduct its duties (15%). About one third of the countries do not have a national, multisectoral strategy on road safety. Not all countries have measurable targets that can be properly monitored. #### **5. The legislative framework and enforcement are weak for important risk factors** Many countries have inadequate legislation to control speed in urban areas, drink–driving and use of helmets, seat-belts and child car restraints. Even well-designed legislation can have no effect if it is not properly enforced. In most countries in the Region, the current enforcement of laws on speed control, drink–driving and use of helmets, seatbelts and child car restraints is reported as not being effective enough. #### **6. Many countries can gain from investment in sustainable and healthy transport policies** Most countries subsidize public transport, but only 63% have a national policy encouraging investment and 41% have a national policy to promote cycling and/or walking. Moreover, only one quarter have measures to manage demand for private car use. Land-use and transport policies that encourage public transport, cycling and walking will provide multiple health gains by reducing injuries and emissions of greenhouse gases, air pollution and noise and by mitigating the negative effects of climate change, as highlighted by the Amsterdam Declaration *(35)*. Making roads safer for vulnerable road users through multisectoral stakeholder involvement and nongovernmental organizations will help ensure greater mobility by walking and cycling. # **4.2 Key actions** #### **1. Inequality in road traffi c injury deaths should be reduced** More attention needs to be given to road safety throughout the Region. Some highincome countries have shown sustained political commitment and developed innovative strategies and technologies for reducing road traffic deaths and serious injuries. Countries with poorer road safety records need to take up this experience. #### **2. Vulnerable road users need better protection** Governments need to protect all road users and not neglect the needs of the most vulnerable ones. Road safety stakeholders need to work together to implement evidence-based action to guarantee better protection, especially in low- and middle-income countries. #### **3. More countries need a multisectoral road safety body that is well resourced to take forward a strategy for safety** Such a body should involve all stakeholders in developing a multisectoral strategy that should clearly designate responsibilities and authority as to who should do what, where and when. #### **4. Better enactment and enforcement of legislation on road safety could save lives** Governments need to ensure that comprehensive laws cover the main risk factors of speed, drink–driving and use of helmets, seat-belts and child car restraints. Enforcement of such legislation needs to be improved. This requires wellpublicized enforcement campaigns, perceived certainty of being apprehended and making the penalties sufficiently severe and imposing them quickly and effi ciently. Many countries need to put this winning combination in place. #### **5. Sustainable transport policies present a large untapped opportunity for health and environmental gains** This represents an important opportunity for contributing to the achievement of other public health and environmental goals. More countries could reap the multiple benefi ts of investing in policies that promote public transport, cycling and walking. Land-use and transport policies that encourage such modes of travel will provide multiple health gains by reducing injuries, decreasing respiratory illness, preventing noncommunicable disease through physical activity and mitigating the negative effects of climate change. Making roads safer for vulnerable road users will help to encourage greater mobility with walking and cycling. Transport policies that integrate road safety with environmental and health concerns are one way of achieving this. ![](_page_43_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_44_Picture_0.jpeg) - 1. *The global burden of disease: 2004 update.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2008 (http://www.who. int/healthinfo/global\_burden\_disease/GBD\_report\_2004update\_AnnexA.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 2. Racioppi F et al. *Preventing road traffi c injury: a public health perspective for Europe.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2004 (http://www.euro.who.int/InformationSources/Publications/ Catalogue/20041119\_2, accessed 23 July 2009). - 3. Peden M et al., eds. *World report on child injury prevention.* Geneva, World Health Organization and UNICEF, 2008 (http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/child/injury/world\_report/en, accessed 23 July 2009). - 4. Peden M et al., eds. *World report on road traffi c injury prevention.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004 (http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/publications/road\_traffi c/world\_report/en/index.html, accessed 23 July 2009). - 5. *Global status report on road safety.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2009 (http://www.who.int/violence\_ injury\_prevention/road\_safety–status/2009/en/index.html, accessed 23 July 2009). - 6. *Faces behind the fi gures. Voices of road traffi c crash victims and their families.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2007 (http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention /road\_traffi c/activities/faces/en, accessed 23 July 2009). - 7. Sethi D et al. *European report on child injury prevention.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2008 (http://www.euro.who.int/violenceinjury/injuries/20081205\_2, accessed 23 July 2009). - 8. Jacobs G, Thomas AA, Astrop A. *Estimating global road fatalities.* Crowthorne, Transport Research Laboratory, 2000 (TRL report 445; http://www.trasnport-links.org/transport\_links/fi learea/publications/1\_329\_TRL445. pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 9. Eksler V, Lassarre S, Thomas I. Regional analysis of road mortality in Europe. *Public Health*, 2008, 122:826– 837. - 10. European Health for All database [online database]. Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2004 (http://www.euro.who.int/hfadb, accessed 23 July 2009). - 11. Sethi D, Racioppi F, Mitis F. *Youth and road safety in Europe.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2007 (http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E90142.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 12. Lafl amme L et al. *Addressing the socioeconomic safety divide: a policy briefi ng.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2009 (http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E92197.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 13. Edwards P et al. Deaths from injury in children and employment status in family: analysis of trends in class specifi c death rates. *British Medical Journal*, 2006, 333:119. - 14. Sethi D et al. Reducing inequalities from injuries in Europe. *Lancet*, 2006, 368:2243–2250. - 15. Towner E, Towner J. The hazards of daily life: an historical perspective on adult unintentional injuries. *Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health*, 2008, 62:952–956. - 16. Kunzli N et al. Public-health impact of outdoor and traffi c-related air pollution: a European assessment. *Lancet*, 2000, 356:795–801. - 17. Roberts I, Hillman M. Climate change: the implications for policy on injury control and health promotion. *Injury Prevention*, 2005, 11:326–329. - 18. WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe and United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. *Ten years' work towards sustainable and healthy transport in Europe: key achievements and the way forward.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe and Geneva, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2009 (http://www.euro.who.int/Document/mediacentre/FS\_healthy\_transport.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 19. *Climate for a transport change. TERM 2007: indicators tracking transport and environment in the European Union.* Copenhagen, European Environment Agency, 2008 (EEA Report, 1/2008). - 20. *EMEP/CORINAIR emission inventory guidebook 2006*. Copenhagen, European Environment Agency, 2006 (EEA Technical Report, No. 11/2006). - 21. THE PEP Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme [web site]. Geneva, Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme, 2009 (http://www.unece.org/thepep/en/welcome.htm, accessed 23 July 2009). - 22. *Transport at a crossroads. TERM 2008: indicators tracking transport and environment in the European Union.* Copenhagen, European Environment Agency, 2009 (EEA Report No 3/2009; http://www.eea.europa.eu/ publications/transport-at-a-crossroads, accessed 23 July 2009). - 23. *Global road safety crisis.* New York, United Nations General Assembly, 2003 (http://www.who.int/violence\_ injury\_prevention/media/en/un\_general\_assembly.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 24. *Global road safety crisis.* New York, United Nations General Assembly, 2003 (Resolution 57/309; http:// www.unece.org/trans/roadsafe/docs/GA\_R\_57-309e.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 25. *European Road Safety Action Programme. Halving the number of road accident victims in the European Union by 2010: a shared responsibility.* Brussels, European Commission, 2003 (COM(2003)311 fi nal). - 26. Sethi D et al. *Progress in preventing injuries in the WHO European Region.* Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2008 (http://www.euro.who.int/InformationSources/Publications/Catalogue/20080912\_1, accessed 23 July 2009). - 27. *Annual statistical report 2008.* Brussels, European Road Safety Observatory, 2008 (http://www.erso.eu/ safetynet/fi xed/WP1/2008/SafetyNet%20Annual%20Statistical%20Report%202008.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 28. *Vision, strategy and targets for road traffi c safety in Norway 2006–2015.* Oslo, Norwegian Public Roads Administration, 2006. - 29. *European Road Safety Action Programme mid-term review.* Brussels, European Commission, 2006 (COM(2006)74 fi nal). - 30. *The national road safety plan. Major elements of the plan.* Tel Aviv, Committee for the Preparation of a National, Multi-year Road Safety Plan, 2005. - 31. *Via sicura. Federal action programme for greater road safety.* Berne, Federal Roads Offi ce, Switzerland, 2005. - 32. [The happy road of childhood] [web site]. Moscow, Department of Road Safety, Ministry of Internal Affairs, 2009 (http://www.dddgazeta.ru, accessed 23 July 2009). - 33. *Transport policy guidelines and transport network investment and fi nancing programme until 2020. Government transport policy report to Parliament, 2008.* Helsinki, Ministry of Transport and Communication, Finland, 2008. - 34. Evans R. *Central London Congestion Charging Scheme: ex-post evaluation of the quantifi ed impacts of the original scheme. Prepared by Reg Evans, for Congestion Charging Modelling and Evaluation Team.* London, Transport for London, 2007. - 35. *Amsterdam Declaration. Making THE link: transport choices for our health, environment and prosperity.* Geneva, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and Copenhagen, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe, 2009 (http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E92356.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). ![](_page_46_Picture_0.jpeg) # **Explanatory notes** #### **Background** The country profi les in this section of the report present selected information about road safety as reported by each of the 49 participating countries. Annexes 3–13 present additional national data. The country survey tools are available at: http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/road\_traffi c/road\_safety\_status/2009. ## **Variation in methods** Forty-nine countries participated in the *European status report on road safety* (Annex 13). Most countries followed the standardized method (Annex 1), but the national data coordinators (Annex 13) in Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan completed the questionnaire without any consensus meeting. In Germany the questionnaire was completed by the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). Population data are from the United Nations Population Division and refer to 2007. Income data, Human Development Index and CO2 emissions per person per year are from the World Bank for the latest year available (2007 for income, 2006 for Human Development Index and 2004 for CO2 emissions per person per year). Life expectancy and median age are from the WHO Statistical Information System (WHOSIS) for 2006. Car ownership per 1000 population is calculated as: (the number of cars the country reported in the survey divided by the total population) times 1000. #### **Terms used** The following terms and issues should be considered when reviewing the individual country profi les. - The questionnaire asked for information on several topics, with follow-up questions exploring each topic in further detail. For many topics, respondents were asked to skip follow-up questions depending on their answer to the top-level question. Consequently, the country profi les do not report information from follow-up questions if these should have been skipped. - Road classifi cations (especially the defi nitions of an urban road, a rural road and a highway) vary greatly from country to country. Respondents were asked to report on the speed limits of different kinds of road according to the defi nitions used in the country concerned. - Respondents were asked, as individuals, to rate the effectiveness of enforcement of various elements of national road safety legislation based on their professional opinion or perception. A scale of 0 to 10 was used, where 0 was "not effective" and 10 was "highly effective". The group of respondents then tried to reach consensus on an enforcement score. These scores are therefore subjective and should be seen only as indicating how enforcement is perceived in the country. Many respondents expressed diffi culty in assessing enforcement at the national level since it often varies from region to region and the intensity of enforcement may vary. - Blood alcohol concentration limits refer to the level above which a driver may be punished by law. - If respondents provided explanatory information on rates of helmet wearing and/or seat-belt use for instance, describing methods or geographical coverage – this information is reported in footnotes. - A motorcycle helmet law is assessed as applying to all riders if the law requires drivers and passengers (both adults and children) to wear a helmet. Exceptions to these laws based on religion, health conditions or other reasons are indicated in a footnote. - Respondents were asked to report on vehicle standards required for car manufacturers or assemblers in the country. Therefore, no information is included on vehicle standards for countries in which manufacture or assembly do not take place. Some countries apply stringent standards to imported vehicles, but this survey did not collect data on such standards. #### **Data presentation** Country profi les contain data on road traffi c deaths and non-fatal injuries as reported by countries. - Data from different countries are not necessarily comparable, as different defi nitions and time frames have been used. - Due to space constraints in footnotes, the data source has been summarized as police, transport or health if the data are from the interior ministry, transport ministry or health ministry, respectively. In the charts presenting data on deaths by road user category, proportions may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Some countries classify road traffi c deaths according to the vehicle or road user "at fault" rather than according to who died or use categories different from those requested in the questionnaire. In these countries, deaths among vulnerable road users are even more likely to be underreported. The standard colour coding of the pie charts used to represent the road user categories requested in the questionnaire is shown below. Non-standard colours represent additional categories. - Drivers of four-wheeled vehicles - Passengers of four-wheeled vehicles - Occupants (drivers or passengers) of four-wheeled vehicles - Riders (drivers or passengers) of motorized two- or three-wheelers - Cyclists - Pedestrians - Other - Unspecifi ed Age-specifi c mortality rates were computed according to the age categories provided by the country. Many country profi les therefore present age categories that are not directly comparable. Age-specifi c mortality rates for Tajikistan and Turkey are not reported due to underreporting (see the explanatory notes to the statistical annexes). Trend graphs are shown either as road traffi c death rates per 100 000 population (on a yellow background) or as an absolute number of road traffi c deaths (on a blue background), depending on which fi gures the country supplied. Due to space constraints, an arbitrary starting-point of 1970 was applied for the few countries that provided many decades of trend data. If the primary source of information for both the pie and trend graphs was not stipulated, the source has been reported as "country questionnaire". Information about the number of vehicles in the country includes only registered vehicles and the proportions of various types of such vehicles. These proportions may not add up to 100% due to rounding. In some countries, respondents noted that much of the vehicle fl eet may not be registered. # **Albania** Population: 3.19 million (2007) Median age: 29 years Life expectancy at birth: 71 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 3290 Rank: 40 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.807 Rank: 35 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: d 74.5 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 1.2 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | | | | |--------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--|--|--|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Committee on Road Safety | | | | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | | | | Funded in national budget | No | | | | | | National road safety strategy | No | | | | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | | | | | Key data | | |------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 384ª (77% males, 23% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road trainjuries (2007) | affic 1344 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 5.2%⁵ | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 30% d | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year) | ) NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or b | oth NA | | Methods used | NA | - ° Police data, defined as died at the crash scene. - Police data. 2007, Traffic Police Directorate, Ministry of the Interior. 1996, Citizen Society of Road Safety, data from pilot cities. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_49_Figure_19.jpeg) ![](_page_49_Figure_20.jpeg) Source: Traffic Police Directorate, Ministry of the Interior #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_49_Figure_23.jpeg) Source: 2006, Ministry of the Interior #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_49_Figure_26.jpeg) Source: 2006, Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Telecommunications ![](_page_50_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 349 646 | | Cars | 68% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 7% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 8% | | Lorries | 12% | | Buses | 5% | *Source*: Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Telecommunications | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Subnational number
(2253364) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Maksim Bozo, Ministry of Health Respondents: Fatos Olldashi, University Military Hospital, Tirana; Maksim Tasho, Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Telecommunications; Demir Osmani, Citizen Society of Road Safety; Luri Balla, General State Police Directorate; Gentiana Qirjako, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tirana # **Armenia** Population: **3.00 million** Median age: **32** years Life expectancy at birth: **69** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 2640** Rank: **41** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.777** Rank: **41** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **95.9** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **1.2** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Lead agency: Road Police of the Police of the Republic of Armenia | | | Status of the agency | Directly under the
Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | No | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 371a
(75% males, 25% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 2720b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 6.1%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | Police data, no specifi ed time period. Police data. ![](_page_51_Figure_11.jpeg) ![](_page_51_Figure_12.jpeg) Source: Road Police of the Police of the Republic of Armenia ![](_page_51_Figure_14.jpeg) ![](_page_51_Figure_15.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Department of Statistics of Transportation and Communication of National Statistical Service #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_51_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Road Police of the Police of the Republic of Armenia 2007, Road Police of the Police of the Republic of Armenia. ![](_page_52_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | No | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |---------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 366 836 | | Cars | 79% | | Buses | 7% | | Other | 15% | *Source*: Road Police of the Police of the Republic of Armenia | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (103) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Lilit Avetisyan, State Hygiene and Anitiepidemic Inspectorate of Ministry of Health Respondents: Ella Safaryan, Health Care Department Ministry of Health; Grigory Torosyan, National Statistical Service; Rubik Navoyan, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Vardan Petrosyan, Ministry of Jurisdiction; Vahe Petrosyan, Police of the Republic of Armenia; Mariam Gukasyan, State Hygiene and Anitiepidemic Inspectorate of Ministry of Health ### **Austria** Population: 8.36 million (2007) Median age: 40 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 42 700 Rank: 9 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.951 Rank: 9 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 507.5 CO, emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 8.5 - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road s | afety | |-------------------------------------------|------------| | Lead agency: Austrian Road Safety Council | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | No | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_53_Figure_13.jpeg) - · Statistics Austria, defined as died within 30 days of the accident. - Statistics Austria - 2007, Statistics Austria. - d 2007, Austrian Road Safety Board survey. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_53_Figure_19.jpeg) Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs, Statistics Austria ![](_page_53_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: 2007, Road Accidents Statistics 2007, Austrian Road Safety Board #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_53_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_54_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Exceptions: constitutional impossibility and situations like parking. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 5 796 973 | | Cars | 73% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 11% | | Lorries | 14% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 2% | *Source*: Statistics Austria | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (144) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Federal Ministry of Health, Family and Youth National data coordinator: Rupert Kisser, Austrian Road Safety Board Respondents: Guenter Breyer, Federal Ministry of Traffi c, Innovation and Technology; Martin Germ, Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs; Fritz Wagner, Federal Ministry of Health, Family and Youth; Martin Vergeiner, Austrian Road Safety Board; Thomas Fessl, Austrian Road Safety Board # **Azerbaijan** Population: **8.47 million (2007)** Median age: **28** years Life expectancy at birth: **64** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 2550** Rank: **42** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.758** Rank: **43** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **71.7** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **3.8** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|--------------| | Lead agency: State Road Police | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2007)) | 3.16 million | ![](_page_55_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 7 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, State Road Police. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_55_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Head Department of State Road Police ![](_page_55_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Head Department of State Road Police ![](_page_55_Figure_22.jpeg) ![](_page_56_Picture_0.jpeg) | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | No | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 784 018 | | Cars | 77% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | <1% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 2% | | Lorries | 16% | | Buses | 4% | | Non-motorized vehicles | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: State Road Police | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|---------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(103) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Rustam Talishinskiy, Traumatology and Orthopaedics Institute Respondents: Hikmet Ibishov, Ministry of Justice; Ali Aliyarov, Ministry of Transport; Anar Orujov, State Statistical Committee; Rustam Humbetov, Ministry of Internal Affairs; Mamed Jafarov, Public Health; Arif Mirzoev, Public Health # **Belarus** Population: **9.69 million (2007)** Median age: **38** years Life expectancy at birth: **69** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 4220** Rank: **37** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.817** Rank: **33** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **241.7** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **6.6** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Standing Committee by Council of Ministers of Republic of
Belarus, Ensuring Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | No | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | ![](_page_57_Figure_13.jpeg) ![](_page_57_Figure_14.jpeg) - Ministry of Home Affairs data. - 2007, Ministry of Home Affairs. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_57_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Ministry of Home Affairs ![](_page_57_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_57_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Ministry of Home Affairs ![](_page_58_Picture_0.jpeg) | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | |---------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | Local authorities may set lower limits | No | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | No information | | Highways and motorways | 90 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | Yes | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | No | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | no information | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 3 147 625 | | Cars | 74% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 12% | | Lorries | 12% | | Buses | 1% | *Source*: Ministry of Home Affairs | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (103) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Ivan Pikirenia, Ministry of Health Respondents: Pavel Bozhanov, Ministry of Transport and Services; Sergey Zarecky, Republican Theoretical and Practical Centre of Traumatology and Orthopaedics; Andrej Gusakov, Public Service of Medical Legal Expertises; Tatiana Goriainova, Ministry of Statistics and Analysis; Anatoly Sushko, Ministry of Home Affairs # **Belgium** Population: **10.46 million (2007)** Median age: **41** years Life expectancy at birth: **79** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 40 710** Rank: **11** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.948** Rank: **11** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **482.8** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **9.7** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |---------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Committee for Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 94.00 milliona | | Figure indicates a supplementary allocation to enforcement. | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 1067a
(80% males, 20% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 65 850b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | No information | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 79%c | | Rear-seat occupants | 46%d | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | - Statistics Belgium, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Statistics Belgium estimate. - 2007, Belgian Road Safety Institute observational study. - 2006, Belgian Road Safety Institute self-report survey. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_59_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: Country questionnaire ![](_page_59_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Statistics Belgium ![](_page_59_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_60_Picture_0.jpeg) | Applies to all engine types | Yes | |----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Exception to the legislation | Yesb | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | a The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Exceptions: post delivery at short distances. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 6 362 161 | | Cars | 79% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 6% | | Buses | <1% | | Lorries | 10% | | Other | 4% | *Source*: Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport (Service of Vehicle Immatriculation) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (100) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: General Directorate for Mobility and Road Safety National data coordinator: Anne Meerkens, Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport Respondents: Leen Meulenbergs, Federal Public Service on Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment; Rudi Wagelmans, Permanent Commission of the Local Police Services; Miran Scheers, Belgian Road Safety Institute; Jan Robben, Federal Public Service Economy, Statistics Belgium; Denis Hendrichs, Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport; Anneliese Heeren, Federal Public Service Mobility and Transport; Paul Deblaere, Federal Police # **Bosnia and Herzegovina** Population: **3.93 million (2007)** Median age: **38** years Life expectancy at birth: **75** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 3790** Rank: **38** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.802** Rank: **38** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **145.8** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **4.0** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|--| | Lead agency: Ministry of Communication and Transport of Bosnia and
Herzegovina | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes
a | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 0.026 millionb | | - Formally approved in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina only (not in the Republic of Srpska). - Financial incentives only for the development of Strategy in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and not for its implementation. | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 428a | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 11 647b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 6.7%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | | | | - Institute for Statistics of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, defi ned as died at crash scene; Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Srpska, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Data from multiple sources. 2007, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Srpska, data apply to Republic of Srpska only. #### NA: not applicable ## Trends in road traffi c deaths ![](_page_61_Figure_20.jpeg) #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_61_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Country questionnaire ![](_page_61_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Srpska, data apply to Republic of Srpska only ![](_page_62_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards ona | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | Data apply to the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina only. | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 675 063 | | Cars | 85% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 1% | | Lorries | 9% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 5% | *Source*: Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Srpska, Institute for Statistic of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|---------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(124) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Civil Affairs National data coordinator: Jasminka Kovacevic, Emergency Medical Service Sarajevo; Alen Seranic, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare of Republika Srpska Respondents: Munira Zahiragic, Institute for Statistics of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Muhamed Ahmic, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Pavo Boban, Ministry for Traffi c and Communication of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Irena Jokic, Public Health Institute of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Natasa Kostic, Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Srpska; Mira Bera, Ministry of Education and Culture of the Republic of Srpska; Zelimir Skrbic, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Srpska; Jelena Glamocika, Institute of Statistics of the Republic of Srpska # **Bulgaria** Population: **7.64 million (2007)** Median age: **41** years Life expectancy at birth: **73** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 4590** Rank: **36** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.834** Rank: **29** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **258.2** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **5.5** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: State-Public Consultative Commission on the Problems of
Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | ![](_page_63_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, Traffi c Police Department, Ministry of Interior. # NA: not applicable ![](_page_63_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Country questionnaire ![](_page_63_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_63_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Traffi c Police Department, Ministry of Interior #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_63_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_64_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | No | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 2 628 680 | | Cars | 75% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 3% | | Lorries | 10% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 10% | *Source*: Traffi c Police Department, Ministry of Interior | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (150) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Irina Kovacheva, Ministry of Health Respondents: Valentin Panchev, Ministry of Transport; Evelin Jordanova, National Statistic Institute; Anton Antonov, Traffi c Police, Ministry of Interior; George Petrishki, Traffi c Police, Ministry of Interior; Diana Dimitrova, Ministry of Health # **Croatia** Population: **4.56 million (2007)** Median age: **41** years Life expectancy at birth: **76** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 10 460** Rank: **26** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.862** Rank: **28** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **327.5** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **5.3** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|------------------| | Lead agency | Yes | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 2.08 million | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 619a | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 25 092b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 30.0%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 45%d | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No information | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, Ministry of Interior. - 2004, Ministry of Interior. ![](_page_65_Figure_19.jpeg) *Source*: Ministry of Interior ![](_page_65_Figure_21.jpeg) ![](_page_65_Figure_22.jpeg) ![](_page_65_Figure_23.jpeg) NA: not applicable ![](_page_66_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 1 949 936 | | Cars | 77% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 8% | | Lorries | 9% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 6% | *Source*: Ministry of Interior | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: National Institute of Public Health National data coordinator: Ivana Brki´c Biloš, Croatian National Institute of Public Health Respondents: Tihomira Ivanda, Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Ivica Frani´c, Ministry of Interior; Boris Orlovi´c, Ministry of Interior; Dinka Rajˇci´c, Ministry of Sea, Transport and Infrastructure; Željko Remenar, Ministry of Sea, Transport and Infrastructure # **Cyprus** Population: **0.86 million (2007)** Median age: **35** years Life expectancy at birth: **80** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 24 940** Rank: **17** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.912** Rank: **18** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **480.4** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **No information** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|------------------| | Lead agency: Road Safety Council | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 7.00 million | ![](_page_67_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, Police records. - 2007, Police in cooperation with the Government Statistical Service. - 2007, Police records, national observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_67_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: Country questionnaire #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_67_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police records ![](_page_67_Figure_25.jpeg) ![](_page_67_Figure_26.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police records ![](_page_68_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: children under 12 years old are not allowed on two-wheelers as passengers. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |-------------------|--| | | | No car manufacturers | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 592 480 | | Cars | 69% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 7% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 18% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 4% | *Source*: Department of Road Transport | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|--------------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(199, 112) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Costas Antoniades, Accident and Emergency Deptartment of the Nicosia General Hospital, Ministry of Health; Olga Kalakouta, Medical and Public Health Services, Ministry of Health Respondents: Soteris Koletias, Department of Road Transport; Stavros Cleanthous, Public Works Department, Ministry of Communication and Works; Andreas Kouppis, Ambulance Service of Nicosia General Hospital; George Morfakis, Road Safety Unit to the Ministry of Communication and Works; Charilaos Evripidou, Cyprus Police # **Czech Republic** Population: **10.19 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **77** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 14 450** Rank: **22** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.897** Rank: **20** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **403.2** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **11.5** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|------------| | Lead agency: Ministry of Transport | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | No | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_69_Figure_12.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, Czech Police. - 2006, Transport Research Centre. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_69_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Country questionnaire #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_69_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Czech Police #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_69_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police Presidium of the Czech Republic, Directorate of Traffi c Branch ![](_page_70_Picture_0.jpeg) | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 seat occupants | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 5 455 110 | | Cars | 75% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 15% | | Lorries | 9% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: *Transport Yearbook,* Transport Research Centre | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112; 155) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Veronika Benesova, Charles University in Prague, 2nd Faculty of Medicine Respondents: Sarka Kasalova Dankova, Institute of Health Information and Statistics, Ministry of Health; Josef Tesarik, Ministry of Interior; Zuzana Ambrozova, Ministry of Transport; Jaroslav Horin, Ministry of Interior # **Estonia** Population: **1.34 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **73** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 13 200** Rank: **23** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.871** Rank: **25** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **394.2** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **14.0** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: The Road Safety Committee of the Government of the
Republic of Estonia | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 15.40 million | | ![](_page_71_Figure_13.jpeg) - Estonian National Road Administration data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Estonian National Road Administration data. - 2007, Estonian National Road Adminstration. - 2007, Traffi c Behaviour Monitoring. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_71_Figure_19.jpeg) Year 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 *Source*: Estonian National Road Administration ![](_page_71_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Statistics of Estonian Road Administration ![](_page_71_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Estonian National Road Administration ![](_page_72_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | |----------------------| | No car manufacturers | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|---------| | Total (2008) | 708 794 | | Cars | 74% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 2% | | Lorries | 11% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 12% | *Source*: Estonian Motor Vehicle Registration Centre (ARK) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Social Affairs National data coordinator: Ursel Kedars, Ministry of Social Affairs Respondents: Dago Antov, Technical University of Tallinn; Erik Ernits, Estonian Traffi c Insurance Fund; Jaak Kalda, Police Board under the Ministry of Interior; Alo Kirsimäe, Central Law Enforcement Police under the Ministry of Interior; Toomas Ernits, Estonian Road Administration under the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications # **Finland** Population: **5.28 million (2007)** Median age: **41** years Life expectancy at birth: **79** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 44 400** Rank: **7** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.954** Rank: **8** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **540.0** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **12.6** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Lead agency: Ministry of Transport and Communications of Finland | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 380a
(73% males, 27% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 8446b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 23.9%b | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 95% Driversc | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 89%d | | Rear-seat occupants | 80%e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2007)) | 2.53 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | Gross output method;
Willingness to pay | - a *Road Traffi c Accidents 2007*, Statistics Finland, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - b *Road Traffi c Accidents 2007*, Statistics Finland, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland data. - Estimation by consensus group. - 2007, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland. - 2007, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland, data apply to urban areas only. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_73_Figure_20.jpeg) 0 2 Year *Source*: *Road Traffi c Accidents 2007*, Statistics Finland, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 ![](_page_73_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, *Road Traffi c Accidents 2007*, Statistics Finland, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland ![](_page_73_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_74_Picture_0.jpeg) | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | | | | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | | | Exceptions: specially equipped 2-, 3-, 4-wheeled vehicles, invalids and offi cers performing special duties. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | No | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | No | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 4 656 370 | | Cars | 61% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 8% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 29% | *Source*: The Finnish Vehicle Administration | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health National data coordinator: Petri Jääskeläinen, Central Organization for Traffi c Safety in Finland Respondents: Merja Söderholm, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health; Leif Beilinson, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Pasi Kemppainen, The National Traffi c Police; Marita Koivukoski, The Finnish Vehicle Administration # **France** Population: **61.65 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **81** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 38 500** Rank: **13** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.955** Rank: **6** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **498.0** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **6.2** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Road Safety Task Force | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2007)) | 2.30 billion | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 4620a
(76% males, 24% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 77 007b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 27.0%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 95%d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 98%e | | Rear-seat occupants | 83%e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2006)) | 11.60 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | Gross output
method | - Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR) data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR) data. - 2006, Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR). - 2006, ONISR, Observational study, data apply to motorcyclists (99% for moped riders). - 2006, ONISR, Observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_75_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR) ![](_page_75_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR) ![](_page_75_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Observatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR) ![](_page_76_Picture_0.jpeg) | a | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: motorized 2-wheeled vehicles equipped with seat-belts. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|------------| | Total (2007) | 39 926 000 | | Cars | 77% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 6% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 14% | | Lorries | 1% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: 2006, Chambre syndicale nationale du motocycle; 2007, Fichier central des automobiles; 2008, Comité des constructeurs français d'automobiles | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Interministerial Road Safety Task Force National data coordinator: Bernard Laumon, Institut National de REcherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité (INRETS) Respondents: Jean Chapelon, Obervatoire national interministériel de sécurité routière (ONISR); Mireille Chiron, Institut National de REcherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité (INRETS); Mouloud Haddak, Institut National de REcherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité (INRETS); Alexis Marsan, Ministère de l'intérieur; Yves Rauch, Ministère des transports # Georgia Population: 4.40 million (2007) Median age: 36 years Life expectancy at birth: 70 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 2120 Rank: 44 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.763 Rank: 42 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: d 107.6 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 0.9 - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|--| | Lead agency: Transport Commission | | | | Status of the agency | Special body coordinated
by the prime minister | | | Funded in national budget | NA | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | ![](_page_77_Figure_13.jpeg) - Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia data, defined as died within 20 days of the crash. Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia data. 2007, Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia. #### Trends in road traffic deaths 1 400 1 200 Number of road traffic deaths 1 000 800 600 400 200 1972 1977 1987 Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia ![](_page_77_Figure_19.jpeg) ![](_page_77_Figure_21.jpeg) NA: not applicable ![](_page_78_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--|--|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | No | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | No | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | No | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|---------| | Total (2008) | 567 900 | | Cars | 83% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | <1% | | Lorries | 10% | | Buses | 7% | *Source*: Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs National data coordinator: Kakha Kheladze, Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs Respondents: Mamuka Vatsadze, Ministry of Economic Development; Zaza Devdariani, Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia; Kakhaber Chikhradze, Tbilisi Ambulance Service 033 and National Medical Centre; Eka Laliashvili, Partnership for Road Safety; Aleqsandre Tudziladze, Georgia Health and Social Projects' Implementation Centre # **Germany**a Population: 82.60 million (2007) Median age: 42 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group:b high Gross national income per person: US\$ 38 860 Rank: 12 of 49 Human Development Index:d 0.940 Rank: 15 of 49° Private car ownership per 1000 population: 564.5 #### COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year:b 9.8 - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|----------------|--| | Lead agency: Federal Ministry for Traffic, Building and Housing Status of the agency No information | | | | | | | | | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | | No | | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 4949 a (73% males, 27% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road injuries (2007) | traffic 431 419 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 12.0% c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 97% Drivers;
96% Passengers d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 95% d | | Front-seat occupants | 95% Drivers;
96% Passengers d | | Rear-seat occupants | 88% d | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (200 | (4)) 30.90 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or | both Both deaths and injuries | | Methods used | Gross output
method | - ° Federal Statistical Office data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Federal Statistical Office data. - 2006, Federal Statistical Office. 2007, Federal Highway Research Institute BASt. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_79_Figure_20.jpeg) Source: Federal Statistical Office #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_79_Figure_23.jpeg) Source: 2006. Federal Statistical Office #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_79_Figure_26.jpeg) ![](_page_80_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | No | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 50 | | Rural roads | 100 | | Highways and motorways | 130a | | Enforcementb | NA | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | No | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementb | NA | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementb | NA | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementb | NA | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementb | NA | | | | | a | Recommended speed limit. | | |---|--------------------------|--| | | | | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | No | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|------------| | Total (2007) | 55 511 374 | | Cars | 84% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 7% | | Lorries | 8% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: Federal Motor Transport Authority | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|---------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(112) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Federal Highway Research Institute BASt National data coordinator: NA Respondents: Rosemarie Schleh, Federal Highway Research Institute BASt ## Greece Population: 11.15 million (2007) Median age: 40 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 29 630 Rank: 15 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.947 Rank: 12 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 455.0 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 8.7 - Varid Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safe | ety | |---------------------------------------|-----| | Lead agency | No | | Status of the agency | NA | | Funded in national budget | NA | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | No | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_81_Figure_13.jpeg) - National Statistical Service data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - Unknown gender <1%. - d 2006, Road Traffic Police, Port Police Authorities, data apply to drivers involved in fatal crashes - only. 2006, Road Traffic Police, Port Police Authorities, data apply to people involved in reported road #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_81_Figure_20.jpeg) Source: National Statistical Service ![](_page_81_Figure_22.jpeg) Source: 2006. National Statistical Service ![](_page_81_Figure_24.jpeg) Source: 2006. National Statistical Service ![](_page_82_Picture_0.jpeg) | a | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: medical reasons. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No information | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | No | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 7 212 236 | | Cars | 65% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 17% | | Lorries | 17% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: Ministry of Transport and Communication | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (166) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity National data coordinator: Dimitrios Efthymiadis, Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity Respondents: Spyros Panagopoulos, Ministry of Interior, Hellenic Police Headquarters, Road Traffi c Police; Vilelmini Paraschou, Ministry of Economy and Finance, National Statistical Service; Vasiliki Mylona-Danelli, Road Safety Institute "Panos Mylonas"; Georgios Kanellaidis, National Technical University of Athens, Metsovo, School of Civil Engineering, Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering; Maria Vaniotou, Ministry of Environment, Land Planning and Public Works, Directorate of Road Works Conservation; Konstantina Kosmidou, Ministry of Transport and Communication, Directorate of Road Safety and Environment, Department of Road Safety # Hungary Population: 10.03 million (2007) Median age: 39 years Life expectancy at birth: 73 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 11 570 Rank: 25 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.877 Rank: 22 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 300.4 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 5.7 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |---------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Committee for Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 13.03 million | | ![](_page_83_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Unknown gender <1%. - Police data. - d 2006, Hungarian Central Statistical Office (KSH). - Estimation by consensus group. 2007, Observational study. - Costs for one road traffic death. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_83_Figure_22.jpeg) Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_83_Figure_24.jpeg) Deaths by road user category ![](_page_83_Figure_26.jpeg) ![](_page_84_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 50 | | Rural roads | 90 | | Highways and motorways | 130 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | a The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 3 625 386 | | Cars | 83% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Lorries | 12% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: Hungarian Central Statistical Offi ce (KSH) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Mária Bényi, National Centre for Healthcare Audit and Inspection Respondents: Péter Holló, Institute for Transport Sciences Non Profi t Ltd. (KTI); Ákos Probáld, Hungarian Central Statistical Offi ce (KSH); Csaba Kiss, National Committee for Accident Prevention; Kirisztina Tálas, Ministry of Health; Zsófi a Szász, National Police Headquarters # Iceland Population: 0.30 million (2007) Median age: 35 years Life expectancy at birth: 81 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 54 100 Rank: 3 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.968 Rank: 1 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 688.9 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: No information - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road sal | fety | |-------------------------------------------|--------------| | Lead agency: The Road Traffic Directorate | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2007)) | 3.49 million | ![](_page_85_Figure_13.jpeg) - o Statistics Iceland Mortality Coding Register data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Icelandic Accident Register data. - 2007, The Road Traffic Directorate. - d Estimation by consensus group. 2007, National telephone survey conducted by Capacent Gallup. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_85_Figure_20.jpeg) Source: The Road Traffic Directorate ![](_page_85_Figure_22.jpeg) Deaths by road user category ![](_page_85_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_86_Picture_0.jpeg) | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 293 299 | | Cars | 71% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 5% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 7% | | Lorries | 3% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 14% | | | | *Source*: Ministry of Transport | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Rósa Thorsteinsdóttir, The Public Health Institute Respondents: Svanhildur Thorsteinsdóttir, The Directorate of Health (representing the Ministry of Health); Birna Hreiðarsdóttir, Ministry of Transport; Kristján Ó Guðnason, Metropolitan Police; Sigurður Helgason, The Road Traffi c Directorate; Brynjólfur Mogensen, Landspitali University Hospital ## **Ireland** Population: 4.30 million (2007) Median age: 34 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 48 140 Rank: 4 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.960 Rank: 3 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 440.6 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 10.4 - Varid Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------| | Lead agency: Road Safety Authority | | | Status of the agency | Agency under the remit of the
Department of Transport | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | No information | | Money allocated (in x (year)) | NA | ![](_page_87_Figure_13.jpeg) - ° Road Safety Authority data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Unknown gender 2%. Road Safety Authority data. - d 2006, Based on Bedford D, McKeown N, Vellinga A, Howell F *Alcohol in Fatal Road Crashes in Ireland* in 2003, Population Health Directorate, Health Service Executive. - ° 2006, Survey of Seat Belt Wearing, Road Safety Authority. ![](_page_87_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: Road Collision Facts Ireland 2006, Road Safety Authority ![](_page_87_Figure_23.jpeg) Source: 2006, Road Collision Facts Ireland 2006, Road Safety Authority ![](_page_87_Figure_25.jpeg) ![](_page_88_Picture_0.jpeg) | Enforcementa | No consensus | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------| | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Enforcementa No consensus Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Applies to rear-seat occupants Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- seat occupants | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 2 444 159 | | Cars | 76% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 2% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 16% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 4% | *Source*: Department of Transport, NVDF Shannon | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (999; 112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Department of Transport National data coordinator: Declan Hayes, Road Safety and Traffi c Division Respondents: Robbie Breen, Department of Health and Children; Gerry O'Malley, Department of Transport, NVDF Shannon; Ann Cody, Department of Transport; Harry Cullen, National Roads Authority; Michael Brosnan, Road Safety Authority; Con O'Donohue, Garda Headquarters # **Israel** Population: **6.93 million (2007)** Median age: **29** years Life expectancy at birth: **81** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 21 900** Rank: **18** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.930** Rank: **16** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **257.1** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **10.5** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |---------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------|--| | Lead agency: National Road Safety Authority | | | | Status of the agency | National Agency by Act of
Knesset (Parliament) | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 101.78 million | | ![](_page_89_Figure_13.jpeg) ![](_page_89_Figure_14.jpeg) - Police data. - 2007, Israeli Police. - 2006, National Road Safety Authority, observational study. - 2007, National Road Safety Authority, observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_89_Figure_20.jpeg) #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries *Source*: Central Bureau of Statistics, Israeli Police ![](_page_89_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Central Bureau of Statistics, Israeli Police ![](_page_89_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: Central Bureau of Statistics, Israeli Police ![](_page_90_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 2 283 634 | | Cars | 78% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 14% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: Central Bureau of Statistics (based on Ministry of Transport fi les) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (101) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Kobi Peleg, National Center Trauma and EM Research; Sarit Levi, National Road Safety Authority (RSA) Respondents: Rinat Zaig, National Road Safety Authority (RSA); Orit Yalon-Shuqrun, Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS); Tsippy Lotan, Or Yarok (Green Light); Maya Siman-Tov, National Center Trauma and EM Research; Vered Yeshouia, Traffi c Department, Israeli Police; Zeev Shadmi, Ministry of Transportation # **Italy** Population: **58.88 million (2007)** Median age: **42** years Life expectancy at birth: **81** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 33 540** Rank: **14** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.945** Rank: **13** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **610.1** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **7.7** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |--------------------------------------------------|---------------|--| | Lead agency: General Directorate for Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 53.00 million | | ![](_page_91_Figure_13.jpeg) ![](_page_91_Figure_14.jpeg) - National Statistics Offi ce (ISTAT), Automobile Club d'Italia (ACI) data. - 2007, Sistema ULISSE *Monitoraggio Nazionale sull'uso dei dispositivi di sicurezza.* #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_91_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: National Statistics Offi ce (ISTAT), Automobile Club d'Italia (ACI) ![](_page_91_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: 2006, National Statistics Offi ce (ISTAT), Automobile Club d'Italia (ACI) ![](_page_91_Figure_22.jpeg) ![](_page_92_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: 3-, 4-wheelers equipped with a cabin; 2-, 3-wheelers equipped with a crash-proof safety frame or other restraining devices. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | No | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|------------| | Total (2008) | 43 262 992 | | Cars | 83% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 13% | | Lorries | 3% | | Buses | <1% | *Source*: Ministry of Transport | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (118) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Maria Giuseppina Lecce, Ministry of Health Respondents: Vito Disanto, Ministry of Transport; Giandomenico Protospataro, State Police; Raffaella Amato, National Statistics Institute (ISTAT); Alba Rosa Bianchi, Italian National Institute for Occupational Safety and Prevention (ISPESL); Alberto Valenti, Municipal police, Rome # **Kazakhstana** Population: **15.42 million (2007)** Median age: **29** years Life expectancy at birth: **64** years Income group:b **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 5060** Rank: **34** of 49c Human Development Index:d **0.807** Rank: **35** of 49c Private car ownership per 1000 population:e **157.2** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:b **13.3** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-----------------------------------------|----------------|--| | Lead agency: Road Police Department | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | No | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 4365a
(78% males, 22% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 32 988b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 3.2%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No information | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | - Ministry of Internal Affairs, Health Ministry and Statistics Agency, defi ned as died within 7 days of the crash. - Health data. - 2007, Ministry of Internal Affairs. Trends in road traffi c deaths ![](_page_93_Figure_19.jpeg) #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_93_Picture_21.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_93_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Ministry of Internal Affairs #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_94_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a professional opinion of NDC on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Drink–driving not defi ned by BAC limit. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | No | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | No | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | No | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2008) | 3 105 954 | | Cars | 79% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 2% | | Lorries | 13% | | Buses | 3% | | Non-motorized vehicles | 4% | *Source*: Ministry of Internal Affairs | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health, Traumatology and Orthopedics Scientifi c Research Institute National data coordinator: Nurlan Batpenov, Traumatology and Orthopedics Scientifi c Research Institute Respondents: Galina Jaxybekova, Traumatology and Orthopedics Scientifi c Research Institute # Kyrgyzstan Population: 5.32 million (2007) Median age: 24 years Life expectancy at birth: 66 years Income group: a low Gross national income per person: US\$ 590 Rank: 48 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.694 Rank: 47 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d No information CO, emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 1.1 World Bank data. North Bank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|--| | Lead agency: Commission of Traffic Accident Prevention to the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | No | | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | | Key data | | |-----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 1252ª | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffic injuries (2007) | 6223 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | No information | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | | | | e Health and Ministry of Internal Affairs data, defined as died within 1 year of the crash. b Health and Ministry of Internal Affairs data. #### Trends in road traffic deaths | YEAR | NUMBER OF DEATHS | |------|------------------| | 2006 | 1 051 | | 2007 | 1 252 | #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_95_Figure_8.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_95_Figure_10.jpeg) Source: 2007, Central Administration of Road Safety to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic, Republican Medical Information Center to the Ministry of Public Health of the Kyrgyz Republic ![](_page_96_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | No information | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | 60 | | Highways and motorways | 100 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | No | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | Yes | | BAC limit: general population | Noneb | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | Noneb | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | Noneb | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | No | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | No | | Enforcement applied to: | front-seat
occupants only | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | No | | Enforcementa | NA | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Drink–driving not defi ned by BAC limit. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | | | | | | Vehicle standards | | |--|--|--|--|--|-------------------|--| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | No car manufacturers | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | No | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |----------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 318 581 | | Registered vehicle types: data not available | | *Source*: Central Administration of Road Safety to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (103) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health and the Executive Director of Road Safety Under the Kyrgyz Government National data coordinator: Samatbek Toimatov, Ministry of Public Health of the Kyrgyz Republic Respondents: Viktor Kustov, Government of the Kyrgyz Republic; Elvira Torobekova, Ministry of Public Health of the Kyrgyz Republic; Zoya Tulegenova, Government of the Kyrgyz Republic; Ludmila Turgasheva, Government of the Kyrgyz Republic; Imanali Sarkulov, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic; Soolot Begaliev, Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kyrgyz Republic; Emil Omuraliev, Country WHO offi ce on Coordination and Communications in Kyrgyzstan ### Latvia Population: 2.28 million (2007) Median age: 40 years Life expectancy at birth: 71 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 9930 Rank: 27 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.863 Rank: 27 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 358.9 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: a 3.1 - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road sa | nfety | |------------------------------------------|------------------| | Lead agency: Road Traffic Safety Council | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in = (2006)) | 7.33 million | ![](_page_97_Figure_13.jpeg) - · Road Safety Directorate data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Road Safety Directorate data. - 2006, Statistics of Road Accidents in Latvia, Road Traffic Safety Directorate. 2006, Research by Road Traffic Research, LTD, data apply to motorcycles in Riga and Riga region - 2006, Observational studies by Road Traffic Research, LTD and Data Serviss, LTD. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_97_Figure_20.jpeg) Source: Road Safety Directorate #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_97_Figure_23.jpeg) Source: 2006, Statistics of Road Traffic Accidents in Latvia 2007, Road Safety Directorate #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_97_Figure_26.jpeg) ![](_page_98_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 50 | | Rural roads | 90 | | Highways and motorways | 110 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | No | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.02 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | No | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 1 062 935 | | Cars | 77% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Lorries | 11% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 7% | *Source*: Road Safety Directorate | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Jana Feldmane, Ministry of Health, Head of the Division of Environmental Health Respondents: Aldis Lama, Road Traffi c Directorate; Georgijs Sovetovs, Riga's City Council Department of Transport; Jolanta Skrule, Public Health Agency; Maija Gaide, Health Statistics and Medical Technologies State Agency; Vida Lukasevica, Central Statistical Bureau; Arnis Vilums, State Policy; Anita Villerusa, Riga's Stradina University # Lithuania Population: 3.39 million (2007) Median age: 38 years Life expectancy at birth: 71 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 9920 Rank: 28 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.869 Rank: 26 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 467.4 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 3.9 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road sa | afety | |---------------------------------------------|------------------| | Lead agency: State Traffic Safety Commissio | n | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | No | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2007)) | 5.69 million | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2006) | 759 a (72% males, 26% females) b | | Reported number of non-fatal road injuries (2006) | traffic 8254° | | Road traffic deaths involving alcoho | 11.7% d | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (20 | 06)) 434.86 million | | Study included deaths, injuries of | r both Both deaths and injuries | | Methods used | No information | - Police data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Unknown gender 2%. - d 2006, Police Department (Ministry of Interior). #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_99_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_99_Figure_21.jpeg) Trends in road traffic deaths Source: Police Department (Ministry of Interior) #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_99_Figure_24.jpeg) Source: 2006, Police Department (Ministry of Interior) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_99_Figure_27.jpeg) ![](_page_100_Picture_0.jpeg) | | National legislation | | |---|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------| | | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | \ | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | | Urban roads | 50 | | | Rural roads | 90 | | | Highways and motorways | 130 | | | Enforcement a | 012345 6 78910 | | | Drink-driving law | Yes | | _ | Drink-driving defined by: | | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | | breath content | No | | | physician certificate | No | | | BAC limit: general population | 0.04 g/dl | | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.02 g/dl | | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.02 g/dl | | | Mechanisms to enforce drink—driving laws | | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | No | | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | No | | | Enforcement a | 012345 6 78910 | | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | | Exception to the legislation | No | | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | | Enforcement a | 012345 6 78910 | | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear-
seat occupants | | | Enforcement a | 012345 6 78910 | | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | | Enforcement a | 01234 5 678910 | | | • The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional | oninion of respondents on | ° The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |-----------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | | |----------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | | | Traffic-calming measures | No | | | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of public transport | NA | | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 1 781 686 | | Cars | 89% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 1% | | Lorries | 8% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 1% | Source: State Enterprise REGITRA | Care after road crashes | | |----------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: **Ministry of Health** National data coordinator: Ramune Meižienė, Ministry of Health Respondents: Gintaras Aliksandraviõus, Lithuanian Police Traffic Supervision Service; Marius Vitėnas, Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Lithuania; Jelena Selivonec, Lithuanian Statistics; Ausra Želvienė, Lithuanian Health Information Centre; Aida Laukaltienė, State Environmental Health Center # **Malta** Population: **0.41 million (2007)** Median age: **38** years Life expectancy at birth: **79** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 14 575** Rank: **21** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.894** Rank: **21** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **647.0** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **No information** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------| | Lead agency: Malta Transport Authority | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_101_Figure_14.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash; Health data, defi ned by ICD-10 codes. - Police data. 2006, Malta Transport Authority survey. #### 30 5 25 Number of road traffi c deaths 15 10 20 Trends in road traffi c deaths 0 *Source*: Country questionnaire #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries Year 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 ![](_page_101_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, National Statistics Offi ce Library and Information Unit #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_101_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Malta Police, published by the National Statistics Offi ce ![](_page_102_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 346 118 | | Cars | 76% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 6% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | <1% | | Lorries | 17% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: Malta Transport Authority | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication:Parliamentary Secretary for Health National data coordinator: Neville Calleja, Department of Health Information and Research; Audrey Galea, Department of Health Information and Research Respondents: Joseph Galea, National Statistics Offi ce; Therese Ciantar, Malta Transport Authority; Josie Brincat, Malta Police; Maryanne Massa, Deptartment of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention; Kathleen England, Department of Health Information and Research # **Montenegro** Population: **0.60 million (2007)** Median age: **35** years Life expectancy at birth: **74** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 5180** Rank: **33** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.822** Rank: **31** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **298.5** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **No information** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|----| | Lead agency: | No | | Status of the agency | NA | | Funded in national budget | NA | | National road safety strategy | No | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_103_Figure_14.jpeg) Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. Police data. ![](_page_103_Figure_17.jpeg) ![](_page_103_Figure_18.jpeg) ![](_page_103_Figure_19.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police Directorate, Department for Road Safety Surveillance and Control #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_103_Figure_22.jpeg) NA: not applicable ![](_page_104_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 199 014 | | Cars | 90% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 2% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | <1% | | Lorries | 6% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 2% | *Source*: Ministry of Interior Affairs and Public Administration | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (124) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Welfare National data coordinator: Svetlana Stojanovic, Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Welfare Respondents: Saša Stefanovic, Emergency Medical Department, Podgorica; Dijana Subotic, Ministry of Interior Affairs and Public Administration; Nevenka Tomic, Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Transportation and Telecommunication; Klikovac Dragan, Police Directorate; Sovjetka Veljic, Statistical Offi ce of Montenegro (MONSTAT); Slobodan Tadic, NGO ALPHA Center # **Netherlands** Population: 16.42 million (2007) Median age: 39 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 45 820 Rank: 6 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.958 Rank: 4 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 440.5 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 8.7 - World bank adia. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------|--| | Lead agency: Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water
Management, Directorate-General Passenger Transport, Road Safety
Division | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 80.00 million | | | Key data | | |------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 791 a (73% males, 27% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road tr injuries (2007) | affic 16 750 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 25.0% c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 92% Drivers;
72% Passengers d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 92% e | | Front-seat occupants | 94% e | | Rear-seat occupants | 73% e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2003 | 1)) 12.30 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or b | oth Both deaths and injuries | | Methods used | Gross output method;
Willingness to pay | - Road Safety in the Netherlands: Key Figures 2008, Ministry of Transport, Water and Public Works, - Acodo sivery in the internations, key rigues 2000, ministry or transport, water and rount works, defined as die within 30 days of the crash. Transport data, data apply to hospitalized subjects. 2005, Case-control study in Tilburg police district, data apply to drivers only. Monitoring Bromfletshelmen 2007, Grontimij Transport and Infrastructure, data apply to mopeds - only. 2006, Road Safety in the Netherlands: Key Figures 2008, Ministry of Transport, Water and Public Work. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_105_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_105_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: 2007, Statistics Netherlands (CBS), Ministry of Transport #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_105_Figure_24.jpeg) Source: 2007, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Centre for Traffic and Navigation (DVS), Statistics Netherlands (CBS) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_105_Figure_27.jpeg) ![](_page_106_Picture_0.jpeg) | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------| | Enforcementa | No consensus | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: light moped. Enforcementa No consensus seat occupants Applies to front-seat occupants Yes Applies to rear-seat occupants Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|-------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | No | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 8 862 935 | | Cars | 82% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 6% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 10% | *Source*: Institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV), Statistics Netherlands (CBS) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV); Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport; Bureau of Traffi c Law Enforcement; Ministry of Transport, Water Mangement and Public Works National data coordinator: Martijn Vis, Institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV) Respondents: Niels Bos, Institute for Road Safety Research (SWOV); Peter van Vilet, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Centre for Traffi c and Navigation (DVS); Harry Derriks, KiM Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis; Loek Hesemans, Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport, Nutrition, Health Protection and Prevention Department; B. Van Bruggen, Public Prosecutors Offi ce # Norway Population: 4.70 million (2007) Median age: 38 years Life expectancy at birth: 80 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 76 450 Rank: 1 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.968 Rank: 2 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 442.7 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 19.1 - World Bank data. Royald Bank data. Royald Bank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------------|--| | Lead agency: Ministry of Transport and Communications | | | | Status of the agency Government | | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in x (2007)) | 103.42 million | | | Key data | | |------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 233 a (70% males, 30% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road trainjuries (2007) | iffic 11 755 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 20.0-30.0% c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 100%⁵ | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 88%□ | | Front-seat occupants | 93%⁵ | | Rear-seat occupants | 85% c | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2008) | ) 3.75 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or bo | Both deaths and injuries | | Methods used | Gross output | - ° Statistics Norway data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - Statistics Norway data. 2007, Norwegian Public Roads Administration. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_107_Figure_18.jpeg) Source: Statistics Norway ![](_page_107_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_107_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: 2007, Statistics Norway #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_107_Figure_24.jpeg) Source: 2007, Statistics Norway ![](_page_108_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 50 | | Rural roads | 80 | | Highways and motorways | 80 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.02 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.02 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.02 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | No | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | a | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 2 599 712 | | Cars | 80% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 16% | | Lorries | 3% | | Buses | 1% | *Source*: Norwegian Public Roads Administration | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (113) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health and Care Services National data coordinator: Jakob Linhave, Norwegian Directorate of Health; Signe Vind, Norwegian Directorate of Health Respondents: Marthe Lillehagen, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Finn Harald Amundsen, Norwegian Public Roads Administration; Jan Guttormsen, National Police Directorate; Kristin Øyen, Trygg Trafi kk # **Poland** Population: **38.08 million (2007)** Median age: **37** years Life expectancy at birth: **75** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 9840** Rank: **29** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.875** Rank: **23** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **354.6** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **8.0** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------------|--------------| | Lead agency: The National Road Safety Council | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2005–2007)) | 1.87 billion | ![](_page_109_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. 2007, Police. - 2006, National Road Safety Council observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_109_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Country questionnaire #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_109_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police, Motor Transport Institute #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_109_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Police, Motor Transport Institute ![](_page_110_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--| | | | | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Exceptions: bikes equiped with safety belts (motorcycle with overhead "cabin"). | Road safety audits | | | |--------------------|--|--| | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|------------| | Total (2006) | 18 035 047 | | Cars | 75% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Lorries | 13% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 7% | *Source*: Central Statistical Offi ce | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Infrastructure National data coordinator: Barbara Król, National Road Safety Council, Ministry of Infrastructure Respondents: Jacek Zalewski, The National Headquarters of Police; Robert Trajan vel Trojanowski, General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways; Andrzej Grzegorczyk, National Road Safety Council, Ministry of Infrastructure; Ryszard Krystek, Technical University of Gdansk; Maria Dabrowska-Loranc, Motor Transport Institute; Anna Zielinska, Motor Transport Institute # **Portugal** Population: **10.62 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **79** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 18 950** Rank: **20** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.900** Rank: **19** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **496.5** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **5.6** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Lead agency: National Authority for Road Safety | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | ![](_page_111_Figure_13.jpeg) - National Authority for Road Safety data, defi ned as died at crash scene or on the way to health services. - National Authority for Road Safety data. - 2007, National Institute of Legal Medicine. - 2004, Portuguese Association of Road Safety Prevention (PRP), data apply to urban roads only (93% on motorways (2005)). - 2004, Portuguese Association of Road Safety Prevention (PRP), data apply to urban roads only (64% on motorways (2005)). #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_111_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_111_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: The National Statistics Institute (INE) #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_111_Figure_24.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, *Annual Report*, National Authority for Road Safety #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_111_Figure_27.jpeg) ![](_page_112_Picture_0.jpeg) | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 seat occupants | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | | |------------------------------------|-----|--| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | | cars | Yes | | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | No | | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | | lorries | Yes | | | buses | Yes | | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2006) | 5 948 269 | | Cars | 88% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 9% | | Lorries | 2% | | Buses | <1% | *Source*: The Automobile Association of Portugal | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Gregória Paixão von Amann, Directorate-General of Health Respondents: Ana Coroado, National Authority for Road Safety; Victor Lourenço, Public Security Police; Luís Filipe Branco, Republican National Guard; Angelina Afonso, National Statistic Institute; José Lisboa Santos, Institute of Road Infrastructure; Maria da Conceição Jorge Proença, Public Institute for Mobility and for Inland Transport; Samuel Bonito Martins, Saint Mary's Hospital (Hospital St. Maria); Rodolfo Manuel Martins Soares, Portuguese League Against Trauma # Republic of Moldova Population: 3.79 million (2007) Median age: 33 years Life expectancy at birth: 68 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 1260 Rank: 45 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.719 Rank: 45 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 87.3 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a 2.0 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safe | ety | |--------------------------------------------|------------------| | Lead agency: National Traffic Safety Board | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | No | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | ![](_page_113_Figure_13.jpeg) - National Bureau for Statistic (compiles Police and Health data), defined as died within 1 year of the - b National Bureau for Statistic data. - 2007, Traffic police database (traffic deaths with alcohol detected/number of road traffic deaths per year). #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_113_Figure_18.jpeg) Source: Country questionnaire #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_113_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: 2007, National Bureau for Statistic #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_113_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_114_Picture_0.jpeg) | Local authorities may set lower limits | No | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | 60 | | Highways and motorways | 90 | | Enforcementa | No consensus | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | Yes | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | No | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | No consensus | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | No | | | | Enforcementa NA a The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | | |------------------------------------|-----|--| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | | cars | Yes | | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | | lorries | Yes | | | buses | Yes | | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 448 202 | | Cars | 74% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 6% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 3% | | Lorries | 16% | | Buses | 1% | *Source*: Traffi c Police database | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (903) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Filip Gornea, State Medical and Pharmaceutical University "Nicolae Testemutanu" Respondents: Iurie Untilov, Ministry of Internal Affairs; Petru Crudu, National Center of Health Management; Nicolae Mihul, Republican Clinic Hospital of Orthopedic and Traumatology; Gheorghe Ceban, National Center of the Emergency Medicine # **Romania** Population: **21.44 million (2007)** Median age: **37** years Life expectancy at birth: **73** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 6150** Rank: **32** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.825** Rank: **30** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **170.1** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **4.2** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Council for Road Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | a
Yes | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | Not formally endorsed by the government. | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 2712a
(86% males, 14% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 29 832b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 1.5%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 90% Drivers;
65% Passengersd | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 50%c | | Front-seat occupants | 80%c | | Rear-seat occupants | 20%c | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in €(2007)) | 1.20 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | No information | - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, National Road Traffi c Police Directorate. - 2007–2008, Road Traffi c Police, unoffi cial estimation for motorcycle riders. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_115_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: National Road Traffi c Police Directorate #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_115_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Ministry of Interior and Administrative Reform, Road Traffi c Police #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_115_Figure_26.jpeg) ![](_page_116_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 50 | | Rural roads | 50 | | Highways and motorways | 90 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | Yes | | BAC limit: general population | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front- and rear
seat occupants | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2008) | 4 611 362 | | Cars | 79% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 1% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 11% | | Lorries | 3% | | Buses | <1% | | Non-motorized vehicles | 4% | | Other | 2% | *Source*: Directorate for Driving Licenses and Vehicle Registration | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator:Raed Arafat, Ministry of Health Respondents: Gino Theodor Bosman, Traffi c Police Directorate, Ministry of Interior; Cristian Constantinescu, Ministry Of Transportation # **Russian Federation** Population: **142.50 million (2007)** Median age: **37** years Life expectancy at birth: **66** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 7560** Rank: **31** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.806** Rank: **37** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **195.5** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **10.6** ![](_page_117_Figure_12.jpeg) ![](_page_117_Figure_13.jpeg) - Ministry of Internal Affairs data, defi ned as died within 7 days of the crash. - Ministry of Internal Affairs data. - 2007, The Road Safety Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. ![](_page_117_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: The Road Safety Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ![](_page_117_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, The Road Safety Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs # Deaths by road user category ![](_page_117_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, The Road Safety Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ![](_page_118_Picture_0.jpeg) On roads marked by special symbols. c The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|------------| | Total (2007) | 38 695 996 | | Cars | 72% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 8% | | Lorries | 13% | | Buses | 2% | | Other | 5% | *Source*: Ministry of Internal Affairs | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Internal Affairs National data coordinator: Gennady Kipor, All-Russian Centre for Disaster Medicine Respondents: Boris Grebenuk, Head Quarters of All-Russian Service for Disaster Medicine; Aleksei Koldin, All-Russian Centre for Disaster Medicine (Representative of Health and Social Development Ministry); Leonid Borisenko, Agency of Health and Social Development of Russian Federation; Aleksei Voitenkov, Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russian Federation; Andrei Fonski, Ministry of Transport of Russian Federation; Alexandr Gordienko, Ministry of Transport of Russian Federation # **San Marino** Population: **0.03 million (2007)** Median age: **No information** Life expectancy at birth: **82** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 41 044** Rank: **10** of 49b Human Development Index:c **No information** Rank: **NA** Private car ownership per 1000 population:d CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **No information** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------| | Lead agency: | Yes | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | No | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 1a
(80% males, 20% females)b | | injuries (2007) | 431c | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | No information | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | | NA | | | NA | | Methods used | NA | | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
Annual estimated costs (in € (year))
Study included deaths, injuries or both | - Health data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - 2004–2007, data apply to 5 deaths. - Health data. ![](_page_119_Figure_15.jpeg) Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_119_Figure_17.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_119_Figure_19.jpeg) *Source*: 2004–2007 (5 deaths), Emergency Service #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_120_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|--------| | Total (2007) | 51 590 | | Cars | 66% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 22% | | Lorries | 7% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 5% | *Source*: Economic Programmation Offi ce | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (118) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Secretariat of State for Health and Social Security National data coordinator: Andrea Gualtieri, Health Authority Respondents: Eleonora Liberotti, Internal Affaires Department; Vladimiro Selva, Territorial Environment Department; Eva Guidi, Justice and Information Department; Dennis Guerra, Foreign Affair Department; Federica Renzi, Finances and Economy Department; Marco Podeschi, Labor and Cooperation Department ## Serbia Population: 9.86 million (2007) Median age: 37 years Life expectancy at birth: 73 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 4730 Rank: 35 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.821 Rank: 32 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 154.0 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 6.6 - World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road | safety | |----------------------------------|---------------------| | Lead agency: | No | | Status of the agency | NA | | Funded in national budget | NA | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_121_Figure_13.jpeg) - Police data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Police data. - 2007, Statistics of the Serbian Ministry of the Interior. 2006, Pilot research of the Academy for Crime Prevention and Police Affairs, observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_121_Figure_19.jpeg) Source: Statistics of the Serbian Ministry of the Interior (data from 1999 to 2007 exclude Kosovo) ![](_page_121_Figure_21.jpeg) Source: 2007, Statistics of the Serbian Ministry of the Interior #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_121_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_122_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | Yes | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | 80 | | Highways and motorways | 120 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | Yes | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | Yes | | Enforcement applied to: | front-seat
occupants only | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | No (subnational) | | Enforcementa | NA | | | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 2 235 389 | | Cars | 68% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 1% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 1% | | Lorries | 8% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 22% | *Source*: Statistics of the Serbian Ministry of the Interior | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|--------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(94) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health and Ministry of Infrastructure National data coordinator: Milena Paunovic, Institute of Public Health of Belgrade Respondents: Jovica Vasiljevic, Ministry of the Interior, Directorate for Traffi c Police; Demir Hadzic, Ministry for Infrastructure; Krsto Lipovac, Academy for Crime Prevention and Police Affairs; Ivana Radojicic, Institute for Emergency Medicine of Belgrade; Svetlana Trtica, Institute of Public Health of Belgrade # **Slovakia** Population: **5.39 million (2007)** Median age: **36** years Life expectancy at birth: **74** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 11 730** Rank: **24** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.872** Rank: **24** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **272.1** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **6.7** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|--------------| | Lead agency: Road Safety Council | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 0.96 million | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 627a
(76% males, 24% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 11 310b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 4.3%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2007)) | 297.96 million | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | Gross output
method | - Police data, defi ned as died within 24 hours of the crash. - Police data. - 2007, Vehicle Register in the Slovak Republic, Ministry of Interior. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_123_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Statistical-Evidence System of Road Traffi c Accidents, Ministry of Interior (SR) ![](_page_123_Figure_20.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, *Statistical Review of Road Traffi c Accidents*, Department of Traffi c Police ![](_page_123_Figure_22.jpeg) ![](_page_124_Picture_0.jpeg) | Urban roads | 60 | |---------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | Rural roads | 90 | | Highways and motorways | 130 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | | | Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 Applies to rear-seat occupants Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes seat occupants | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 2 039 745 | | Cars | 72% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 3% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 1% | | Lorries | 11% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 12% | *Source*: Vehicle Register in the Slovak Republic, Home Offi ce of the Slovak Republic | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|---------------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yesa
(112) | Regional access number also available. #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Martin Smrek, University Children's Hospital Bratislava Respondents: Adam Hochel, Ministry of Heath; Katarina Halzlova, Public Health Authority; Alena Petrikova, Presidium of the Police Force, Ministry of Interior; Stefan Pristas, Ministry of Transportation; Hruskovic Samuel, Rescue Team Slovakia; Darina Sedlakova, WHO Country Offi ce in Slovak Republic a The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. # Slovenia Population: 2.00 million (2007) Median age: 41 years Life expectancy at birth: 78 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 20 960 Rank: 19 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.923 Rank: 17 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: d 509.9 CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 8.1 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--| | Lead agency: Interministerial Working Group on Road Traffic Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | Yes | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 2.20 million | | | Key data | | |------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2007) | 293ª (79% males, 21% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road trainjuries (2007) | affic 16 449 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 38.4%⁵ | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 80% d | | Front-seat occupants | 85% d | | Rear-seat occupants | 51% d | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year) | ) NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or b | oth NA | | Methods used | NA | - ° Police data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Police data. - 2007, Ministry of Interior, Police. 2007, Ministry of Transport, Slovenian Roads Agency, observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_125_Figure_19.jpeg) Source: Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia ![](_page_125_Figure_21.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_125_Figure_23.jpeg) ![](_page_126_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | 1 286 903 | |-----------| | 79% | | 6% | | 6% | | <1% | | 9% | | | *Source*: Ministry of Interior | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes(112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Matej Košir, Ministry of Health Respondents: Vesna Marinko, Ministry of Transport, Transport Directorate; Bojan Žlender, Ministry of Transport, Slovenian Roads Agency, Road Safety Council; Boštjan Smolej, Ministry of Interior, General Police Directorate, Traffi c Police Division; Mateja Rok-Simon, Institute of Public Health of the Republic of Slovenia; Robert Štaba, Zavod Varna pot (Safe Journey Institute) # **Spain** Population: **44.28 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **81** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 29 450** Rank: **16** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.949** Rank: **10** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **480.0** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **7.7** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |----------------------------------------------|----------------| | Lead agency: General Directorate of Traffi c | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (2008)) | 881.03 million | ![](_page_127_Figure_13.jpeg) - General Directorate of Traffi c data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - General Directorate of Traffi c data. - 2007, General Directorate of Traffi c, observational study. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_127_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: General Directorate of Traffi c database ![](_page_127_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_127_Figure_22.jpeg) ![](_page_128_Picture_0.jpeg) | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a | | Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Exceptions: serious medical conditions. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yesa | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|------------| | Total (2006) | 31 441 152 | | Cars | 67% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 14% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 8% | | Lorries | 9% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 3% | *Source*: General Directorate of Traffi c database | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes(112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs National data coordinator: Vicenta Lizarbe Respondents: Pilar Zori Bertolin, Geneneral Directorate of Traffi c; Catherine Pérez, Public Health Agency Barcelona; María Seguí-Gómez, Faculty of Medicine, Navarra University; Teodoro Casillas Martin, Agrupación de Tráfi co, Guardia Civil; María Librada Escribano, Public Health Directorate. Ministry of Health and Consumer Affairs; María Antonia Astorga, Public Health Directorate, Ministry of Health and Consumer Affair # **Sweden** Population: **9.12 million (2007)** Median age: **40** years Life expectancy at birth: **81** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 46 060** Rank: **5** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.958** Rank: **5** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **464.4** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **5.9** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |------------------------------------------|----------------| | Lead agency: Swedish Road Administration | | | Status of the agency | Government | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 471a
(75% males, 25% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2006) | 26 636b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 20.0%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 95%d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | 94%e | | Front-seat occupants | 96%e | | Rear-seat occupants | 90%e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2006)) | 3.25 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | Willingness to
pay | - Transport data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - 2006, Etimate based on autopsies of drivers killed in crashes. - 2007, Estimate provided by consensus group. - 2006, Swedish Road and Transport Research Institute observationa studies. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_129_Figure_20.jpeg) 1972 *Source*: *Road Traffi c Injuries 2007 (Vägtrafi kskador 2007)*, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communication Analyses 2007 Year 1977 1987 1997 2002 1982 1992 ![](_page_129_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2006, Swedish Institute for Transport and Communication Analyses ![](_page_129_Figure_24.jpeg) ![](_page_130_Picture_0.jpeg) | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------| | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on
a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Enforcementa 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Applies to rear-seat occupants Yes Enforcement applied to: front- and rear- Law requiring child restraints in cars Yes seat occupants Exceptions: medical reasons. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | No | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yes | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|-----------| | Total (2007) | 5 500 000 | | Cars | 77% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 8% | | Lorries | 9% | | Buses | <1% | | Other | 6% | *Source*: Statistics Sweden (SCB) | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Swedish Road Administration National data coordinator: Thomas Lekander, Swedish Road Administration (SRA) Respondents: Bengt Svensson, National Police Board; Åsa Ersson, Swedish Road Administration (SRA); Ulf Björnstig, University Hospital in Umeå; Johan Lindberg, The Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Gunnar Ågren, Swedish National Institute of Public Health; Lars Darin, Ministry of Enterprise and Communications # **Switzerland** Population: 7.48 million (2007) Median age: 40 years Life expectancy at birth: 82 years Income group: high Gross national income per person: US\$ 59 880 Rank: 2 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.955 Rank: 7 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 515.3 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 5.5 - Varid Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey. United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. ![](_page_131_Figure_12.jpeg) Not formally endorsed by government | Key data | | |------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffic deaths (2006) | 370° (76% males, 24% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road trainjuries (2006) | affic 26 718 b | | Road traffic deaths involving alcohol | 16.0% c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 100% d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 86% e | | Rear-seat occupants | 61% e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2003) | 9.06 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or be | oth Both deaths and injuries | | Methods used | Gross output
method | - ° Police data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Swiss Council for Accident Prevention data. - 2007, Swiss Council for Accident Prevention. 2006. Sinus-Report 2007, Swiss Council of Accident Prevention, data apply to motorcycle drivers - 2006. Swiss Council for Accident Prevention. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_131_Figure_21.jpeg) Trends in road traffic deaths ![](_page_131_Figure_22.jpeg) Source: Unfallgeschehen in der Schweiz, bfu-Statistik 2007, Swiss Council of Accident Prevention #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_131_Figure_25.jpeg) Source: 2006, Unfallgeschehen in der Schweiz, bfu-Statistik 2007, Swiss Council of Accident Prevention ![](_page_131_Figure_27.jpeg) Source: 2006, Unfallgeschehen in der Schweiz, bfu-Statistik 2007, Swiss Council of Accident Prevention ![](_page_132_Picture_0.jpeg) | a | The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | | | | |---|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--| | | | | | | | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. Exceptions: low-speed duties, such as mail delivery. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | | | |-----------------------------|-----------|--|--| | Total (2007) | 5 356 000 | | | | Cars | 72% | | | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 14% | | | | Lorries | 10% | | | | Buses | 1% | | | | Other | 3% | | | *Source*: Federal Offi ce for Statistics | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes 144) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Federal Offi ce of Public Health National data coordinator: Bertrand Graz, University Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (IUMSP), Lausanne Respondents: Christoph Jahn, Federal Roads Offi ce; Lukas Matti, Federal Health Offi ce; Brigitte Buhmann, Swiss Council for Accident Prevention # **Tajikistan** Population: **6.74 million (2007)** Median age: **20** years Life expectancy at birth: **64** years Income group:a **low** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 460** Rank: **49** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.684** Rank: **48** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **28.8** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **0.8** | Institutional framework for road safety
Lead agency: Department of the State Automobile Inspection (Ministry
of Internal Affairs) | | | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------|--| | | | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | ![](_page_133_Figure_12.jpeg) - Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Internal Affairs data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Internal Affairs data. - 2007, Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. ### NA: not applicable ![](_page_133_Figure_17.jpeg) ![](_page_133_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Internal Affairs #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_133_Figure_21.jpeg) ![](_page_133_Figure_22.jpeg) *Source*: 2007, Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ![](_page_134_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|--|--| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 268 018 | | Cars | 72% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 7% | | Lorries | 15% | | Buses | 2% | *Source*: Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry Internal Affairs | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Abduvali Razzakov, Tajik State Medical University Respondents: Kurbonkhon Saidov, Ministry of Transport and Communication; Nazarali Rahmatulloev, Department of the State Automobile Inspection of the Ministry Internal Affairs; Hasan Nazarov, Khatlon District Clinic Hospital; Shuhratjon Ziyoboev, Khudjand Clinic Hospital No.1; Shodi Jamshedov, Department on Health Protection of the Badakhshan Avtonomy District # The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Population: 2.0 million (2007) Median age: 35 years Life expectancy at birth: 73 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 3460 Rank: 39 of 49b Rank: 34 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.808 Private car ownership per 1000 population:d 109.9 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year: 5.1 - Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road s | afety | | |---------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|--| | Lead agency: Republic's Council for Road Traffic Safety | | | | Status of the agency | Directly under the
Parliament | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | No | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | ![](_page_135_Figure_13.jpeg) - ° State Statistical Office data, defined as died within 30 days of the crash. - b Police data. - 2007, Ministry of Interior, Sector for Analysis, Research and Documentation. 2007, Ministry of Interior, Sector for Information Technology, data apply to motorcycle riders - 2 '2002, PhD thesis by F.G. Tozijo, Socio-medical Aspects of Traffic-related Traumatism in Children and Youth in the Republic of Macedonia, Medical Faculty, Skopje (survey of injured drivers and passengers treated in hospital). #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_135_Figure_20.jpeg) ![](_page_135_Figure_21.jpeg) ![](_page_135_Figure_23.jpeg) Source: 2006. State Statistical Office #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_135_Figure_26.jpeg) ![](_page_136_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | No | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | Yes | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | 80 | | Highways and motorways | 120 | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | No | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.05 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | No | | Police checkpoints | Yes | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | Yes | | Applies to all riders | Yes | | Applies to all engine types | Yes | | Exception to the legislation | No | | Helmet standards mandated | No | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | No | | Enforcement applied to: | front-seat
occupants only | | Enforcementa | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | No | | Enforcementa | NA | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | a The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|---------| | Total (2007) | 259 421 | | Cars | 86% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 2% | | Lorries | 8% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 3% | *Source*: Ministry of Interior, Sector for Information Technology | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (194) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Fimka Tozija, Republic Institute for Health Protection Respondents: Spase Jovkovski, Representative of The Automobila Union of the Republic of Macedonia (AMSM); Boris Murgoski, Police Academy; Cane Kostvski, Ministry of Interior; Marjan Kopevski, Ministry of Transport and Communications; Elena Eftimovska, Macedonian Red Cross; Ljubica Damceska, State Statistical Offi ce ## Turkey Population: 74.88 million (2007) Median age: 27 years Life expectancy at birth: 73 years Income group: middle Gross national income per person: US\$ 8020 Rank: 30 of 49b Human Development Index: 0.798 Rank: 40 of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population: 87.1 COa emissions (tonnes) per person per year: a 3.2 - World Bank data. World Bank data. Rank among the 49 countries in the WHO European Region participating in the survey United Nations Development Programme data. WHO European Region average: 339. | Institutional framework for road s | afety | |-------------------------------------------|---------------------| | Lead agency: Board of Road Traffic Safety | | | Status of the agency | Interministerial | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | Measurable targets | NA | | Implementation funded | NA | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | ![](_page_137_Figure_12.jpeg) - Turkish Statistical Institute data, defined as died at crash scene. - Turkish Statistical Institute data. - 2005-2007, Security Directorate. - d 2007, Security Directorate, data apply to rural roads only (20% in city centres roads). NA: not applicable ![](_page_137_Figure_18.jpeg) Trends in road traffic deaths ![](_page_137_Figure_19.jpeg) Source: Traffic Accident Statistics (Road) 2007. Turkish Statistical Institute #### Age-specific mortality rates from road traffic injuries ![](_page_137_Figure_22.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_137_Figure_24.jpeg) Source: 2006, Security General Directorate ![](_page_138_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No (subnational) | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | No | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | Yes | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|------------| | Total (2008) | 13 311 000 | | Cars | 50% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 15% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 18% | | Lorries | 6% | | Buses | 2% | | Non-motorized vehicles | 1% | | Other | 9% | *Source*: Turkstat through Security Directorate | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (112) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Huseyin Fazil Inan, Ministry of Health Respondents: Bora Kayser, Ministry of Health; Senturk Demiral, Security General Directorate; Ismet Temel, Turkish Statistical Institute (Turkstat); Veysel Akkus, Highways General Directorate; Erpulat Ozis, Ufuk University; A. Haki Turkdemir, Ankara Province Health Directorate; Y. Mehmet Kontas, WHO Country Offi ce Turkey # **Turkmenistan** Population: **5.0 million (2007)** Median age: **24** years Life expectancy at birth: **63** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 1234** Rank: **46** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.728** Rank: **44** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **80.9** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **8.7** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------|--| | Lead agency: | No | | | Status of the agency | NA | | | Funded in national budget | NA | | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2006) | 650a | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2006) | 1606b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 7.4%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | - Department of Police Road Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs data, defi ned as died within 7 days of the crash. - Department of Police Road Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs data. - 2008, Department of Road Police Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Trends in road traffi c deaths ![](_page_139_Figure_17.jpeg) Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_139_Figure_19.jpeg) #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_139_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: Department of Police Road Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ![](_page_140_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |----------------------|--| | No car manufacturers | | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No information | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |-----------------------------|---------| | Total (2008) | 651 564 | | Cars | 62% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 18% | | Lorries | 16% | | Buses | 4% | *Source*: Department of Road Police Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Foreign Affairs National data coordinator: Begklich Ovezklichev, Ministry of Public Health and Medical Industry of Turkmenistan Respondents: Gurbanmurad Shihmuradov, National Concern "Turkmenavtoellary"; Mekan Gaipov, Department of Police Road Supervision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan; Maral Kakisheva, Ashgabat Town Center of Traumatology and Urgent Surgery; Nataliya Levaya, National Society of the Turkmenistan Red Crescent; Irina Kivandova, Ashgabat Town Center of Drug Prevention, Alcohol and Psycologic Diseases to the Ministry of Public Health and Medical Industry of Turkmenistan; Maral Kakabaeva, Governmental Statistics Committee of Turkmenistan; Dovran Ovezov, Emergency centre to the Ministry of Public Health and Medical Industry of Turkmenistan; Ata Boppiev, Information Centre; Mamedov Meylis, Ministry of Road Transport of Turkmenistan # **Ukraine** Population: **46.21 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **67** years Income group:a **middle** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 2550** Rank: **43** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.800** Rank: **39** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **No information** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **6.9** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |-----------------------------------------|---------------------|--| | Lead agency: Ministry of Public Health | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget | Yes | | | National road safety strategy | Multiple strategies | | | Measurable targets | NA | | | Implementation funded | NA | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | NA | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2007) | 9921a
(76% males, 24% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2007) | 40 887b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | No information | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | Health data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. ![](_page_141_Figure_16.jpeg) *Source*: State Medical Statistics Centre 2007 #### Age-specifi c mortality rates from road traffi c injuries ![](_page_141_Figure_19.jpeg) *Source*: 2006, Department of Statistics of Transportation and Communication of National Statistical Service #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_141_Figure_22.jpeg) NA: not applicable Data source not specifi ed. ![](_page_142_Picture_0.jpeg) | National legislation | | |---------------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Speed limits set nationally | Yes | | Local authorities may set lower limits | No | | Speed limits differ by vehicle type | No | | Maximum speed limits (km/h) | | | Urban roads | 60 | | Rural roads | 40 | | Highways and motorways | 90 | | Enforcementa | No consensus | | Drink–driving law | Yes | | Drink–driving defi ned by: | | | blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit | Yes | | breath content | Yes | | physician certifi cate | No | | BAC limit: general population | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: young or novice drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | BAC limit: professional and commercial drivers | 0.00 g/dl | | Mechanisms to enforce drink–driving laws | | | Random breath testing | Yes | | Police checkpoints | No | | Breath testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Blood testing of all drivers involved in crashes | Yes | | Enforcementa | No consensus | | Law requiring motorcycle helmets | No | | Applies to all riders | NA | | Applies to all engine types | NA | | Exception to the legislation | NA | | Helmet standards mandated | NA | | Enforcementa | NA | | Seat-belt law | Yes | | Applies to front-seat occupants | Yes | | Applies to rear-seat occupants | No | | Enforcement applied to: | front-seat
occupants only | | Enforcementa | No consensus | | Law requiring child restraints in cars | No | | Enforcementa | NA | | | | | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | No | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | No | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | No | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No (subnational) | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |---------------------------|----------------| | Total, year: | No information | | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Data were not cleared by the government of Ukraine in time for publication of this report. National data coordinator: Irina Fedenko, Ministry of Public Health Respondents: Mikhail Golubchikov, Ministry of Public Health of Ukraine; Svetlana Sinelnik, Ministry of Public Health of Ukraine # **United Kingdom** Population: **60.77 million (2007)** Median age: **39** years Life expectancy at birth: **79** years Income group:a **high** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 42 740** Rank: **8** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.942** Rank: **14** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **476.5** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **9.8** | Institutional framework for road safety | | |-----------------------------------------|----------------| | Lead agency: | No | | Status of the agency | NA | | Funded in national budget | NA | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | Measurable targets | Yes | | Implementation funded | Yes | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year)) | No information | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2006) | 3298a
(76% males, 24% females) | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (2006) | 264 288b | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | 17.0%c | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | 98%d | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | 91%e | | Rear-seat occupants | 84–90%e | | Costing study available | Yes | | Annual estimated costs (in € (2006)) | 19.49 billion | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | Both deaths and
injuries | | Methods used | Willingness to
pay | - Police data, defi ned as died within 30 days of the crash. - Police data. - c *2006, Road Casualties Great Britain: 2006 Annual Report*, Department for Transport - 2006, Department for Transport estimation. - 2006–2007, Department for Transport, observational studies. #### NA: not applicable ![](_page_143_Figure_19.jpeg) 0 1 000 1971 1976 1981 Year *Source*: *Road Casualties Great Britain: 2006 Annual Report,* Department for Transport, *Road Traffi c Collision Statistics Annual Report 2006,* Police Service of Northern Ireland 1986 1996 1991 2005 2001 2006 ![](_page_143_Figure_21.jpeg) *Source*: 2006, *Road Casualties Great Britain: 2006 Annual Report*, Department for Transport, *Road Traffi c Collision Statistics Annual Report 2006*, Police Service of Northern Ireland ![](_page_143_Figure_23.jpeg) *Source*: *2006, Road Casualties Great Britain: 2006 Annual Report,* Department for Transport, *Road Traffi c Collision Statistics Annual Report 2006,* Police Service of Northern Ireland ![](_page_144_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | Exceptions: Sikhs while they are wearing a turban. | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | Yesa | | Investment in bicycle lanes | Yes | | Investment in foot paths | Yes | | Traffi c-calming measures | Yes | | Investment for increasing cycling | No | | Disincentives for private car use | No | | National policies to promote public transport | Yes | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | Yes | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | Yes | | Disincentives for private car use | No | Other policies are implemented in addition to those listed. | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |--------------------------------------------|------------| | Total (2006) | 34 327 520 | | Cars | 84% | | Motorized 2- and 3-wheelers | 4% | | Minibuses, vans, etc. (seating <20 people) | 9% | | Lorries | 1% | | Buses | 1% | | Other | 1% | *Source*: *Vehicle Licensing Statistics: 2006,* Department for Transport, *Northern Ireland Transport Statistics 2006,* Department for Regional Development | Care after road crashes | | |-------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (999) | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Department for Transport National data coordinator: Mark Bellis, Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University; Sara Hughes, Centre for Public Health, Liverpool John Moores University Respondents: Andrew Colski, Department for Transport; Pat Kilbey, Department for Transport; Harry Green, Department of the Environment; Carol Ann Munn, Scottish Government; Paul Taylor, Association of Chief Police Offi cers; Sue Maisey, Department of Health; Meryl James, Welsh Assembly Government # **Uzbekistan** Population: **27.37 million (2007)** Median age: **23** years Life expectancy at birth: **68** years Income group:a **low** Gross national income per person: **US\$ 730** Rank: **47** of 49b Human Development Index:c **0.701** Rank: **46** of 49b Private car ownership per 1000 population:d **No information** CO2 emissions (tonnes) per person per year:a **5.3** | Institutional framework for road safety | | | |------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|--| | Lead agency: The State Motor-Vehicle Inspectorate, Ministry of Internal
Affairs | | | | Status of the agency | Government | | | Funded in national budget
Yes | | | | National road safety strategy | Yes | | | Measurable targets | Yes | | | Implementation funded | No information | | | Money allocated (in ¤ (year))
NA | | | | Key data | | |---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | Reported number of road traffi c
deaths (2006) | 2034a | | Reported number of non-fatal road traffi c
injuries (year) | No information | | Road traffi c deaths involving alcohol | No information | | Wearing motorcycle helmets | No information | | Using seat-belts in cars | | | Overall | No information | | Front-seat occupants | No information | | Rear-seat occupants | No information | | Costing study available | No | | Annual estimated costs (in € (year)) | NA | | Study included deaths, injuries or both | NA | | Methods used | NA | | | | Ministry of Internal Affairs data, defi ned as died at the crash scene. ![](_page_145_Figure_16.jpeg) ![](_page_145_Figure_17.jpeg) ![](_page_145_Figure_18.jpeg) *Source*: 2006, The State Motor-Vehicle Inspectorate, Ministry of Internal Affairs #### Deaths by road user category ![](_page_145_Figure_21.jpeg) NA: not applicable ![](_page_146_Picture_0.jpeg) | a
The enforcement score represents a consensus based on the professional opinion of respondents on | | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--| | a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 is not effective and 10 is highly effective. | | | Road safety audits | | |--------------------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Formal audits required for major new road
construction projects | Yes | | Regular audits of existing road infrastructure | Yes | | Vehicle standards | | |------------------------------------------------------|-----| | Car manufacturers required to adhere to standards on | | | Fuel consumption | Yes | | Seat-belt installation for all seats | Yes | | Promoting transport alternatives to cars | | |-------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | National policies to promote walking or cycling | No information | | Investment in bicycle lanes | NA | | Investment in foot paths | NA | | Traffi c-calming measures | NA | | Investment for increasing cycling | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | National policies to promote public transport | No information | | Subsidized pricing of public transport | NA | | Improving the frequency and coverage of
public transport | NA | | Disincentives for private car use | NA | | Vehicle regulations | | |------------------------------------|-----| | Compulsory insurance for vehicles | Yes | | Periodic vehicle inspection for: | | | cars | Yes | | motorized 2- or 3-wheeled vehicles | Yes | | minibuses and vans | Yes | | lorries | Yes | | buses | Yes | | Registered motor vehicles | | |---------------------------|----------------| | Total, year: | No information | | Care after road crashes | | | |-------------------------------------------------------|----------|--| | Formal, publicly available prehospital care
system | Yes | | | National universal access telephone number | Yes (03) | | #### Acknowledgements Authority approving the data for publication: Ministry of Health National data coordinator: Mirhakim Azizov, Recearch Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedy to the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Uzbekistan; Gulnora Kasimova, Scientifi c Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedy, Tashkent Respondents: NA ![](_page_148_Picture_0.jpeg) #### Annex 1. Explanatory notes for Annexes 2–13 #### **Background** The data presented in Annexes 2–13 were obtained through a self-administered questionnaire implemented in the 49 countries of the WHO European Region that participated in the fi rst Global Survey on Road Safety in 2008. The survey focused on the recommendations of the *World report on road traffi c injury prevention (1)* as the basis for its structure and content. Most countries used the same methods for data collection, as outlined in a survey protocol developed for the study. In 92% of the countries, a national data coordinator identifi ed by the country coordinated the implementation of the survey, and teams of 6−8 key respondents including the national data coordinator completed the survey. The national data coordinators were trained in the methods and coordinated the collection, validation and clearance of data, as well as the data entry. The survey instrument, protocol and accompanying guidelines and training materials were available in the six offi cial WHO languages. Where needed, national data coordinators coordinated the translation of these documents into the local language and then back-translated them for the data entry, which was done in English. More details on the methods used for data collection can be found at: www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/road\_traffi c/road\_safety\_status/2009. The following sections contain country-by-country data obtained from the survey. - Annex 2 includes the list of indicators explored in the survey. - Annex 3 provides detailed data on the 30-day adjusted number and rates per population of road traffi c deaths and on the proportion of road users by country. The table includes modelled road traffi c death numbers that have been generated. The process is briefl y described below. Annex 3 also presents some general information on the countries, number of vehicles and rate of private car ownership and number and rates of injuries due to road crashes. - Annex 4 includes a graph presenting the mortality rates for road crashes by gross national income per person. - Annex 5 includes a list of objectives retrieved from the national strategies for the countries that reported a national strategy or a summary of it in English. - Annex 6 presents the estimated economic costs of one death in countries for which this was available. - Annexes 7–10 provide information on the status of laws, the enforcement of laws and the coverage and wearing rates relating to fi ve road traffi c risk factors: alcohol, seat-belts, child restraints, speed and helmets. - Annex 11 contains data on policy-related responses. - Annex 12 includes information related to the availability of prehospital care. - Annex 13 includes a list of national data coordinators and respondents who, in collaboration with national authorities, played a key part in conducting the survey. #### **Data processing** The data processing involved completing the survey instrument and entering data at the country level and validation at the regional level. WHO headquarters cleaned and modelled the data, and the WHO Country Offi ce in the Russian Federation and the European Centre for Environment and Health, Rome Offi ce, WHO Regional Offi ce for Europe performed analysis and wrote the report. #### *Reporting of country-level data* National data coordinators entered the fi nal country responses into an online database specially prepared by WHO for this project. National data coordinators also uploaded supporting documents where applicable and available. Data were then validated at the regional level. Once fi nalized and approved by regional data coordinators, the data were then exported into Microsoft Excel for cleaning. At this stage, each country's data were examined for accuracy, consistency and validity on a question-by-question basis. Where necessary, national data coordinators were contacted and additional supporting documents were requested to clarify inconsistencies. The survey instrument and study protocol are available at: http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/road\_traffi c/ road\_safety\_status/2009. #### *Types of data used* This report uses three types of data: - data from countries and secondary sources; - data adjusted for the 30-day defi nition of a road traffi c death to facilitate comparability; and - modelled numbers. In addition to the data obtained directly from countries, secondary data sources were used: - to classify countries into income categories; and - to generate road safety indicators such as the adjusted road traffi c deaths and modelled road traffi c death rates (with a 90% confi dence interval) as reported in Annex 3. Population and income data from the United Nations Population Division *(2)* and the World Bank *(3)* were used for this analysis. Annex 3 reports population estimates for 2007. If no estimate was available for a country for that year, published data for the latest year were used. Population estimates corresponding to the year of reporting were used for the modelling process. Annex 3 uses World Bank (Atlas method) gross national income per capita for 2007 *(4)* (or latest available year) to categorize countries into: - low-income = US\$ 935 or less; - middle-income = US\$ 936 to US\$ 11 455; - high-income = US\$ 11 456 or more *(3)*. The modelling process used more detailed subgroups. #### *Adjusted data* Underreporting has been acknowledged for many years as an important reason for the diffi culty in comparing road crash data between countries. Further, the lack of harmonized defi nitions for road traffi c deaths, the use of different data sources and the quality of the reporting system have also been documented. Consequently, several mechanisms were used to address these issues and make data more comparable. The Global Survey used the following two methods: - the European Conference of Ministers of Transport standardized 30-day road crash fatality factors *(5)* to adjust all reported country data; and - a model using negative binomial regression (*Global status report on road safety.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2009:231–234). The "reported" data in Annex 3 have been adjusted to this 30-day defi nition (see Table 1 for adjustment factors). Data for Albania, Portugal, Slovakia, Turkey and Uzbekistan were adjusted by a factor of 1.30 to correct for deaths defi ned as died on the scene or within 24 hours. Data for Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation and Turkmenistan were adjusted by a factor of 1.08 to correct for road traffi c deaths defi ned as died within 7 days of the crash. Data for Kyrgyzstan and the Republic of Moldova were adjusted by a factor of 0.97 to correct for deaths defi ned as died within 1 year of the crash. The new adjusted numbers were therefore used in the corresponding model. Table 1. European Conference of Ministers of Transport standardized 30-day factors for adjusting road crash fatalities | | 30-day total | Adjustment factor | |-----------------------|--------------|-------------------| | On the scene or 1 day | 77% | 1.30 | | 3 days | 87% | 1.15 | | 6 days | 92% | 1.09 | | 7 days | 93% | 1.08 | | 30 days | 100% | 1.00 | | 365 days | 103% | 0.97 | ## *Modelled data* The model developed for estimating mortality rates used data obtained from all 178 countries participating in the Global Survey. The *Global status report on road safety* provides detailed information on the variables included in the model and how the estimates were achieved on pages 231–234. Once data from all the countries participating in the survey had been adjusted for defi nition, countries were divided into two groups based on the completeness of vital registration data. Data from countries with good vital registration data and a population of more than 100 000 were used as a reference in constructing the negative binomial model. The model considered independent variables that are directly related to the outcome variable (road traffi c deaths): gross national income per person, income level per person according to the World Bank classifi cation of low, medium or high, population, vehicle density, road density, existence of a national helmet law, national speed limits on urban roads, national speed limits on rural roads, national policies that encourage walking and/or cycling, national policies that support investment in public transport, alcohol consumption and the strength of the health system. Estimates of the number of deaths with 90% confi dence intervals were calculated using the model developed. The methods and formulas for the modelling process are fully described in the *Global status report on road safety (6)* on pages 231–234 and at the following web site: http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/ road\_safety\_status/2009. Only six countries in the Region had incomplete vital registration data of less than 85% or external causes of death of undetermined intent greater than 30% *(7,8)*. Data on road traffi c injury deaths from Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Turkey and Turkmenistan required modelling. Annex 3 presents results with 90% confi dence intervals derived from the model. These results were also used to calculate mortality rates per 100 000 population, as shown in Fig. 3 in the main text. #### **References** - 1. Peden M et al., eds. *World report on road traffi c injury prevention*. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2004 (http://www.who.int/violence\_injury\_prevention/publications/road\_traffi c/world\_report/en/index.html, accessed 23 July 2009). - 2. *World population prospects: the 2006 revision. Highlights.* New York, United Nations Population Division, 2007. - 3. *World development indicators.* Washington, DC, World Bank, 2007. - 4. *GNI per capita 2007: Atlas method and PPP.* Washington, DC, World Bank, 2007 (http://siteresources. worldbank.org/DATASTATISTICS/Resources/GNIPC.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 5. Jacobs G, Aeron-Thomas A, Astrop A. *Estimating global road fatalities.* Crowthorne, Transport Research Laboratory, 2000 (TRL Report 445; http://www.transport-links.org/transport\_links/fi learea/publications/1\_329\_ TRL445.pdf, accessed 23 July 2009). - 6. *Global status report on road safety.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2009 (http://www.who.int/violence\_ injury\_prevention/road\_safety–status/2009/en/index.html, accessed 23 July 2009). - 7. *The global burden of disease: 2004 update.* Geneva, World Health Organization, 2008 (http://www.who.int/ healthinfo/global\_burden\_disease/GBD\_report\_2004update/en/index.html, accessed 23 July 2009). - 8. Mathers CD et al. Counting the dead and what they died from: an assessment of the global status of cause of death data. *Bulletin of the World Health Organization,* 2005, 83:171–177. #### Annex 2. Indicators explored in the questionnaire developed for the *Global status report on road safety* ### **1. Institutional framework, strategy and fi nancial investment** #### *Lead agency or coordinating body* Existence of a lead agency Status of the lead agency Budget for the lead agency ## *Strategy: existence of a national road strategy or action plan* Existence of a national strategy Measurable targets set Budget for the national strategy #### **2. Data** ### *Fatalities* Defi nition of road traffi c death Number of offi cial deaths and the agency collecting fatality data Fatalities by sex, age group, trend data and road user categories #### *Nonfatal injuries* Number of injured subjects and agency collecting nonfatality data #### *Economic costs* Existence of studies on the economic costs of road traffi c crashes Estimated costs Methods used for estimating costs #### **3. Interventions** #### *Exposure to risk* Number of registered vehicles and distribution by vehicle category Existence of a policy that encourages walking and/or cycling Existence of policies that support investment in public transport Requirements for getting a driving licence #### *Infrastructure and vehicle standards* Road safety audits on new and existing roads Car manufacturers required to adhere to safety standards Compulsoriness of insurance for all motorized vehicles Periodic vehicle inspection by vehicle types #### *Legislation* Speed: limits set, difference of speed limits by vehicle type, by road types, local authorities entitled to change speed limits and perception of enforcement Drink–driving: existence of a national law on drink–driving, blood alcohol concentration limit, mechanism of enforcement, perception of enforcement and estimation of the number of deaths attributable to drink–driving Motorcycle helmet use: existence of legislation on helmet use, whether the law differentiates by road type or road user, existence of helmet standards, helmet use prevalence and perception of enforcement Seat-belt and child restraints: existence of national legislation on restraint measures, compulsoriness by vehicle occupant position, seat-belt use prevalence and perception of enforcement #### **4. Post-crash care** #### *Emergency health services* Availability of a prehospital care system Availability of a universal access phone number Annex 3. General information, vehicles, road traffic deaths and proportions of road user deaths by type and road traffic injuries for countries in the WHO European Region | | Gen | eral informa | tion | Vehi | icles | | Roa | ad traffic dea | aths | | |-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|--------------------|----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|-------------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------| | | | Gross
national | | | Private car | Reported | Death | | ımber of road
deathse | Estimated road traffic | | Country | Population a
for 2007 | income per
capita b for
2007 in
US dollars | Income level c | Number of vehicles | ownership
per 1000
persons | number of
road traffic
deaths d | defined
in the
country | Point
estimate | 90%
confidence
interval | death rate
per 100 000
population | | Albania | 3 190 012 | 3 290 | Middle | 349 646 | 74.5 | 499 | On the scene | 445 | 366-522 | 13.9 | | Armenia | 3 002 271 | 2 640 | Middle | 366 836 | 95.9 | 371 | No time frame | 417 | 352-489 | 13.9 | | Austria | 8 360 746 | 42 700 | High | 5 796 973 | 507.5 | 691 | Within 30 days | 691 | _ | 8.3 | | Azerbaijan | 8 467 167 | 2 550 | Middle | 784 018 | 71.7 | 1 195 | Within 7 days | 1 099 | 900-1 319 | 13.0 | | Belarus | 9 688 795 | 4 220 | Middle | 3 147 625 | 241.7 | 1 517 | Within 30 days | 1 517 | _ | 15.7 | | Belgium | 10 457 343 | 40 710 | High | 6 362 161 | 482.8 | 1 067 | Within 30 days | 1 067 | _ | 10.2 | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 3 934 816 | 3 790 | Middle | 675 063 | 145.8 | 428 h | Within 30 days | 428 | _ | 10.9 | | Bulgaria | 7 638 831 | 4 590 | Middle | 2 628 680 | 258.2 | 1 006 | Within 30 days | 1 006 | _ | 13.2 | | Croatia | 4 555 398 | 10 460 | Middle | 1 949 936 | 327.5 | 619 | Within 30 days | 619 | _ | 13.6 | | Cyprus | 854 671 | 24 940 | High | 592 480 | 480.4 | 89 | Within 30 days | 89 | _ | 10.4 | | Czech Republic | 10 186 330 | 14 450 | High | 5 455 110 | 403.2 | 1 222 | Within 30 days | 1 222 | _ | 12.0 | | Estonia | 1 335 333 | 13 200 | High | 708 794 | 394.2 | 196 | Within 30 days | 196 | _ | 14.7 | | Finland | 5 276 892 | 44 400 | High | 4 656 370 | 540.0 | 380 | Within 30 days | 380 | _ | 7.2 | | France | 61 647 375 | 38 500 | High | 39 926 000 | 498.0 | 4 620 | Within 30 days | 4 620 | _ | 7.5 | | Georgia | 4 395 420 | 2 120 | Middle | 567 900 | 107.6 | 737 | Within 20 days | 737 | _ | 16.8 | | Germany | 82 599 471 | 38 860 | High | 55 511 374 | 564.5 | 4 949 | Within 30 days | 4 949 | _ | 6.0 | | Greece | 11 146 918 | 29 630 | High | 7 212 236 | 455.0 | 1 657 | Within 30 days | 1 657 | _ | 14.9 | | Hungary | 10 029 683 | 11 570 | High | 3 625 386 | 300.4 | 1 232 | Within 30 days | 1 232 | _ | 12.3 | | Iceland | 301 006 | 54 100 | High | 293 299 | 688.9 | 30 | Within 30 days | 30 | _ | 10.0 | | Ireland | 4 300 902 | 48 140 | High | 2 444 159 | 440.6 | 365 | Within 30 days | 365 | _ | 8.5 | | Israel | 6 927 677 | 21 900 | High | 2 283 634 | 257.1 | 398 | Within 30 days | 398 | _ | 5.7 | | Italy | 58 876 834 | 33 540 | High | 43 262 992 | 610.1 | 5 669 | Within 30 days | 5 669 | _ | 9.6 | | Kazakhstan | 15 421 861 | 5 060 | Middle | 3 105 954 | 157.2 | 4 714 | Within 7 days | 4714 | _ | 30.6 | | Kyrgyzstan | 5 316 543 | 590 | Low | 318 581 | _ | 1 214 | Within 1 year | 1 214 | _ | 22.8 | | Latvia | 2 277 040 | 9 930 | Middle | 1 062 935 | 358.9 | 407 | Within 30 days | 407 | _ | 17.9 | | Lithuania | 3 389 937 | 9 920 | Middle | 1 781 686 | 467.4 | 759 | Within 30 days | 759 | _ | 22.4 | | Malta | 406 582 | 14 575 9 | High | 346 118 | 647.0 | 14 | Within 30 days | 14 | _ | 3.4 | | Montenegro | 597 983 | 5 180 | Middle | 199 014 | 298.5 | 122 | Within 30 days | 122 | _ | 20.4 | | Netherlands | 16 418 824 | 45 820 | High | 8 862 935 | 440.5 | 791 | Within 30 days | 791 | _ | 4.8 | | Norway | 4 698 097 | 76 450 | High | 2 599 712 | 442.7 | 233 | Within 30 days | 233 | _ | 5.0 | | Poland | 38 081 971 | 9 840 | Middle | 18 035 047 | 354.6 | 5 583 | Within 30 days | 5 583 | _ | 14.7 | | Portugal | 10 623 031 | 18 950 | High | 5 948 269 | 496.5 | 1 110 | On the scene | 1 110 | _ | 10.4 | | Republic of Moldova | 3 793 604 | 1 260 | Middle | 448 202 | 87.3 | 571 | Within 1 year | 571 | _ | 15.1 | | Romania | 21 437 887 | 6 150 | Middle | 4 611 362 | 170.1 | 2 712 | Within 30 days | 2 712 | _ | 12.7 | | Russian Federation | 142 498 532 | 7 560 | Middle | 38 695 996 | 195.5 | 35 972 | Within 7 days | 35 972 | _ | 25.2 | | San Marino | 30 926 | 41 044 9 | High | 51 590 | _ | 1 | Within 30 days | 1 | _ | 3.2 | | Serbia | 9 858 424 | 4 730 | Middle | 2 235 389 | 154.0 | 962 | Within 30 days | 962 | _ | 9.8 | | Slovakia | 5 390 035 | 11 730 | High | 2 039 745 | 272.1 | 815 | Within 24 hrs | 815 | _ | 15.1 | | Slovenia | 2 001 506 | 20 960 | High | 1 286 903 | 509.9 | 293 | Within 30 days | 293 | _ | 14.6 | | Spain | 44 279 180 | 29 450 | High | 31 441 152 | 480.0 | 4 104 | Within 30 days | 4 104 | _ | 9.3 | | Sweden | 9 118 955 | 46 060 | High | 5 500 000 | 464.4 | 471 | Within 30 days | 471 | _ | 5.2 | | Switzerland | 7 483 973 | 59 880 | High | 5 356 000 | 515.3 | 370 | Within 30 days | 370 | _ | 4.9 | | Tajikistan | 6 735 996 | 460 | Low | 268 018 | 28.8 | 464 | Within 30 days | 951 | 767–1 196 | 14.1 | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | 2 038 464 | 3 460 | Middle | 259 421 | 109.9 | 140 | Within 30 days | 140 | _ | 6.9 | | Turkey | 74 876 695 | 8 020 | Middle | 13 311 000 | 87.1 | 6 022 | On the scene | 10 066 | 8 394-11 839 | 13.4 | | Turkmenistan | 4 965 278 | 1 2349 | Middle | 651 564 | 80.9 | 702 | Within 7 days | 926 | 694–1 343 | 18.6 | | Ukraine | 46 205 382 | 2 550 | Middle | - 001.004 | 30.7 | 9 921 | Within 30 days | 9 921 | | 21.5 | | United Kingdom | 60 768 946 | 42 740 | High | 34 327 520 | 476.5 | 3 298 | Within 30 days | 3 298 | _ | 5.4 | | Uzbekistan | 27 372 260 | 730 | Low | 0.02.020 | 170.0 | 2 644 | On the scene | 2 644 | | 9.7 | &lt;sup>a Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations. World population prospects: the 2006 revision, highlights. New York, United Nations, 2007. a Gross national income per capita is the value of a country's final income in a year divided by its population using the World Bank Atlas method. Data source: World Development Indicators database [online database]. Washington, DC, World Bank, 17 October 2008 (http://www.worldbank.org/data, accessed 10 June 2009). World Development Indicators database: low income is US\$ 935 or less, middle income is US\$ 936 to US\$ 11 455 and high income is US\$ 11 456 or more. d Adjusted for 30-day definition of a road traffic death. Longest time frame applied in the country. Modelled using negative binomial regression (Global status report on road safety. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2009-231—234). Data from countries with good vital registration and countries with a population of less than 100 000 were not included | | | | Road user deaths (%) | | Road traffi c injuries | | | | | |-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-------------|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--| | Country | Drivers and
passengers of
four-wheeled
vehicles | Drivers and
passengers
of motorized
two
wheelers | Cyclists | Pedestrians | Other or
unspecifi ed
users | Number
of people
injured | Injuries per
100 000
population | Ratio of
injuries to
deaths | | | Albania | 45.3 | 9.0 | 5.7 | 40.0 | — | 1 344 | 42.1 | 3.0 | | | Armenia | 60.3 | — | 0.3 | 39.4 | — | 2 720 | 90.6 | 6.5 | | | Austria | 59.0 | 17.4 | 5.4 | 15.6 | 2.6 | 53 211 | 636.4 | 77.0 | | | Azerbaijan | 59.7 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 38.1 | 0.1 | 3 432 | 40.5 | 3.1 | | | Belarus | 47.3 | 3.8 | 9.1 | 39.8 | — | 7 991 | 82.5 | 5.3 | | | Belgium | 56.0 | 15.2 | 8.2 | 9.7 | 11.0 | 65 850 | 629.7 | 61.7 | | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 61.0 | 4.7 | 5.8 | 23.7 | 4.8 | 11 647 | 296.0 | 27.2 | | | Bulgaria | 65.0 | 0.0 | 4.5 | 26.3 | 4.2 | 9 827 | 128.6 | 9.8 | | | Croatia | 49.9 | 18.8 | 4.5 | 20.0 | 6.8 | 25 092 | 550.8 | 40.5 | | | Cyprus | 50.6 | 28.1 | 3.4 | 18.0 | — | 2 119 | 247.9 | 23.8 | | | Czech Republic | 59.4 | 11.4 | 9.5 | 19.2 | 0.5 | 23 060 | 226.4 | 18.9 | | | Estonia | 66.0 | 6.0 | 9.0 | 19.0 | — | 3 270 | 244.9 | 16.7 | | | Finland | 70.3 | 10.8 | 5.8 | 12.6 | 0.5 | 8 446 | 160.1 | 22.2 | | | France | 59.2 | 25.0 | 3.1 | 12.1 | 0.6 | 77 007 | 124.9 | 16.7 | | | Georgia | — | — | 0.3 | 27.7 | 72.0 | 7 349 | 167.2 | 10.0 | | | Germany | 58.0 | 18.0 | 10.0 | 14.0 | 1.0 | 431 419 | 522.3 | 87.2 | | | Greece | 50.3 | 30.2 | 1.3 | 16.1 | 2.1 | 20 675 | 185.5 | 12.5 | | | Hungary | 54.4 | 10.1 | 11.7 | 22.7 | 1.1 | 27 452 | 273.7 | 22.3 | | | Iceland | 85.0 | 5.0 | — | 10.0 | — | 2 092 | 695.0 | 69.7 | | | Ireland | 61.9 | 7.9 | 2.5 | 20.0 | 7.7 | 8 575 | 199.4 | 23.5 | | | Israel | 57.6 | 9.3 | 1.5 | 31.6 | — | 2 079 | 30.0 | 5.2 | | | Italy | 49.0 | 26.0 | 5.5 | 13.4 | 6.1 | 332 995 | 565.6 | 58.7 | | | Kazakhstan | — | — | — | 16.2 | 83.8 | 32 988 | 213.9 | 7.0 | | | Kyrgyzstan | 55.0i | — | 1.0 | 43.0 | 1.0 | 6 223 | 117.0 | 5.1 | | | Latvia | 50.4 | 4.2 | 8.1 | 37.3 | — | 5 404 | 237.3 | 13.3 | | | Lithuania | 53.7 | 4.5 | 6.9 | 31.9 | 3.0 | 8 254 | 243.5 | 10.9 | | | Malta | 35.7 | 28.6 | — | 35.7 | — | 1 195 | 293.9 | 85.4 | | | Montenegro | 75.4 | 4.1 | — | 20.5 | 0.1 | 2 796 | 467.6 | 22.9 | | | Netherlands | 46.0 | 18.0 | 24.0 | 12.0 | — | 16 750 | 102.0 | 21.2 | | | Norway | 67.0 | 17.0 | 3.0 | 10.0 | 3.0 | 11 755 | 250.2 | 50.5 | | | Poland | 51.0 | 5.0 | 9.0 | 35.0 | — | 63 224 | 166.0 | 11.3 | | | Portugal | 54.6 | 22.1 | 3.5 | 16.1 | 3.7 | 46 318 | 436.0 | 41.7 | | | Republic of Moldova | 57.3 | 4.1 | 2.4 | 34.3 | 1.9 | 2 985 | 78.7 | 5.2 | | | Romania | 74.5 | 8.0 | 6.8 | 10.8 | — | 29 832 | 139.2 | 11.0 | | | Russian Federation | 62.0 | 2.1 | — | 35.9 | — | 292 206 | 205.1 | 8.1 | | | San Marino | 60.0j | 20.0j | — | 20.0j | — | 431 | 1463.1 | 431.0 | | | Serbia | 58.6 | 5.6 | 9.2 | 25.1 | 1.5 | 22 201 | 225.2 | 23.1 | | | Slovakia | 49.6 | 8.0 | 8.5 | 33.9 | — | 11 310 | 209.8 | 13.9 | | | Slovenia | 64.5i | 18.1 | 5.8 | 11.3 | 0.3 | 16 449 | 821.8 | 56.1 | | | Spain | 62.0 | 19.0 | 2.0 | 15.0 | 1.0 | 143 450 | 324.0 | 35.0 | | | Sweden | 65.0 | 16.0 | 6.0 | 12.0 | 1.0 | 26 636 | 292.1 | 56.6 | | | Switzerland | 48.0 | 22.0 | 9.0 | 21.0 | — | 26 718 | 357.0 | 72.2 | | | Tajikistan | 48.7 | 1.1 | 6.0 | 43.6 | 0.7 | 2 048 | 30.4 | 2.2 | | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | 41.4 | 10.7 | 3.6 | 34.3 | 10.0 | 6 133 | 300.9 | 43.8 | | | Turkey | 55.0 | 8.0 | 1.8 | 18.9 | 16.3 | 169 080 | 225.8 | 16.8 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Turkmenistan | — | — | 4.6 | 28.9 | 66.5 | 1 606 | 32.3 | 1.7 | | | Ukraine
United Kingdom | 44.3i | — | — | 55.7 | — | 40 887 | 88.5 | 4.1 | | | | 55.0 | 19.0 | 4.0 | 21.0 | 1.0 | 264 288 | 434.9 | 80.1 | | 2007 data not available. Latest available used from: UN data [online database]. New York, United Nations, 2009 (http://data.un.org, accessed 10 June 2009). Death is defi ned as died at crash scene in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and as died within 30 days of the crash in the Republic of Srpska. Passengers and drivers of any motorized vehicle. Data apply to 5 deaths (2004-2007). — Data not available. Annex 4. Mortality rates for road traffic injuries per 100 000 population by gross national income per person in the WHO European Region, 2008a ![](_page_157_Figure_1.jpeg) &lt;sup>a The International Organization for Standardization acronyms are used in this figure; ALB; Albania; ARM; Armenia; AUT; Austria; AZE: Azerbaijan; BEL: Belgium; BHH: Bosnia and Herzegovina; BUR: Belana; BUL: Bulgaria; CRO; Croadia; CIP; Cypurs; CZH: Czech Republic, DEU: Germany; EST: Estonia; FINE, Finland; FRA: France; GEO: Georgia; GRE: Greece; HUN; Hungary; ICE: Iceland; IRE: Ireland; ISR: Israel; ITA: Haly; KAZ: Kazakhstan; KGZ: Kyrgyrstan; LVA: Lativia; LTU: Lithuania; MDA: Republic of Moldova; MKD: The former Tigoslav Republic of Mozdovina; MLT: Malta; MME: Montenegro, NET: Netherlands; MOR: Norway; POL: Poland; POR: Portugal; ROM: Romania; RUS: Russian Federation; SMR: San Martino; SPA: Spain; SRB: Serbia; SWC: Slovenkia; SVM: Slovenkia; SVM: Switzerland; TUR: Turkey; TLX: Tajikistan; UKR: Ukraine; UNK: United Kingdom; UZB: Uzbekistan. Gorss national income per person is from World Bank deal for 2007. #### Annex 5. Sample objectives from national strategies implemented in countries in the WHO European Region #### **Infrastructure** - Safety on rural and urban roads - Tunnel safety - Creating advisory committees for the road marking - Creating "safety zones" on the roads - Ensuring that walkways meet the standards for width and design - Providing safe routes to schools - Removing roadside hazards - Improving curves - Introducing centre-line rumble strips - Improving road lighting - Establishing safe crossing points for pedestrians and cyclists - Proper equipment for winter conditions - Routine road maintenance - Installing road sign warnings on paths used by animals - Constructing animal fences - Black-spot treatment #### **Policy and enforcement** - Implementing stricter control of traffi c rules (such as speed limits, use of safety equipment, valid driving licence and driving under the infl uence of alcohol or drugs) - Routine road safety inspection - Effectively controlling and sanctioning road offences - Improving conditions of the examination of the driving licence - Partnering with professional federations of road transport to develop road safety policies - Imposing sanctions on the use of entertainment in driving situations - Ensuring a decrease in the number of unlicensed drivers on the road - Optimizing the operation of emergency care services and the rescue network - Controlling rest regimes for professional drivers - Conducting audits of road safety - Improving the legal basis of road safety - Conducting regular inspection of public transport, including school transport vehicles - Enforcing regulations on transport operators for the carriage of goods and passengers, especially dangerous goods - Enforcing safety regulations for parked cars - Increasing roadside technical checks of heavy vehicles - Enhancing tools and examinations used to assess driver competence - Implementing automatic traffi c surveillance - Developing policies to curb the growth of the distance travelled by private vehicles - Implementing awareness campaigns to educate the public about traffi c dangers - Positive reinforcement and penalty point system #### **Human behaviour** - Increasing the use of restraint systems, child safety seats and crash helmets (for motorcycle and moped drivers) - Fighting the risks related to alcohol and drugs - Ensuring that vehicles drive under speed limits - Effective driver education and advanced driver training - Elimination of driving fatigue - Maintaining safe following distances - Using daytime running lights - Traffi c education for children and adolescents (in schools) - Black-spot treatment - Providing advanced training for professional drivers - Limiting the use of entertainment in driving situations - Effective training and education for the employees of traffi c control services - Limiting the use of hand-held communication devices #### **Vehicles** - Lorry safety - Equipping vehicles with child safety seats, if necessary - Improving the visibility of heavyweight vehicles in the dark - Improving the quality of vehicles through roadside vehicle testing - Ensuring that vehicles are properly registered, inspected and licensed - Encouraging the use of innovative technologies #### **Post-crash efforts** - Independent accident analysis - First-aid training for drivers - Promoting the use of roadside telematics - Improving the effi ciency of emergency care services - Creating accident analysis groups #### **Research** - Accident analysis of the road network - Conducting scientifi c studies intended for establishing a coordinating institution for road safety - Conducting studies to assess the impact of transport on health by monitoring traffi c volumes, environmental quality and proximity to urban areas Annex 6. Estimated economic costs of one death in selected countries in the WHO European Region | Country | Costs per death in thousands of eurosa | Method used | Year | |-------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|------| | Austria – including (excluding) human suffering | 2676 (1399) | Willingness to pay | 2006 | | Netherlands | 2427 | Gross output method; Willingness to pay | 2003 | | United Kingdom | 2137 | Willingness to pay | 2005 | | Finland | 1752 | Gross output method; Willingness to pay | 2007 | | France | 1194 | Gross output method | 2006 | | Germany | 1162 | Gross output method | 2004 | | Hungary | 769 | Willingness to pay | 2002 | | Estonia | 767 | Gross output method | 2007 | | Cyprus | 480 | Gross output method | 2008 | | Latvia | 398 | Gross output method | 2006 | | Slovakia | 287 | Gross output method | 2007 | Currencies were converted into euros using the appropriate mid-year exchange rate. Annex 7. Drinking and driving laws, enforcement and road traffic deaths attributed to alcohol in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | | | How di | rink–driving is | defined | Mechan | isms to enforce | bans on drink- | -driving | |-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------|----------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------| | Country | National
drink-driving
law | Blood alcohol
concentration | Physician
certificate | Breath content | Random breath testing | Police
checkpoints | Breath testing
of all drivers
involved in
crashes | Blood testing
of all drivers
involved in
crashes | | Albania | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Austria | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Finland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | France | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Georgia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Germany | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Greece | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Ireland | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | | Israel | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Italy | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Kazakhstan | Yes | No | Yes | No No | Yes | No No | Yes | Yes | | | Yes | No | | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Kyrgyzstan
Latvia | Yes | Yes | Yes
No | No No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Lithuania | | | | | | | | No No | | Malta | Yes
Yes | Yes | No
No | No
Voc | Yes | Yes | No | No
No | | | | Yes | No
Voc | Yes | No
Voe | No
No | No
Voe | | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No
No | Yes | Yes | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | | Norway | Yes | Yes | No
No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Poland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Portugal | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Romania | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Russian Federation | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | San Marino | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | Yes | | Serbia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Spain | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Turkmenistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Ukraine | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | No | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Drink—driving not defined by BAC limit. Data not available. NA: not applicable. | | Effectiveness of overall | National maximu | m legal blood alco | hol concentration | | |-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | Country | enforcement (respondent consensus on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best) | For the general population (g/dl) | For young or novice
drivers (g/dl) | For professional or commercial driveres (g/dl) | Proportion (%) of road traffic deaths attributable to alcohol | | Albania | 8 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 5.2 | | Armenia | 5 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 6.1 | | Austria | 9 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 8.1 | | Azerbaijan | 9 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.7 | | Belarus | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 12.9 | | Belgium | 3 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | _ | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 6 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6.7 | | Bulgaria | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 4.7 | | Croatia | 7 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 30.0 | | Cyprus | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 18.0 | | Czech Republic | 9 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 3.4 | | Estonia | 8 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 48.0 | | Finland | 8 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 23.9 | | France | 4 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 27.0 | | | 9 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 37.0 | | Georgia | | | | | | | Germany | NA . | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 12.0 | | Greece | 7 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 7.2 | | Hungary | 5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 12.0 | | Iceland | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 20.0 | | Ireland | No consensus | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 37.0 | | Israel | 6 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 7.5 | | Italy | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | No consensus | | Kazakhstan | 10 | Nonea | None a | Nonea | 3.2 | | Kyrgyzstan | 4 | None a | Nonea | Nonea | _ | | Latvia | 7 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 20.6 | | Lithuania | 6 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 11.7 | | Malta | 4 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | _ | | Montenegro | 6 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.00 | _ | | Netherlands | No consensus | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 25.0 | | Norway | 4 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 20.0-30.0 | | Poland | 7 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 14.0 | | Portugal | 8 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 31.4 | | Republic of Moldova | 2 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 17.0 | | Romania | 8 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.5 | | Russian Federation | 6 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 9.7 | | San Marino | 6 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | | | Serbia | 7 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 6.0 | | Slovakia | 9 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 4.3 | | Slovenia | 6 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 38.4 | | Spain | 7 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | J0.4 | | Sweden | 6 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 20.0 | | | | | | | | | Switzerland | 6 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 16.0 | | Tajikistan | 9 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 5.0 | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | 6 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 4.6 | | Turkey | 9 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 2.0 | | Turkmenistan | 10 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 7.4 | | Ukraine | NA | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | _ | | United Kingdom | No consensus | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 17.0 | | Uzbekistan | 9 | None | None | None | _ | Annex 8. Seat-belt and child restraint laws, enforcement and wearing rates in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | | | | Seat-belts | | | Using seat-belts in cars (%) | | | Child restraints | |-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Country | There is a
national
seat-belt
law | The law
applies
to all
occupants | Enforcement is applied
to the following
occupants | Effectiveness of
seat-belt law
enforcement
(respondent
consensus on
a scale from
1 to 10) | Overall | Front-seat
occupants | Rear-seat
occupants | National
law
requiring
child
restraints | Effectiveness of
enforcement of
child restraint
law (respondent
consensus on a
scale from 1 to 10) | | Albania | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 9 | — | 30 | — | Yes | 8 | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 3 | — | — | — | Yes | 5 | | Austria | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | 88 | 89 | 49 | Yes | 9 | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 9 | — | — | — | Yes | 9 | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | — | 7 | — | — | — | Yes | 6 | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 3 | — | 79 | 46 | Yes | 6 | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | — | — | Yes | 5 | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | — | — | — | Yes | 4 | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | 45 | — | — | Yes | 5 | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 81 | 9 | Yes | 3 | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | 85 | 90 | 80 | Yes | 7 | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | 88 | 90 | 68 | Yes | 8 | | Finland | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 89 | 80 | Yes | 7 | | France | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | — | 98 | 83 | Yes | 5 | | Georgia | Yes | No | Front-seat occupants only | 8 | — | — | — | Yes | 7 | | Germany | Yes | Yes | All occupants | NA | 95 | 95 (drivers);
96 (passengers) | 88 | Yes | NA | | Greece | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 75 | 42 | Yes | 6 | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 4 | 69 | 71 | 40 | Yes | 4 | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | 80 | 88 | 68 | Yes | 8 | | Ireland | Yes | Yes | All occupants | No consensus | — | 86 | 63 | Yes | No consensus | | Israel | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | — | 94 (drivers);
88 (passengers) | 45 | Yes | 5 | | Italy | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 65 | 10 | Yes | 7 | | Kazakhstan | Yes | Yes | Driver only | 7 | — | — | — | Yes | 7 | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | No | Front-seat occupants only | 5 | — | — | — | No | NA | | Latvia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 77 | 32 | Yes | 6 | | Lithuania | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 6 | — | — | — | Yes | 5 | | Malta | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | — | 96 | 21 | Yes | 6 | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 6 | — | — | — | No | NA | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | All occupants | No consensus | 92 | 94 | 73 | Yes | No consensus | | Norway | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 6 | 88 | 93 | 85 | Yes | 9 | | Poland | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | 65 | 74 | 45 | Yes | 6 | | Portugal | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 9 | — | 86 (urban roads);
93 (motorways) | 28 (urban roads);
64 (motorways) | Yes | 8 | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | Yes | All occupants | No consensus | — | — | — | No | NA | | Romania | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 5 | 50 | 80 | 20 | Yes | 3 | | Russian Federation | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 33 | — | Yes | 8 | | San Marino | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 6 | — | — | — | Yes | 6 | | Serbia | Yes | Yes | Front-seat occupants only | 4 | 40–50 | 50–60 | 4-5 | Subnational | NA | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | — | — | — | Yes | 9 | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | 80 | 85 | 51 | Yes | 6 | | Spain | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | 84 | 89 | 69 | Yes | 7 | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 3 | 94 | 96 | 90 | Yes | 2 | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 7 | — | 86 | 61 | Yes | 8 | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 3 | — | — | — | Yes | 1 | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | No | Front-seat occupants only | 6 | 16 | — | — | No | NA | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 8 | 70 (rural roads);
20 (city centres) | — | — | Yes | 7 | | Turkmenistan | Yes | No | Front-seat occupants only | 7 | — | — | — | No | NA | | Ukraine | Yes | No | Front-seat occupants only | NA | — | — | —
84 (Great Britain); | No | NA | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | All occupants | No consensus | — | 91 | 90 (Northern Ireland) | Yes | No consensus | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Yes | All occupants | 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — Data not available. NA: not applicable. Annex 9. Speed limit laws and enforcement in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | | | | | Maximum speed | | | | |-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|-----------------------------|-----------------------------|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | | | | | | | | Country | Speed limits set
at the national
level | Speed limits
modifiable at
the local level | Legislation
differs by
vehicle type | On urban
roads
(km/h) | On rural
roads
(km/h) | Intercity
roads and
highways | Effectiveness of
overall enforcement
(respondent
consensus on a
scale from 1 to 10) | | Albania | Yes | Yes | Yes | 40 | 80 | 90-110 | 9 | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 60 | 90-110 | 5 | | Austria | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 100 | 100 | 7 | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 90 | 110 | 9 | | Belarus | Yes | No | Yes | 60 | _ | 90 | 6 | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 120 | 5 | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | _ | 130 | 6 | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 90-130 | 6 | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 6 | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | No | 50 | 80 | 100 | 6 | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 5 | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | No | 50 | 90 | 90 | 6 | | Finland | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 80-100 | 7 | | France | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 7 | | Georgia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 60 | 90-110 | 8 | | Germany | Yes | No | Yes | 50 | 100 | 130° | NA NA | | Greece | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 6 | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 4 | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80-90 | NA | 7 | | Ireland | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 100 | No consensus | | Israel | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80-90 | 90-110 | 5 | | Italy | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 110-130 | 7 | | Kazakhstan | Yes | No | No | 60 | 60 | 120 | 5 | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | Yes | _ | 60 | 60 | 100 | 7 | | Latvia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 110 | 7 | | Lithuania | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 6 | | Malta | Yes | No | Yes | 50 | 80 | NA | 5 | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 100 | 6 | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 120 | No consensus | | Norway | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 80 | 6 | | Poland | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 5 | | Portugal | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 90-100 | 8 | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | No | Yes | 60 | 60 | 90 | No consensus | | Romania | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 50 | 90 | 5 | | Russian Federation | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 90 b | 110 c | 6 | | San Marino | Yes | No | Yes | 50 | 70 | 70 | 5 | | Serbia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 80 | 120 | 4 | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 90 | 130 | 7 | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 130 | 7 | | Spain | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 100 | 8 | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 70 | 90 | 5 | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 80 | 120 | 7 | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | 60 | 90 | 110 | 8 | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | No | Yes | 60 | 80 | 120 | 4 | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 90 | 120 | 8 | | Turkmenistan | Yes | No | No | 60 | 90 | 110 | 9 | | Ukraine | Yes | No | No | 60 | 40 | 90 | NA | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | Yes | 50 | 100 | 115 | No consensus | | Uzbekistan | Yes | No | Yes | 70 | 70 | 90 | 7 | Recommended speed limit. On roads out of populated regions and sites. On roads marked by special symbols. Data not available. NA: not applicable. Annex 10. Helmet laws, enforcement and wearing rates in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | | | Law applies to the following road users | | Exceptions to the law | | | | | |-------------------------------------------|------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------------|---------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--| | Country | National
helmet law | Drivers | Adult passenger | Child passengers | Exceptions to the
helmet law | Helmet law applies
to all road types | Helmet law applies
to all engine types | | | Albania | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | Yes | Yes | | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Austria | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Finland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | France | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Georgia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Germany | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Greece | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Ireland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Israel | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Italy | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Kazakhstan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | Yes | No | | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Latvia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Lithuania | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Malta | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | | Norway | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Poland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Portugal | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | | | Romania | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Russian Federation | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | San Marino | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Serbia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | | | Spain | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | | Turkmenistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | | | Ukraine | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | — Data not available. NA: not applicable. | Country | Effectiveness of overall enforcement
(respondent consensus on a scale
from 1 to 10) | Helmet standards | Estimated national
helmet-wearing rate (%) | |-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Albania | 10 | Yes | — | | Armenia | 5 | No | — | | Austria | 9 | Yes | 95 | | Azerbaijan | 9 | No | — | | Belarus | 9 | Yes | — | | Belgium | 8 | Yes | — | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 6 | No | — | | Bulgaria | 7 | Yes | — | | Croatia | 6 | No | — | | Cyprus | 5 | Yes | 68 (drivers); 56 (passengers) | | Czech Republic | 9 | Yes | 97 (drivers); 85 (passengers) | | Estonia | 9 | Yes | — | | Finland | 9 | Yes | 95 (drivers) | | France | 7 | Yes | 95 | | Georgia | 6 | No | — | | Germany | NA | Yes | 97 (drivers); 96 (passengers) | | Greece | 7 | Yes | 58 (drivers); 32 (passengers) | | Hungary | 9 | Yes | 95 | | Iceland | 8 | No | 95 | | Ireland | No consensus | — | — | | Israel | 9 | No | 95 | | Italy | 7 | Yes | 60 | | Kazakhstan | 5 | No | — | | Kyrgyzstan | 7 | No | — | | Latvia | 6 | No | 93 (drivers) | | Lithuania | 6 | No | — | | Malta | 9 | No | — | | Montenegro | 6 | No | — | | Netherlands | No consensus | Yes | 92 (drivers); 72 (passengers) | | Norway | 9 | Yes | 100 | | Poland | 8 | Yes | — | | Portugal | 9 | Yes | — | | Republic of Moldova | 1 | No | — | | Romania | 6 | Yes | 90 (drivers); 65 (passengers) | | Russian Federation | 6 | Yes | — | | San Marino | 9 | Yes | — | | Serbia | 3 | No | — | | Slovakia | 8 | Yes | — | | Slovenia | 7 | Yes | — | | Spain | 8 | Yes | 98 (drivers); 92 (passengers) | | Sweden | 1 | Yes | 95 | | | | | | | Switzerland
Tajikistan | 9
6 | Yes
No | 100
— | | | | | | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | 2 | No | 1 | | Turkey | 5 | Yes | 12 (drivers) | | Turkmenistan | 8 | No | — | | Ukraine | NA | NA | — | | United Kingdom | No consensus | Yes | 98 | | Uzbekistan | 9 | No | — | Annex 11. Road safety management, strategies and policies in countries in the WHO European Region | | | Lead agency | | | | Strategies | | | |-------------------------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------| | Country | A lead agency is present | Lead agency status | Lead agency is funded | National road
safety strategy | Strategy includes
measurable
national targets | Strategy is funded | National strategy:
amount of money
allocated (in
millions of euros a ) | Year of funding | | Albania | Yes | Interministerial | No | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Armenia | Yes | Other | Yes | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Austria | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | NA | NA | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 3.16 | 2007 | | Belarus | Yes | Interministerial | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Belgium | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 94.00 | 2008 | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 0.026b | 2008 | | Bulgaria | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Croatia | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 2.08 | 2008 | | Cyprus | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 7.00 | 2008 | | Czech Republic | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | NA | NA | | Estonia | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 15.40 | 2008 | | Finland | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | France | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 2 295.00 | 2007 | | Georgia | Yes | Other | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Germany | Yes | _ | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | _ | _ | | Greece | No | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | NA | NA | | Hungary | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 13.03 | 2008 | | Iceland | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 3.49 | 2007 | | Ireland | Yes | Other | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | NA | NA | | Israel | Yes | Other | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 101.78 | 2008 | | Italy | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 53.00 | 2008 | | Kazakhstan | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | _ | _ | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | Interministerial | No | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Latvia | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 7.33 | 2006 | | Lithuania | Yes | Interministerial | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | 5.69 | 2007 | | Malta | Yes | Government | Yes | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Montenegro | No | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Netherlands | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 80.00 | 2008 | | Norway | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 103.42 | 2007 | | Poland | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 1 871.58 | 2005-2007 | | Portugal | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | Interministerial | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Romania | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes d | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Russian Federation | Yes | Interministerial | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | 245.73 | 2007 | | San Marino | Yes | Interministerial | No | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Serbia | No | NA | NA | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Slovakia | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 0.96 | 2008 | | Slovenia | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 2.20 | 2008 | | Spain | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | 881.03 | 2008 | | Sweden | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | _ | _ | | Switzerland | Yes | Government | Yes | Yesd | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Tajikistan | Yes | Government | Yes | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Other | Yes | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Turkey | Yes | Interministerial | Yes | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Turkmenistan | No | NA | NA | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | Ukraine | Yes | Government | Yes | Multiple strategies | NA | NA | NA | NA | | United Kingdom | No | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | - | - | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Government | Yes | Yes | Yes | | | | Currencies were converted into euros using the appropriate mid-year exchange rate. Honds for the development of the strategy in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina only. Costs for one read traffic death only. Not formally endrosed by the government. NA: not applicable. | | | E | | | | Policies on wall | king and cycling | |-------------------------------------------|---------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------|--------------------------------------------|--------------------|---------------------------------------| | Country | Studies on economic costs | Estimates refer to | Estimated total
annual economic
costs (in millions
of euros a ) | Year of estimation | Method for estimation | Presence of policy | Increased investment in bicycle lanes | | Albania | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Armenia | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Austria | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 9 922.00 | 2006 | Willingness to pay | Yes | Yes | | Azerbaijan | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Belarus | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 179.65 | 2003 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Belgium | No | NA NA | NA | NA | NA NA | Yes | Yes | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Bulgaria | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | | Croatia | _ | NA NA | NA | NA | NA NA | No | NA NA | | Cyprus | Yes | Deaths only | 38.15 | 2001 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Czech Republic | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 1 900.86 | 2007 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Estonia | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 150.32 | 2007 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Finland | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 2 532.33 | 2007 | Gross output method;
Willingness to pay | Yes | No | | France | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 11 600.00 | 2006 | Gross output method | Local | NA | | Georgia | No | NA NA | NA NA | NA. | NA | No. | NA NA | | Germany | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 30 900.00 | 2004 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Greece | No No | NA NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | No
No | | Hungary | Yes | Deaths only | 0.77 | 2002 | Willingness to pay | Yes | Yes | | Iceland | | , | 369.43 | | | Local | NA NA | | Ireland | Yes
Yes | Both deaths and injuries Both deaths and injuries | 1 328.96 | 2005
2006 | Gross output method | No Local | NA
NA | | | Yes | | 1328.00 | 2005 | Cross outset method | | NA
NA | | Israel | | Both deaths and injuries | 32 236.00 | 2005 | Gross output method | Local | | | Italy | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | | | Gross output method | Yes | Yes
No | | Kazakhstan | _ | NA
NA | NA | NA
NA | NA | Yes | | | Kyrgyzstan | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Latvia | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 191.78 | 2006 | Gross output method | Local | NA | | Lithuania | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 434.86 | 2006 | _ | Yes | Yes | | Malta | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Montenegro | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Netherlands | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 12 300.00 | 2003 | Gross output method;
Willingness to pay | Yes | Yes | | Norway | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 3 751.26 | 2008 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Poland | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 4 319.65 | 2006 | Gross output method | Yes | Yes | | Portugal | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | | Republic of Moldova | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Romania | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 1 200.08 | 2007 | _ | Yes | Yes | | Russian Federation | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 8 033.09 | 2007 | Direct costing | No | NA | | San Marino | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Serbia | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | Slovakia | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 297.96 | 2007 | Gross output method | No | NA | | Slovenia | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Spain | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 6 280.36 | 1997 | Gross output method;
Willingness to pay | Local | NA | | Sweden | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 3 252.59 | 2006 | Willingness to pay | Yes | Yes | | Switzerland | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 9 057.45 | 2003 | Gross output method | Local | NA | | Tajikistan | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 28.25 | 2002 | Gross output method | No | NA | | Turkey | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 8 917.18 | 2002 | _ | Local | NA | | Turkmenistan | No | NA NA | NA | NA | NA | - | NA | | Ukraine | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | | United Kingdom | Yes | Both deaths and injuries | 19 492.05 | 2006 | Willingness to pay | Yes | Yes | | Uzbekistan | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | _ | NA | #### Annex 11. *continued* | | | | Policies on walking and cycling | | | | | Policies on public transport | | | | Audits | |-------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|---------------------|----------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------|-----------------------|-----------------------|--------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|-------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------| | Country | Increased
investment
in foot paths | Traffi c
calming | Investiment
in increased
cycling | Introduction
of
disincentives
to private
car use | Other | Presence of
policy | Subsidized
pricing | Improved
frequency or
coverage | Introduction
of
disincentives
to private
car use | Other | Formal
audits on
new roads | Regular
audits on
existing
roads | | Albania | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | | Armenia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Austria | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | | Azerbaijan | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Bulgaria | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Croatia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | No | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | | Finland | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | France | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | | Georgia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Germany | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Yes | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Greece | No | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | — | | Hungary | No | Yes | No | No | No | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | Yes | | Iceland | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | No | | Ireland | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Israel | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Italy | No | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Kazakhstan | No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Kyrgyzstan | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Latvia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Lithuania | Yes | No | No | No | No | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Malta | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | | Montenegro | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Netherlands | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | No | | Norway | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Poland | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Portugal | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Republic of Moldova | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Romania | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Russian Federation | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | San Marino | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | Yes | | Serbia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Slovakia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | | Spain | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | | Switzerland | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Tajikistan | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | No | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | | Turkey | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | | Turkmenistan | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Ukraine | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | Local | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | No | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | | Uzbekistan | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | | NA | NA | NA | NA | Yes | Yes | Currencies were converted into euros using the appropriate mid-year exchange rate. Funds for the development of the strategy in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina only. Costs for one road traffi c death only. Not formally endorsed by the government. — Data not available. | | | Driving test | | | | | le inspectio | ns on | | Car man | | |-------------------------------------------|---------|--------------|----------|----------------------------------------------|------------|----------------------------------|--------------------|---------|-------|------------------------------------------|---------------------| | Country | Written | Practical | Medical | Compulsory
vehicle
insurance
system | Cars | Motorized
2- or
3-wheelers | Minibuses,
vans | Lorries | Buses | Seat-belt
installation
(all seats) | Fuel
consumption | | Albania | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA | | Austria | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Finland | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | France | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Georgia | Yes | Yes | No | No No | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Germany | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Greece | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Ireland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Israel | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA NA | | Italy | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Kazakhstan | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA NA | NA NA | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | Yes | No | No No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA NA | | Latvia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA NA | | Lithuania | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA NA | | Malta | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No No | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA
NA | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA NA | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No No | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA
NA | | Norway | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
No | | Poland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Portugal | | | | | Yes | No | | | | | | | Republic of Moldova
Romania | Yes | Yes
Yes | No
No | Yes
Yes | Yes
Yes | Yes
Yes | Yes
Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
Yes | NA
Yes | | | Yes | | | | | | | Yes | Yes | | | | Russian Federation
San Marino | Yes | Yes
Yes | No
No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes
NA | Yes
NA | | San Marino
Serbia | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes
Yes | Yes | Yes | | | | | Yes | | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | | Spain | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA
NA | NA
NA | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA
NA | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Turkmenistan | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | NA | NA | | Ukraine | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Annex 12. Prehospital post-crash care systems in countries in the WHO European Region, 2008 | | National prehospital | Universal access t | elephone number | Tolonhono number(s) | | |-------------------------------------------|----------------------|--------------------|-----------------|---------------------|--| | Country | care system | National | Regional | Telephone number(s) | | | Albania | Yes | No | Yes | 2253364 | | | Armenia | Yes | Yes | No | 103 | | | Austria | Yes | Yes | No | 144 | | | Azerbaijan | Yes | Yes | Yes | 103 | | | Belarus | Yes | Yes | No | 103 | | | Belgium | Yes | Yes | No | 100 | | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Yes | Yes | Yes | 124 | | | Bulgaria | Yes | Yes | No | 150 | | | Croatia | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Cyprus | Yes | Yes | Yes | 199, 112 | | | Czech Republic | Yes | Yes | No | 112, 155 | | | Estonia | Yes | Yes | No No | 112 | | | Finland | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | France | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Georgia | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | | Germany | Yes | Yes | Yes | 112 | | | Greece | Yes | Yes | No No | 166 | | | Hungary | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Iceland | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Ireland | | | No | 999, 112 | | | Israel | Yes
Yes | Yes
Yes | No
No | 101 | | | | | | | | | | Italy | Yes | Yes | No
No | 118 | | | Kazakhstan | Yes | Yes | No
No | 03 | | | Kyrgyzstan | Yes | Yes | No | 103 | | | Latvia | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Lithuania | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Malta | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Montenegro | Yes | Yes | No | 124 | | | Netherlands | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Norway | Yes | Yes | No | 113 | | | Poland | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Portugal | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Republic of Moldova | Yes | Yes | No | 903 | | | Romania | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Russian Federation | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | | San Marino | Yes | Yes | No | 118 | | | Serbia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 94 | | | Slovakia | Yes | Yes | Yes | 112 | | | Slovenia | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Spain | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Sweden | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Switzerland | Yes | Yes | No | 144 | | | Tajikistan | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Yes | Yes | No | 194 | | | Turkey | Yes | Yes | No | 112 | | | Turkmenistan | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | | Ukraine | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | | United Kingdom | Yes | Yes | No | 999 | | | Uzbekistan | Yes | Yes | No | 03 | | # Annex 13. National data coordinators and survey respondents in countries in the WHO European Region | Country | National data coordinator(s) | Respondents | |-------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Albania | Maksim Bozo | Fatos Olldashi, Maksim Tasho, Demir Osmani, Luri Balla, Gentiana Qirjako | | Armenia | Lilit Avetisyan | Ella Safaryan, Grigory Torosyan, Rubik Navoyan, Vardan Petrosyan, Vahe Petrosyan, Mariam Gukasyan | | Austria | Rupert Kisser | Guenter Breyer, Martin Germ, Fritz Wagner, Martin Vergeiner, Thomas Fessl | | Azerbaijan | Rustam Talishinskiy | Hikmet Ibishov, Ali Aliyarov, Anar Orujov, Rustam Humbetov, Mamed Jafarov, Arif Mirzoev | | Belarus | Ivan Pikirenia | Pavel Bozhanov, Sergey Zarecky, Andrej Gusakov, Tatiana Goriainova, Anatoly Sushko | | Belgium | Anne Meerkens | Leen Meulenbergs, Rudi Wagelmans, Miran Scheers, Jan Robben, Denis Hendrichs, Anneliese Heeren, Paul Deblaere | | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Jasminka Kovacevic, Alen Seranic | Munira Zahiragic, Muhamed Ahmic, Pavo Boban, Irena Jokic, Natasa Kostic, Mira Bera, Zelimir Skrbic, Jelena Glamocika | | Bulgaria | Irina Kovacheva | Valentin Panchev, Evelin Jordanova, Anton Antonov, George Petrishki, Diana Dimitrova | | Croatia | Ivana Brkic Biloš | Tihomira Ivanda, Ivica Franić, Boris Orlović, Dinka Rajčić, Željko Remenar | | Cyprus | Costas Antoniades, Olga Kalakouta | Soteris Koletias, Stavros Cleanthous, Andreas Kouppis, George Morfakis, Charilaos Evripidou | | Czech Republic | Veronika Benesova | Sarka Kasalova Dankova, Josef Tesarik, Zuzana Ambrozova, Jaroslav Horin | | Estonia | Ursel Kedars | Dago Antov, Erik Ernits, Jaak Kalda, Alo Kirsimäe, Toomas Ernits | | Finland | Petri Jääskeläinen | Merja Söderholm, Leif Beilinson, Pasi Kemppainen, Marita Koivukoski | | France | Bernard Laumon | Jean Chapelon, Mireille Chiron, Mouloud Haddak, Alexis Marsan, Yves Rauch | | Georgia | Kakha Kheladze | Mamuka Valsadze, Zaza Devdariani, Kakhaber Chikhradze, Eka Laliashvili, Aleqsandre Tudziladze | | Germany | Talvia Nilolaes | Rosemarie Schleh | | Greece | Dimitrios Efthymiadis | Spyros Panagopoulos, Vilelmini Paraschou, Vasiliki Mylona-Danelli, Georgios Kanellaidis, Maria Vaniotou, Konstantina Kosmidou | | Hungary | Mária Bényi | Péter Holló, Ákos Probáld, Csaba Kiss, Kirisztina Tálas, Zsófia Szász | | Iceland | Rósa Thorsteinsdóttir | Svanhildur Thorsteinsdóttir, Birna Hreiðarsdóttir, Kristján Ó Guðnason, Sigurður Helgason, Brynjólfur Mogensen | | Ireland | Declan Hayes | Robbie Breen, Gerry O'Malley, Ann Cody, Harry Cullen, Michael Brosnan, Con O'Donohue | | Israel | Kobi Peleq, Sarit Levi | Rinat Zaig, Orit Yalon-Shuqrun, Tsippy Lotan, Maya Siman-Tov, Vered Yeshouia, Zeev Shadmi | | | 9 | | | Italy | Maria Giuseppina Lecce | Vito Disanto, Giandomenico Protospataro, Raffaella Amato, Alba Rosa Bianchi, Alberto Valenti | | Kazakhstan | Nurlan Batpenov | Galina Jaxybekova | | Kyrgyzstan | Samatbek Toimatov | Viktor Kustov, Elvira Torobekova, Zoya Tulegenova, Ludmila Turgasheva, Imanali Sarkulov, Soolot Begaliev, Emil Omuraliev | | Latvia | Jana Feldmane | Aldis Lama, Georgijs Sovetovs, Jolanta Skrule, Maija Gaide, Vida Lukasevica, Arnis Vilums, Anita Villerusa | | Lithuania | Ramuné Meižienė | Gintaras Aliksandravičius, Marius Viténas, Jelena Selivonec, Aušra Želvienė, Aida Laukaitienė | | Malta | Neville Calleja, Audrey Galea | Joseph Galea, Therese Ciantar, Josie Brincat, Maryanne Massa, Kathleen England | | Montenegro | Svetlana Stojanovic | Saša Stefanovic, Dijana Subotic, Nevenka Tomic, Klikovac Dragan, Sovjetka Veljic, Slobodan Tadic | | Netherlands | Martijn Vis | Niels Bos, Peter Van Vilet, Harry Derriks, Loek Hesemans, B. Van Bruggen | | Norway | Jakob Linhave, Signe Vind | Marthe Lillehagen, Finn Harald Amundsen, Jan Guttormsen, Kristin Øyen | | Poland | Barbara Król | Jacek Zalewski, Robert Trajan vel Trojanowski, Andrzej Grzegorczyk, Ryszard Krystek, Maria Dabrowska-Loranc, Anna Zielinska | | Portugal | Gregória Paixão von Amann | Ana Coroado, Victor Lourenço, Luís Filipe Branco, Angelina Afonso, José Lisboa Santos, Maria da Conceição Jorge Proença, Samuel
Bonito Martins, Rodolfo Manuel Martins Soares | | Republic of Moldova | Filip Gornea | Iurie Untilov, Petru Crudu, Nicolae Mihul, Gheorghe Ceban | | Romania | Raed Arafat | Gino Theodor Bosman, Cristian Constantinescu | | Russian Federation | Gennady Kipor | Boris Grebenuk, Aleksei Koldin, Leonid Borisenko, Aleksei Voitenkov, Andrei Fonski, Alexandr Gordienko | | San Marino | Andrea Gualtieri | Eleonora Liberotti, Vladimiro Selva, Eva Guidi, Dennis Guerra, Federica Renzi, Marco Podeschi | | Serbia | Milena Paunovic | Jovica Vasiljevic, Demir Hadzic, Krsto Lipovac, Ivana Radojicic, Svetlana Trtica | | Slovakia | Martin Smrek | Adam Hochel, Katarina Halzlova, Alena Petrikova, Stefan Pristas, Hruskovic Samuel, Darina Sedlakova | | Slovenia | Matej Košir | Vesna Marinko, Bojan Zlender, Bostjan Smolej, Mateja Rok-Simon, Robert Staba | | Spain | Vicenta Lizarbe | Pilar Zori Bertolin, Catherine Pérez, María Seguí-Gómez, Teodoro Casillas Martin, María Librada Escribano, María Antonia Astorga | | Sweden | Thomas Lekander | Bengt Svensson, Åsa Ersson, Ulf Björnstig, Johan Lindberg, Gunnar Ågren, Lars Darin | | Switzerland | Bertrand Graz | Christoph Jahn, Lukas Matti, Brigitte Buhmann | | Tajikistan | Abduvali Razzakov | Kurbonkhon Saidov, Nazarali Rahmatulloev, Hasan Nazarov, Shuhratjon Ziyoboev, Shodi Jamshedov | | The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia | Fimka Tozija | Spase Jovkovski, Boris Murgoski, Cane Kostvski, Marjan Kopevski, Elena Eftimovska, Ljubica Damceska | | Turkey | Huseyin Fazil Inan | Bora Kayser, Senturk Demiral, Ismet Temel, Veysel Akkus, Erpulat Ozis, A. Haki Turkdemir, Y. Mehmet Kontas | | Turkmenistan | Begklich Ovezklichev | Gurbanmurad Shihmuradov, Mekan Gaipov, Maral Kakisheva, Nataliya Levaya, Irina Kivandova, Maral Kakabaeva, Dovran Ovezov,
Ata Boppiev, Mamedov Meylis | | Ukraine | Irina Fedenko | Mikhail Golubchikov, Svetlana Sinelnik | | United Kingdom | Mark Bellis, Sara Hughes | Andrew Colski, Pat Kilbey, Harry Green, Carol Ann Munn, Paul Taylor, Sue Maisey, Meryl James | | guoni | | - I all a state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of | $^{\rm a}$ $\,$ Questionnaire completed by the Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). ![](_page_173_Picture_0.jpeg) ![](_page_173_Figure_1.jpeg) World Health Organization Regional Offi ce for Europe Scherfi gsvej 8 DK–2100 Copenhagen Ø DenmarkTel.: +45 39 17 17 17 Fax: +45 39 17 18 18 E-mail: postmaster@euro.who.int www.euro.who.int