IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v35y2014icp286-294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Needs and priorities of road safety stakeholders for evidence-based policy making

Author

Listed:
  • Papadimitriou, Eleonora
  • Yannis, George

Abstract

The objective of this research is the analysis of needs and priorities of road safety stakeholders for evidence-based policy making, on the basis of a broad consultation of road safety stakeholders at international level. Needs and priorities concern both the data to be collected or made available and the tools to be developed or made available to support science-based policy-making. An on-line survey was addressed to more than 3000 stakeholders, mostly from European countries, in which participants were asked to assess the importance (high, medium or low priority) of more than 50 items reflecting data and resources for all stages of road safety policy making—from fact-finding and diagnosis, to programme development, to implementation and monitoring/evaluation. A principal component analysis technique was applied, and 6 components of data and tools were identified, concerning implementation of measures, statistical models, costs and safety impacts of measures, road infrastructure and accident analysis, common definitions and under-reporting, and crash causation. Then, cluster analysis was carried out for profiling the stakeholders, revealing 4 groups of stakeholders with similar needs and priorities in road safety data and tools: a “low priorities” group, a “need data and models group”, a group mainly interested on “implementation” and an “in-depth analysis” group. Further analysis of the cluster characteristics suggested that the 4 clusters are adequately – and often similarly – represented in all groups of countries, and in all types of organization (e.g. national administrations, universities, interest groups, road safety organizations etc.). It is also found that national/regional administrations and research institutes/universities reported practically the same needs in data and tools, not confirming the common belief that these two types of stakeholders have different needs. Finally, the “policy-makers” group within the stakeholders was found to put particular emphasis on implementation issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Papadimitriou, Eleonora & Yannis, George, 2014. "Needs and priorities of road safety stakeholders for evidence-based policy making," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 286-294.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:35:y:2014:i:c:p:286-294
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.06.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X14001279
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.06.006?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michela Nardo & Michaela Saisana & Andrea Saltelli & Stefano Tarantola & Anders Hoffman & Enrico Giovannini, 2005. "Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2005/3, OECD Publishing.
    2. Tony Bliss & Jeanne Breen, 2009. "Country Guidelines for the Conduct of Road Safety Management Capacity Reviews and the Specification of Lead Agency Reforms, Investment Strategies and Safe System Projects," World Bank Publications - Reports 12706, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Utriainen, Roni & Pöllänen, Markus & Liimatainen, Heikki, 2018. "Road safety comparisons with international data on seriously injured," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 138-145.
    2. Mononen, Petri & Leviäkangas, Pekka, 2016. "Transport safety agency's success indicators – How well does a performance management system perform?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 230-239.
    3. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Chien, Ya-Ling & Nguyen, Ngoc-Mai & Truong, Dinh-Nhat, 2018. "Pricing policy of floating ticket fare for riding high speed rail based on time-space compression," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 179-192.
    4. Guadalupe González-Sánchez & María Isabel Olmo-Sánchez & Elvira Maeso-González & Mario Gutiérrez-Bedmar & Antonio García-Rodríguez, 2021. "Needs for International Benchmarking of Road Safety Management Based on Mobility Exposure Measures and Risk Patterns," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Mononen, Petri & Leviäkangas, Pekka & Haapasalo, Harri, 2017. "From internal efficiency to societal benefits – Multi modal transport safety agency's socio-economic impact analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 78-90.

    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. Hertrich Markus, 2019. "A Novel Housing Price Misalignment Indicator for Germany," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 20(4), pages 759-794, December.
    2. Drago, Carlo & Ginesti, Gianluca & Pongelli, Claudia & Sciascia, Salvatore, 2018. "Reporting strategies: What makes family firms beat around the bush? Family-related antecedents of annual report readability," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 142-150.
    3. Fabio Pammolli & Francesco Porcelli & Francesco Vidoli & Guido Borà, 2014. "La spesa sanitaria delle Regioni in Italia - Saniregio 3," Working Papers CERM 02-2014, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    4. Fabio Pammolli & Francesco Porcelli & Francesco Vidoli & Monica Auteri & Guido Borà, 2017. "La spesa sanitaria delle Regioni in Italia - Saniregio2017," Working Papers CERM 01-2017, Competitività, Regole, Mercati (CERM).
    5. Mehar, Mamta & Yamano, Takashi & Panda, Architesh, 2017. "The Role of Gender, Risk, and Time Preferences in Farmers' Rice Variety Selection in Eastern India," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 14(01), June.
    6. Marta Santagata & Enrico Ivaldi & Riccardo Soliani, 2019. "Development and Governance in the Ex-Soviet Union: An Empirical Inquiry," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 157-190, January.
    7. Erahman, Qodri Febrilian & Purwanto, Widodo Wahyu & Sudibandriyo, Mahmud & Hidayatno, Akhmad, 2016. "An assessment of Indonesia's energy security index and comparison with seventy countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 364-376.
    8. Evers, Hans-Dieter & Karim, Azhari, 2011. "The Maritime Potential of ASEAN Economies," MPRA Paper 31760, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Schepelmann, Philipp & Goossens, Yanne & Makipaa, Arttu (ed.), 2009. "Towards sustainable development: Alternatives to GDP for measuring progress," Wuppertal Spezial, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 42, number 42.
    10. Alessandro Bitetto & Paola Cerchiello & Charilaos Mertzanis, 2021. "A data-driven approach to measuring epidemiological susceptibility risk around the world," DEM Working Papers Series 200, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    11. Elisa Barbieri & Manli Huang & Shenglei Pi & Mattia Tassinari, 2017. "Restructuring the Production of Medicines: An Investigation on the Pharmaceutical Sector in China and the Role of Mergers and Acquisitions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, October.
    12. Ewa Roszkowska & Bartłomiej Jefmański, 2021. "Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Synthetic Measure (I-VIFSM) Based on Hellwig’s Approach in the Analysis of Survey Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Peter Mayerhofer & Oliver Fritz & Dieter Pennerstorfer, 2010. "Dritter Bericht zur internationalen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Wiens," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 42430.
    14. Fritzsch, Jana, 2011. "A Composite Fuzzy Indicator for Assessing Farm Household Potential for Non-farm Income Diversification," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114349, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Qingyun Du & Yanxia Wang & Fu Ren & Zhiyuan Zhao & Hongqiang Liu & Chao Wu & Langjiao Li & Yiran Shen, 2014. "Measuring and Analysis of Urban Competitiveness of Chinese Provincial Capitals in 2010 under the Constraints of Major Function-Oriented Zoning Utilizing Spatial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-26, May.
    16. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    17. Laurens CHERCHYE & Willem MOESEN & Nicky ROGGE & Tom VAN PUYENBROECK, 2009. "Constructing a knowledge economy composite indicator with imprecise data," Working Papers of Department of Economics, Leuven ces09.15, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Department of Economics, Leuven.
    18. Yiannis Psycharis & Panagiotis Artelaris & Dimitris Kallioras & Panayiotis Pantazis & Maria Tsiapa, 2012. "The Spatial Footprint Of The Ongoing Economic Crisis (2009-…) In Greece: Assessing The Resilience And Development Of The Greek Regions," ERSA conference papers ersa12p641, European Regional Science Association.
    19. Vijaya Krishnan, 2015. "Development of a Multidimensional Living Conditions Index (LCI)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 120(2), pages 455-481, January.
    20. Kouamé, Wilfried A.K. & Tapsoba, Sampawende J.-A., 2019. "Structural reforms and firms’ productivity: Evidence from developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 157-171.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:trapol:v:35:y:2014:i:c:p:286-294. 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/30473/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.