Upload
gilles
View
28
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Local road safety policymaking in Flanders. Towards an integral approach. Hans Tormans Transportation Research Institute (IMOB) Hasselt University Wetenschapspark 5 – 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium hans.tormans @ uhasselt.be Tel: +32 (0)11 26 91 37. Road safety fact-sheet. EU: Fatalities - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Local road safety policymaking in FlandersTowards an integral approachHans TormansTransportation Research Institute (IMOB)Hasselt UniversityWetenschapspark 5 – 3590 Diepenbeek, [email protected]: +32 (0)11 26 91 37
2
EU: Fatalities
2009: 34.500 2008: 38.900 ( -11%) 2001: 54.302 ( -36%) 1991: 75.426 ( -54%) Target 2000-2010: -50%
Injuries 2008: 1.631.412 2001: 1.986.645 ( -18%) 1991: 1.907.125 ( -14%)
Road safety fact-sheet
Source: CARE
3
Road safety fact-sheet
Source: CARE
4
Belgium (2008) Fatalities: 904 (2000-2008: -36%) Injuries: 64.436 (2000-2008: -5%) Target 2010: 500 fatalities
Flanders (2008) Fatalities: 495 (2000-2008: -43%) Injuries: 41.072 (2000-2008: -10%) Target 2010: 250 fatalities
Inside built-up areas Flanders: 49,8% of fatalities Pedestrians/bicyclists Children and elderly
Road safety fact-sheet
Source: Statbel
5
Legislation/policy plans European Federal Regional Provincial Local
Urban transport policymaking 308 municipalities
Politicians – town council Administration
118 police zones Public transport providers (De Lijn, NMBS) Stakeholders Users
Urban Road Safety Management
6
Covenant-policy (°1996) Voluntary agreement Collaboration, consultation, participation and
harmonization Coordinated allocation of resources Multimodal approach Partners involved:
Flemish Government Municipal authorities De Lijn (PT) Provinces and ‘third parties’
Outcome: Local mobility plans Coordination of mobility projects (modules)
Urban Road Safety Management
7
Evaluation (Polders, 2010) Strengths
Clear vision Motivation Participation Coordination
Weakness Political continuity Internal conflicts - Mutual recognition Know-how General municipal policy
Urban Road Safety Management
8
Methodological approach Not just remedy, but address at the source
internal organization Self-assessment procedure Framework = Total Quality Management“A comprehensive and structured approach to organizational
management that seeks to improve the quality of products and services through ongoing refinements in response to
continuous feedback.”
Aim: “Road to excellence”
Research objective
9
Key elements: customer orientation commitment and leadership of senior
management planning and organization using quality management techniques and
tools education and training involvement and teamwork measurement and feedback
(Vinni, 2007)
Total Quality Management
10
TQM in local RS-management
Benchmark RS plans
TQM
11
I. User needs
Organization
Collect Analyze Use
12
II. Leadership
Organization
Communication Dedication Coordination
13
III. Policy planning
Organization
Preparation Background Vision Elaboration
14
IV. People and resources
Organization
HRM Financial mgt. Empowerment
and delegation Data mgt. Process mgt. Daily mgt.
15
V. Infrastructure and engineering
Road Safety Actions
Trigger Preparation Involvement and
collaboration Follow-up
16
VI. Education and behavior
Road Safety Actions
Education Sensitization Information
17
VII. Enforcement
Road Safety Actions
Context Planning Registration
18
VIII. Results
Analysis
Key activities Residents Users Co-workers
19
IX. Self-assessment and follow-up
Analysis
Instruments Level Adjustments Management of
change
20
Conceptual model
21
Levels of development Ladder of maturity
Phase 4: integral
Phase 2: isolated
Phase 1: ad-hoc
Phase 3: system oriented
22
Levels of developmentAd hoc
Isolated
System oriented
Integrated
23
Phases (3)1. Organization: “Behind the screens”2. Road safety actions: “Context and content”3. Analysis: “Feedback”
“What” and “How”?modules (9) aspects (35) points of interest (140)
Levels of development (4)1. Ad hoc2. Isolated3. System-oriented4. Integrated
Conceptual model
24
Framework for continuous improvement Allow policymakers to self-assess their organization and
performances in a structured manner Involve (all) stakeholders in the organization’s
development Identify both points of attention and good practices Create platform for benchlearning
Ultimate goal: raise level of road safety in our society in a sustainable
way and reduce the number of road casualties
Tool objectives
25
Procedure Implementation
Standardized (web based) questionnaires Context Modules
Independent assessment by stakeholders Official Politician Local police force
Consensus meeting Feedback meeting
26
Pilot caseOrganization Road Safety Analysis
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IXa 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 0b 4 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 4c 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 3 4d 3 3 4 2 3 3 4 2 4e 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 3f 2 3 3 0 3 4 2 3g 4 4 3 2 4 1 3 2h 2 3 1 3 4 3 3i 3 4 4 3 4 3 4j 0 3 2 4 2 4 3k 4 3 3 4 4 3 4l 2 2 2 4 2 4 4m 3 2 3 2 3n 3 3 3o 4 3 3p 3 4 2q 3 3 3r 2 2s 2t 3u 2v 2
AVG 3,29 3 3,08 2,45 3,12 2,89 3 3 3,25
27
Conclusion Output
Visual representation of levels of development Policy advice
Facilitate continuous improvement Create breeding ground for discussion Reveal points of attention Recognition of good examples and good practices Create medium for interaction and communication
No scores/judgments/comparisons… but motivation!
Tool can never be a goal as such!