IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v91y2016icp286-301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combining traffic efficiency and traffic safety in countermeasure selection to improve pedestrian safety at two-way stop controlled intersections

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Zhao
  • Zhang, Yuanyuan
  • Grembek, Offer

Abstract

Decision makers are encouraged to consider multiple objectives (such as traffic efficiency, safety, and environment) together to make decisions. Although there are methods to evaluate each objective respectively, there are few reports or research papers showing how to incorporate these objectives and put it in practice. Thus, this study aims to develop a procedure to incorporate traffic efficiency into the traffic safety countermeasure (CM) selection process. To illustrate the procedure, the economic benefits of four pedestrian safety improvements at crosswalks of major-streets at two-way stop controlled intersections (TWSC) were calculated, considering not only the safety benefits but also the efficiency impacts. First, for each countermeasure the efficiency impacts were calculated as the average delay reduction for both pedestrians and motorists. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine how the crucial parameters, including vehicular volume, pedestrian volume, and motorist yield rate, offset the average vehicle and pedestrian delay. Next, the safety impacts were calculated as the crash reduction benefits for different CMs using safety performance functions (SPFs) and crash modification factors (CMFs). Finally, the equivalent uniform annual return (EUAR) method was used to combine the countervailing effects of efficiency and safety by evaluating the economic effectiveness of different CMs. The Monte Carlo (MC) simulation method was used to conduct uncertainty analysis by using random sampling from probability descriptions of uncertain input variables to generate a probabilistic description of results. The findings showed that, first, CMs can have tradeoff impacts for pedestrians and motorists. Second, the efficiency impacts accounted for a large proportion of the total impacts, which can significantly affect the selection of CMs. Third, the rankings of the CMs differ depending on whether the safety impacts alone are considered, or whether both safety and efficiency impacts are integrated. The study illustrates the detailed process of evaluating projects considering multiple objectives for multiple road users. This process offers policy and decision makers a solid and practical reference using existing guidebooks. The findings also explain how safety and efficiency objectives can countervail with each other in improving pedestrian safety at TWSC.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Zhao & Zhang, Yuanyuan & Grembek, Offer, 2016. "Combining traffic efficiency and traffic safety in countermeasure selection to improve pedestrian safety at two-way stop controlled intersections," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 286-301.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:91:y:2016:i:c:p:286-301
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.07.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856416305912
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2016.07.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hickman, Robin & Saxena, Sharad & Banister, David & Ashiru, Olu, 2012. "Examining transport futures with scenario analysis and MCA," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 560-575.
    2. Sohn, Keemin, 2011. "Multi-objective optimization of a road diet network design," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 499-511, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Eichler & Hillel Bar-Gera & Meir Blachman, 2013. "Vortex-Based Zero-Conflict Design of Urban Road Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 229-254, September.
    2. Soria-Lara, Julio A. & Banister, David, 2017. "Dynamic participation processes for policy packaging in transport backcasting studies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 19-30.
    3. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    4. Eda Ustaoglu & Brendan Williams & Laura O. Petrov & Harutyun Shahumyan & Hedwig Van Delden, 2017. "Developing and Assessing Alternative Land-Use Scenarios from the MOLAND Model: A Scenario-Based Impact Analysis Approach for the Evaluation of Rapid Rail Provisions and Urban Development in the Greate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, December.
    5. Jonas Damidavičius & Marija Burinskienė & Jurgita Antuchevičienė, 2020. "Assessing Sustainable Mobility Measures Applying Multicriteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-15, July.
    6. Grischkat, Sylvie & Hunecke, Marcel & Böhler, Susanne & Haustein, Sonja, 2014. "Potential for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through the use of mobility services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 295-303.
    7. Gülay Demir & Milanko Damjanović & Boško Matović & Radoje Vujadinović, 2022. "Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility by Using Fuzzy-FUCOM and Fuzzy-CoCoSo Methods: The Case of the SUMP Podgorica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-27, April.
    8. Zuo, Ting & Wei, Heng & Liu, Hao & Yang, Y. Jeffrey, 2019. "Bi-level optimization approach for configuring population and employment distributions with minimized vehicle travel demand," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 161-172.
    9. C. S. Shui & W. L. Chan, 2019. "Optimization of a Bikeway Network with Selective Nodes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-18, November.
    10. G. Marletto, 2013. "Car and the city: Socio-technical pathways to 2030," Working Paper CRENoS 201306, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    11. Minaei, Negin, 2014. "Do modes of transportation and GPS affect cognitive maps of Londoners?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 162-180.
    12. Vo, Khoa D. & Lam, William H.K. & Chen, Anthony & Shao, Hu, 2020. "A household optimum utility approach for modeling joint activity-travel choices in congested road networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 93-125.
    13. Chung, Jin-Hyuk & Bae, Yun Kyung & Kim, Jinhee, 2016. "Optimal sustainable road plans using multi-objective optimization approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 105-113.
    14. Soria-Lara, Julio A. & Banister, David, 2018. "Evaluating the impacts of transport backcasting scenarios with multi-criteria analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 26-37.
    15. Aoun, Joelle & Quaglietta, Egidio & Goverde, Rob M.P., 2023. "Roadmap development for the deployment of virtual coupling in railway signalling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Navarro-Ligero, Miguel L. & Valenzuela-Montes, Luis Miguel, 2022. "Scenario archetypes in urban transport planning: Insights from the implementation of LRT systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 152-164.
    17. Macharis, Cathy & Bernardini, Annalia, 2015. "Reviewing the use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the evaluation of transport projects: Time for a multi-actor approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 177-186.
    18. Salcedo-Sanz, S. & Cuadra, L. & Alexandre-Cortizo, E. & Jiménez-Fernández, S. & Portilla-Figueras, A., 2014. "Soft-Computing: An innovative technological solution for urban traffic-related problems in modern cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 236-244.
    19. Hickman, Robin & Hall, Peter & Banister, David, 2013. "Planning more for sustainable mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 210-219.
    20. Varvara Nikulina & David Simon & Henrik Ny & Henrikke Baumann, 2019. "Context-Adapted Urban Planning for Rapid Transitioning of Personal Mobility towards Sustainability: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-37, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:91:y:2016:i:c:p:286-301. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.