Disadvantage and Road User Safety

It is well established that more people are injured on the road in disadvantaged areas than in other areas. For example, in order to meet its target of halving the number of children killed or injured in road accidents, the Government is prioritising a focus on reducing accidents in disadvantaged areas and among children from different social and ethnic groups. What is less clear is why such risks are more pronounced for disadvantaged groups. The Department for Transport commissioned CRSP, in partnership with AECOM, to undertake a major study to investigate this and so inform strategies to improve road user safety. The findings of this research were published in February 2011.

CRSP was responsible for conducting research with residents in 5 case study areas. These included wards in:

• Bradford
• Wolverhampton
• Wigan
• Sunderland
• London (Newham)

In addition in order to test the assumption that the environment that people live in plays a key part in increasing the likelihood of road injury among children in disadvantaged areas, the final phase included comparative research with residents in a more affluent ward in Maidstone.

The research with local residents used a semi-ethnographic approach. This grounded the research within the local context, focused on the most meaningful and tangible issues to local people, and were rooted in their own lifestyles. This enabled us to address the question of why risks of accident and injury are higher in disadvantaged areas. It also allowed us to obtain a detailed insight into the experiences, behaviour and attitudes of local people.

The research with local residents focused on exploring the following topics:

• attitudes and behaviour, including: lifestyles and culture; and travel needs (both temporal and spatial);
• transport modes and resources, including: access to cars and
• the street context, including temporal and spatial dimensions of: risk areas; and activities on and use of streets.

Within each case study area group discussions and individual interviews were held with local residents. These included discussions and interviews with:

• adults - including parents;
• young people aged 16-21;
• secondary school children; and
• primary school children.

Within the groups a range of techniques were employed to engage the interests of participants and to simulate discussion. These included:

• Mapping - residents were asked to identify places of importance and traffic or road safety 'hot spots'.
• Drawing - this enabled us to get an insight into children's activities, behaviour and perceptions of risk.
• Ranking - used to explore behaviour or issues that were considered to cause road safety problems.
• Vignettes/scenarios and role play - these were used with children to explore attitudes, values and behaviour sensitively.

The research also included observations of the key sites identified by local people where congestion, accidents ad traffic incidents occur. These observations enable us to build up a picture of the behaviour of road users within the vicinity.

Main Findings
Children and young people living in disadvantaged areas appear to be at greater risk of road injury because they live in more hazardous environments with high density housing, close proximity to high volumes of traffic and high levels of on street parking. They also have lifestyles with higher levels of exposure to traffic risk as they are more likely to walk and have less access to safe play spaces and supervised facilities. This means that there are fewer alternatives to the street as places to socialise and play outside the home. . Children and young people also live in environments with greater levels of hazardous and illegal driving behaviour with an absence of consistent visible enforcement. The risk of road accidents is exacerbated by having to contend with navigating unsafe and run down environments on a daily basis.

• Developing and managing the physical environment by giving a higher priority to environmental planning for pedestrians in these areas. Suggestions here are to avoid further intensification of housing and ensure that any developments make provision for public transport or on site access.
• More effective and visible traffic management and enforcement activities to reduce the volume and speed of traffic in disadvantaged areas and so reduce risks for child pedestrians. Work with the local community to identify areas of particular risk and determine appropriate responses.
• Integrate road safety into other policy agendas. There would be considerable value in ensuring that road safety was incorporated at a high level within a wide range of organisations in order for it to become entrenched in strategic level planning and policy. Increase the level of co-ordinated and partnership working at a an operational level to link with police, fire and rescue, community safety, community development, health, children’s services, regeneration, housing and neighbourhood management, recreation management and planning. Some of these partners will have a key role in the development and management of the physical environment which is a central theme.

Sponsor
Department for Transport

Project team
Liz Sutton, Grahame Whitfield, Yvette Hartfree, Chris Dearden, Jacqueline Beckhelling, and Nicola Selby.

Start date: March 2008

Completion date: 2010

Conference presentation
Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2010) Road user safety and disadvantage. Road Safety GB national conference: 15-16 November, Kenilworth.

Publications
Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Road User Safety and Disadvantage.  Road Safety Research Report No. 123.  London: Department for Transport.

Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Appendix 1: Methodology in Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Road User Safety and Disadvantage.  Road Safety Research Report No. 123.  London: Department for Transport.

Christie, N. and Whitfield, G. (2011) Appendix 2: Literature Review in Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Road User Safety and Disadvantage.  Road Safety Research Report No. 123.  London: Department for Transport.

Sutton, L., Lowe, C., Hartfree, Y. and Dearden, C. (2011) Appendix 3: Case Study Report in Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Road User Safety and Disadvantage.  Road Safety Research Report No. 123.  London: Department for Transport.

Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Appendix 4: Partnership Working in Lowe, C., Whitfield, G., Sutton, L. and Hardin, J. (2011) Road User Safety and Disadvantage.  Road Safety Research Report No. 123.  London: Department for Transport.

top