The investigation of Turkey’s road safety decisions by Haddon Matrix and 7Es
Abstract
Objective: Road traffic crashes are one of the crucial public health problems in Turkey and all over the world. Various human, vehicle, and environment factors have been associated with road traffic crashes and different policies, strategies, and interventions have been applied to decrease adverse outcomes such as deaths. Strategies adopted and applied by authorities play a crucial role in road safety.Methods: In the present study, the road safety decisions taken by the Road Traffic Safety Province Coordination Board of each of the 81 provinces of Turkey were analysed by using two frameworks,the Haddon Matrix and Es of road safety.Results: The classification procedure resulted in 8840 decisions in different cities and 652 unique decisions across Turkey. These decisions were classified based on the Haddon Matrix and Es of road safety. The majority of the decisions focused on the pre-crash phase and education, enforcement, engineering and evaluation activities.Conclusion: In line with the strategic decisions, practical implications were discussed, and suggestions have been introduced for the future of road safety. The study provides both methodological and practical implications for road safety research and agenda. It is believed that the use of the Haddon Matrix and 7Es of road safety for policy development will result in significant improvements in public health interventions.
Keywords
road safety decision, policy analysis, Haddon Matrix, policy development, public health
Supporting Institution
Thanks
References
- Larsson P, Dekker SW, Tingvall C. The need for a systems theory approach to road safety. Saf Sci 2010;48(9):1167-1174.
- Özkan T, Lajunen T. A general traffic(safety) culture system (G-TraSaCu-S).TraSaCu project, European Commission,RISE Programme. 2015;1–47.
- Scott-Parker B, Goode N, Salmon P.The driver, the road, the rules . . . and the rest? A systems-based approach to young driver road safety. Accid Anal Prev 2015;74:297–305.
- Özkan T, Öztürk İ, Üzümcüoğlu Y, Bıçaksız P, Yıldırım E, Vursavaş F, Daşkın O, Turgut S, Sayı İE, Battal Ö, Söylemez M, Kurban S. Trafik Kurul Kararlarının Analizi – Türkiye Değerlendirmesi.Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü. Available at: http://www.trafik.gov.tr/kurumlar/trafik.gov.tr/06-Yayinlar/Diger/TKKA_TurkiyeDegerlendirmesi.pdf. 2015.
- Albertsson P, Björnstig U, FalkmerT. The Haddon Matrix, a tool for investigating severe bus and coach crashes. International Journal of Disaster Medicine 2003;2:109–119.
- Runyan CW. Introduction: Back to the Future—Revisiting Haddon’s Conceptualization of Injury Epidemiology and Prevention. Epidemiol Rev 2003;25:60–64.
- Barnett DJ, Balicer RD, Blodgett D, Fews AL, Parker, CL, Links JM. The Application of the Haddon Matrix to Public Health Readiness and Response Planning. Environ Health Perspect 2005;113(5):561–566.
- Zhong S, Clark M, Hou XY, Zang YL, FitzGerald G. 2010–2011 Queensland floods: Using Haddon’s Matrix to define and categorise public safety strategies. Emerg Med Australas 2013;25:345–352.
- Rustagi N, Kumar A, Norbu L, Vyas D. Applying Haddon Matrix for Evaluation of Road Crash Victims in Delhi, India. Indian J Surg 2017;80(5):479–487.
- Haddon WJr. A logical framework for categorising highway safety phenomena and activity. J Trauma 1972;12(3):193–207.