NRSA's Model

A systemic Model for Planning and

Operating in the Field of Road Safety

Sarit Amram-Katz and Yael Hadar

January 2019

Introduction

Road safety is a varied subject, composed of many fields and aspects. Thus, attempting to improve

road safety is a highly complicated task that entails sophisticated challenges. In order to overcome

these complexities, and enable strategic and systematic work, the National Road Safety Authority

(hereinafter: NRSA) has adopted a model for creating action plans and programs that is presented in

this document – the NRSA's Model.

The Model's objective is to form systematic work guidelines for creating action plans to promote road

safety in Israel. The Model represents the NRSA's perception of the promotion of road safety in Israel

on the macro level and as such it will serve as a planning model on the micro level for action plans

regarding the annually chosen core issues.

Method

The Model is based on two main approaches to road safety promotion as customary in the OECD

countries, the Safe-System approach and the Safe Systemic Climate approach.1

Description of the Systemic Model for shared responsibility for road safety

The sole purpose of the NRSA's existence is to save lives by reducing injuries from road accidents in

Israel. This purpose translates into an action plan that includes activities in various subjects and fields

with one thing in common: they are all intended to reduce the number of road accidents casualties

and fatalities.

In 2017, the index of fatalities per billion km traveled in Israel was 6.2, when, according to NRSA's

council's resolution, Israel should reach a target of no more than 5 fatalities per billion km traveled,

no later than 2022 (Figure 1).

1 For detailed information about the Safe System approach: Hakkert, S. 2016. Zero Road Deaths and Serious Injuries. International Transport Forum. OECD Research Report. https://www.itf-oecd.org/zero-road-deaths Wegman, F. 2012. Driving Down the road toll by building a Safe System. Government of South Australia. https://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/259251/FredWegman_drivingdowntheroadtoll.pdf For detailed information about the Safe Systemic Climate and Safety Culture: Zohar, D., Zur, S., Stusser, P., Dayan, S. 2012. Effects of Safety Climate and Passenger Disruptions on Driving Safety of School-Bus Drivers. Jerusalem: National Road Safety Authority. http://www.infocenters.co.il/rsa/multimedia/ Baron-Epel, O., Leibovitch-Zur, S., Magid, A. 2013. The relation between safe road behavior, infrastructure quality and safety climate inside the settlement in the Arab sector. (in Hebrew) http://www.igudbit.org.il/Index.asp?ArticleID=2468&CategoryID=420 Ward, N. 2015. Measuring Minnesota’s Safety Culture. Western Transportation Institute Montana State University. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/shsp/safetyculture.pdf

Figure 1: Road Accidents Fatalities in Israel 2015-2017 (in raw data and normalized according to

billion km traveled)2

Source: Romm, 2018

How can we reach this target? How do we plan the actions intended to reduce the number of fatalities

and/or casualties?

The NRSA's Model proposes a systematic method to plan various ways to potentially influence the

extent of road accidents injuries.

The basic assumptions underlying the Model

The NRSA's Model is based on six basic assumptions (as above mentioned, based on the Safe-

System approach and the Safe Systemic Climate approach):

1. A safe systemic climate assists in forming road safety – the safety climate can increase the

chance of safe driving, and as a result, reduce accidents and casualties.

2. People make mistakes that can lead to accidents – the assumption is that human errors cannot

be completely avoided being that they are the result of human behavior.

3. The human body has limited physical ability to sustain injury – it cannot endure all types of

injuries, thus, when planning safety, we must create a situation that would minimize the

severity of injuries.

2 NRSA's processing of the fatalities and km traveled data, 2015-2017.

4. All those designing, building, managing and using the system share the responsibility – if all

the parties involved step up and take responsibility, it will lead to the best outcome of keeping

road safety, with each function doing its best in its field of responsibility.

5. All parts of the system must be strong in order to increase their influence, thus, if one part

fails, road users will still be protected. Given a strong and well-functioning system, human

errors will not lead to severe injury.

6. A plan for promoting road safety is a systemic plan which requires clear leading, management

and follow-up – the plan and the system must be strictly managed and monitored to realize

their potential.

The various aspects of the model

As mentioned, the Model's main goal is to reduce the number of casualties and/or fatalities. Each one

of the Model's components influences, positively or adversely, achievement of the goal. This

document offers a description of the various parts of the Model and their function, including an

explanation and examples, however not in such detail as to specify the entire possible contents

related to each part.

The NRSA's Model is comprised of three dimensions which, jointly, constitute the system for shared

responsibility for road safety, intended to minimize injury (Figure 2). These dimensions are

separated at the Model level, but naturally they share mutual interfaces.

The primary dimension

Vehicle – vehicles' degree of safety and intactness is a significant factor in reducing injury. This factor

includes many elements which influence the safety level. For example, proper air pressure in the tires,

the number and quality of air-bags, the existence of an Active Brake Assist system and more. Different

types of vehicles are distinguished by their maximal degree of safety. Thus, drivers of two-wheel

vehicles are more exposed to injury than the occupants of a private vehicle, not to mention occupants

of a truck. All these and more must be taken into consideration in forming the action plan.

Infrastructure –infrastructure is a wide area, which includes all that exists on the road and its

environment: the material from which the road is paved, markings on the road, signs and traffic lights,

fences and separators, types of junctions and more. Infrastructure plays a significant role both in

preventing the accident and in reducing injury. First, infrastructure must be intact and free of

obstacles. Second, infrastructure must be built in a way that will reduce the severity of injury, to the

extent such does occur. For example, the safety guardrails on dual roadways prevent the shifting of

vehicles from one lane to the opposite lane, thus reducing the spreading of the injury to other vehicles

in case a vehicle deviates from its lane (yet, the same guardrails might, at times, become a safety

hazard, for motorcyclists, for example).

Behavior –behavior of road users critically influences the degree of injury, mostly because it is a very

dynamic and unpredictable factor. Allegedly, each user's behavior is independent and derives from

the individual choice how to behave – whether it is the choice to wear a full helmet or to drive above

the speed limit. However, the NRSA's Model assumes that alongside personal choices, behavior is

designed and influenced by other factors. These behaviors are also influenced by the level of

infrastructure and the type of vehicle, the degree of experience, personal skills and education each

user possesses, and by the safety climate surrounding him. Furthermore, road users' behavioral

decision-making process is not based merely on rational, conscious and educated decisions, but is

done also consequent upon a less conscious response to various elements in the environment. Thus,

for example, a road user might consciously and rationally choose to drive slower when he notices a

30 km/h speed limit sign, on the other hand, he might actually drive slower because the road design

has changed to make him slow down and the driver chooses it unknowingly.

Technology is an integral part of each one of the factors, and produces different degrees of road

safety in each one of the factors.

Regarding the vehicle, there are different degrees of technology-dependent vehicle safety, such as

the number of air-bags, Lane Departure Warning systems and more.

Regarding infrastructure, technology produces a relatively forgiving infrastructure, depending on the

type of materials used for paving the road and its environment. In addition, it can be used to plant

various means to monitor road users' behaviors, to warn road users and to prevent potential

accidents.

Regarding behavior, technology affects road users' behavior, regardless of the vehicle and

infrastructure. Examples include the degree of distraction during driving or during crossing on a

pedestrian crossing which derives from smartphones and the technological methods to prevent it, or

the degree of usage of protective jackets with air-bags.

All these factors, behavior, vehicle, infrastructure and technology interact. For example, the risk of

injury of a motorcyclist on a road without a right shoulder is different compared to that of a private

vehicle driver on the same road. Another example of the relation between the factors, producing a

different degree of risk is the changing behavior of a driver in a vehicle with an Active Brake Assist

system.

The time dimension

The Model assumes there are different actions that can and should be done referring to the time

dimension: before the accident, during the accident and after the accident. Actions before occurrence

of an accident will focus on the various ways to prevent it by using the factors of the vehicle,

infrastructure and behavior. Actions during the occurrence of an accident will focus on minimizing the

degree and severity of injury. Actions after occurrence of an accident will focus on providing effective

medical care to the injured and reducing secondary injury of other road users consequent upon the

accident. Minimization of injury will occur when the actions on these three dimensions of time are

optimally combined.

The safety climate dimension

The Model assumes that a safe systemic climate should be improved for it encourages road safety.

A safe systemic climate refers to shared or similar perceptions among the different road users

regarding the importance of safe road behavior, over other goals such as speedy arrival.3 Namely,

prioritizing safety over various shortcuts, which are often characterized by traffic law violations (such

as not wearing a seat belt in the settlement's premises, forbidden overtaking when being stressed

and impatient, using a smartphone while crossing the road). The shared perceptions of road users

are shaped by all actions done in the context of the variables that influence promotion of road safety.

Namely, in a settlement where emphasis is put on promotion of safety by improving infrastructures,

by enforcement and by education and public awareness programs, the climate that will be created

will influence the perceptions and behaviors and promote road users' safety. Thus, the actions for

promoting the safe systemic climate will focus on two levels: the first is improving the perceptions of

road users, and the other is improving the perceptions of decision and policy makers. A combined

action will lead to the best result. Research shows that this variable is the strongest predictor of

accidents, hence its importance.4

3 Zohar et al. 2012. Ibid. Baron-Epel et al. 2013. Ibid. 4 Zohar et al. 2012. Ibid.

Figure 2: The NRSA's Model – a systemic model of shared responsibility for road safety

The NRSA's activity – shared responsibility

Road safety is comprised of many fields, the essence of which is expressed in the core elements of

the Model (the vehicle, infrastructure, behavior, technology and safety climate). Similarly, the field of

activity when promoting road safety is complex, varied (presented in Figure 3) and includes

government ministries, municipalities, NPOs, R&D bodies, companies, youth organizations and more.

Success in promoting road safety in Israel is closely related to Political Will. Namely, to what degree

the subject is at the top of their agenda, and to what extent they are committed to it and promote it.

One cannot exaggerate of the importance of this variable, being that it influences all stages of safety

promotion, from the making of the plans, through the allocation of budgets and to the supervision of

implementation.

The means to promote road safety are:

1. Regulation, legislation and policy – legislating or amending existing laws. Decisions regarding

procedures, regulations and guidelines, determined by the various institutes.

2. Compliance and enforcement – the degree of complying with legislation and policy.

3. Incentives – encouraging safety promotion by budgets and their substitutes.

4. Education, public awareness and public relations – educating for safe behavior, passing

messages and making them available.

The means of operation are across-the-board tools which may be operated in all government

ministries and other institutions and are valid for promoting plans in other fields as well. The field of

action and means are generic and relevant for almost any field of content a country is interested in

promoting. Currently, the NRSA is a statutory institution and has very limited authorities regarding the

various aspects of the Model.

Regarding the present field of action, the NRSA is a statutory body which current authorities are very

limited regarding the Model's fields of content.

The field of action designed in such manner requires a systemic action plan that would integrate and

adjust the various contents, authorities and responsibilities. The NRSA's role is to produce the

systemic action plan that would concentrate the efforts for all partners.

A cooperation out of the perceived shared responsibility is best done when the Political Will exists

and is high among the most senior officers at the relevant authorities.

Figure 3: The NRSA's Model – a systemic model of shared responsibility for road safety – the

field of action and means

Uses and guidelines for operation

Choosing and the action plans and their focus points

One of the important and complicated tasks when dealing with road safety is identifying the problems.

A careful choice of the focus points will increase the chances of success in achieving the goal. The

document: "NRSA: Concept, road map, excess fatalities and pyramid – The Operating Concept"

(Romm, 2018) was drafted to present the approach according to which the NRSA determines the

focus points of its activity. The method for determining the action points is to locate the sub-groups

characterized by excess fatalities. "Excess fatalities" is the number of fatalities beyond the number of

expected fatalities. The expectation is determined compared to the benchmarks found to be most

suitable (ibid). According to the document, focusing the plans can be done in two ways:

1. Focus on target populations – observing populations which were found in the preliminary

analysis as representing excess casualties and fatalities, such as motorcyclists in a certain

year. Accordingly, the goal of the action plan will be to reduce the number of casualties among

motorcyclists (ibid).

2. Across-the-board factors – observing the overall factors which lead to accidents and injuries

regardless of population groups, such as driving in an unsuitable speed. Accordingly, the goal

of the action plan will be to reduce the number of casualties as a result of driving in an

unsuitable speed. Other examples, injuries on relatively unsafe roads, aggressive driving, not

wearing a seatbelt, distractions during driving, or use of impaired vehicles (ibid).

Appointing a plan leader

In light of the complexity of the field of action, after choosing the focus points, a leader must be

appointed to the plan. The plan leader will be responsible for motivating the forming of the plan,

division of labor, coordination and follow up after implementation, forming collaborations between

the relevant NRSA's departments and other authorities, identifying bureaucratic and political

obstacles and reporting the plan's status to the CEO. To that end, a designated team will be

formed for each plan, which will include the officers most relevant to the subject of the plan out of

the NRSA's departments, critical partners in the field of action (for example government ministries,

authorities), content experts from relevant information bodies (such as the academy, JDC Israel,

Beterem, and so on).

Designing and implementing the action plan5

After choosing the main goal, we must systematically examine which intervention may assist in

reducing the number of casualties according to each one of the Model components. Thus, we

shall detail the interventions according to time (before/during/after an accident), vehicle factors,

infrastructure, behavior and safety climate.

The interventions should meet several requirements:

1. They must be supported by research that examined their effectiveness referring to reduction

of the number of road accident casualties.

2. They must be applicable and feasible.

3. They must not violate individual freedom.

The action plan will eventually be comprised of many elements that must be prioritized according to

their benefit and according to available resources.

Follow-up and measurement – or, how will we know we are in the right direction?

In designing the action plan, we must include in the plan indexes for the plan's success. These indexes

are divided into two types:

5 A basic example of implementation of the Model in an action plan in appendix 1.

1. Input indexes – following any changes in the plan's components. For example, if it was decided

in the action plan to invest in the installation of passive systems in vehicles, then we must

monitor the percentage of vehicles in which passive systems are installed.

2. Output indexes – following the reduction in the number of road accident casualties.

Summary

Road safety is a highly complicated subject, which requires the dedication of all those involved. The

NRSA is the authority that is responsible, among other things, to motivating the different parts of the

system and raising the dedication to promoting safety. Beyond that, the NRSA is obligated to form

and promote action plans which take into account all those elements. The best outcome will be

obtained only with joint effort, with everyone doing their part the best way possible.

References

Baron-Epel, O., Leibovitch-Zur, S., Magid, A. 2013. The relation between safe road behavior, infrastructure quality and safety climate inside the settlement in the Arab sector. (in Hebrew) http://www.igudbit.org.il/Index.asp?ArticleID=2468&CategoryID=420 Zohar, D., Zur, S., Stusser, P., Dayan, S. 2012. Effects of Safety Climate and Passenger Disruptions on Driving Safety of School-Bus Drivers. Jerusalem: National Road Safety Authority. (in Hebrew. English summary) http://www.infocenters.co.il/rsa/multimedia/ Romm, G. 2018. NRSA: Concept, road map, excess fatalities and pyramid – the operating concept. Jerusalem: NRSA. Hakkert, S. 2016. Zero Road Deaths and Serious Injuries. International Transport Forum. OECD Research Report. https://www.itf-oecd.org/zero-road-deaths

Ward, N. 2015. Measuring Minnesota’s Safety Culture. Western Transportation Institute Montana State University. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/trafficeng/safety/shsp/safetyculture.pdf Wegman, F. 2012. Driving Down the road toll by building a Safe System. Government of South Australia. https://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/259251/FredWegman_drivingdowntheroadtoll.pdf

Appendix 1: An example of a plan for reducing motorcyclists' injury according to

the NRSA's Model

In this part we shall demonstrate the use of the NRSA's Model in designing a work plan in a

specific subject: reducing severe injury of motorcyclists. This is merely an example and the Model

may be applied on any subject which requires a work plan. The plan presented below is brought

to demonstrate how to apply the Model to planning an action plan.

It should be noted that this is not the actual NRSA's action plan for the subject (which is much

more elaborated, detailed and comprehensive). It should also be noted that the Model should be

uniquely adjusted for each group, sub-group, or subject as relevant.

The example in this document refers to the group of motorcyclists in its entirety, and does not go

deeper to other elements with which one should deal when designing the complete plan.

How to get to work? Forming the plan

In order to form a plan with the highest chances of success, the subject of the plan must be

thoroughly studied. Thus, we take the following actions:

1. Review the literature.

2. Investigate the effective ways to deal with the problem.

3. Collect insights from the field.

4. Act in collaboration with other interested parties.

Appointing a supervisor for the plan

In addition, or simultaneous to studying the subject, a supervisor should be appointed for the plan:

a person who will be in charge of drafting the plan and executing it.

Building the plan according to the Model

In order to treat the problem in the best manner, we must examine what are the effective and

feasible interventions in every one of the aspects: vehicle, infrastructure and behavior before,

during and after an accident. It is possible that there is no effective intervention known for any one

of the elements, however, all angles must be investigated.

In order to reduce injury of motorcyclists, one must first examine what can be done to prevent the

accident. It should be noted that a systematic observation includes examination of interventions

both for the motorcyclists, and for the other road users. In this case, the emphasis in "other road

users" is put on drivers.

Before the accident

Vehicles, motorcyclists should ensure the motorcycle's intactness. Furthermore, if the other

drivers drive vehicles with effective safety systems, which will alert when a motorcycle is outside

the driver's field of vision, and maintain safe driving, it might reduce the number of accidents, and

as a result, the injury.

Infrastructure, the roads should be marked with standard marking paint with high friction

coefficient, that is not slippery, and the infrastructure should be clean of obstacles that might

endanger the motorcyclists, such as holes in the road, or oil stains.

Behavior, training motorcyclists to obtain the license should include understanding of the risks,

and providing suitable riding skills. Regarding the other drivers, proper enforcement should

encourage them to obey the traffic laws and not endanger the motorcyclists.

During an accident

Vehicles, motorcycles should be accessorized with safety measures as advanced as possible in

order to reduce injury in case it happens.

Infrastructure, a lower beam should be installed on safety guardrails, so in case a motorcyclist hits

the safety guardrail, the injury is minimized.

Behavior, motorcyclist should use protection equipment.

After an accident

Infrastructure, the infrastructure should enable speedy and effective evacuation. This is true for

any accident.

Behavior, rescue forces personnel should be given tools and knowledge to handle people injured

in motorcycle accidents. Regarding the motorcyclists, they should devote all their efforts to

rehabilitation after an accident, in order to enable optimal recovery.

Technology

The technology is combined in the different interventions presented above.

Safety climate

The safety climate includes a distinction between three populations, with each having its own role,

which requires a separate strategic intervention.

Regarding motorcyclists, they should understand and comprehend they are a part of the entire

set of road users, and they must obey all the rules. This may be achieved by both education and

enforcement.

Regarding the other drivers on the road, in order to better notice motorcyclists on the road, they

should have empathy for motorcyclists and understanding of their vulnerability on the road. This

may be achieved by raising public awareness.

Regarding the policy makers at the different levels, they should show, both in their decisions and

in their actions, that they wish to protect motorcyclists from injury, and they act to that end.

Follow up and measurement

There will be a follow up of the input and output indexes. First, we must examine whether there

has been a decrease in the number of injured motorcyclists in general. Then, we must examine

each one of the elements: at which stage of implementation it is?

Figure 3: Reduction of motorcyclists' injury using the NRSA's Model