Using GIS to interpret automated speed enforcement guidelines and guide deployment decisions in mobile photo enforcement programs
Automated speed enforcement (ASE) guidelines are designed to guide enforcement agencies in operating ASE programs that are effective in improving traffic safety. Given that appropriate deployment decisions are essential to a program’s effectiveness, a number of deployment priorities are generally included in most ASE guidelines. However, when implementing the guidelines, most descriptions of deployment goals are so qualitative that they might have multiple quantitative interpretations, and thus affecting the identification of specific deployment considerations. In addition, limited research has been done to improve the process by which guidelines are implemented. Therefore, this paper proposes quantitative measures for an ASE program, in order to facilitate interpretation of the main ASE principles and improve deployment decisions. To illustrate the various types of high-priority deployment considerations, a case study in the city of Edmonton in the province of Alberta, Canada is presented. It explores the deployment outcomes of the mobile photo enforcement (MPE) program in Edmonton, in relation to six priorities identified in the provincial enforcement guidelines. Two performance measures, spatial coverage and enforcement intensity, are assessed for priority sites and non-priority sites. Moreover, the distance halo effects of MPE are considered in the review of spatial coverage. All findings are visualized using Geographic Information Systems, such that high priority sites and coverage of these sites in the historical deployment can be visually assessed. A better understanding of the governing ASE guidelines and how to implement them can help enforcement agencies to improve decision-making and resource allocation, thereby increasing program effectiveness and efficiency.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 86 (2016)
Issue (Month): C ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:86:y:2016:i:c:p:141-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.