File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Road safety strategies: A comparative framework and case studies

TitleRoad safety strategies: A comparative framework and case studies
Authors
Issue Date2005
PublisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/01441647.asp
Citation
Transport Reviews, 2005, v. 25 n. 5, p. 613-639 How to Cite?
AbstractThis paper proposes a nine-component analytical framework for developing, comparing, and evaluating road safety strategies. The nine components are: (1) vision; (2) objectives; (3) targets; (4) action plan; (5) evaluation and monitoring; (6) research and development; (7) quantitative modelling; (8) institutional framework; and (9) funding. While thefirstfour components are essential for the formulation of a road safety strategy, the remaining components are key to its successful implementation. To demonstrate the usefulness of this comparative framework, we examine the road safety strategies of six selected administrations: Australia, California, Great Britain, Japan, New Zealand, and Sweden. In these case studies, we extract and highlight good practices in the formulation and implementation of their road safety strategies. The proposed framework also provides a systematic approach for assessing road safety strategies in other administrations. The evaluation of the six case studies forms a benchmarking platform for the planning, formulation, and implementation of good practices for road safety strategies. © 2005 Taylor & Francis.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/71290
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.452
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.635
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLoo, BPYen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHung, WTen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLo, HKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, SCen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T06:30:39Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T06:30:39Z-
dc.date.issued2005en_HK
dc.identifier.citationTransport Reviews, 2005, v. 25 n. 5, p. 613-639en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0144-1647en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/71290-
dc.description.abstractThis paper proposes a nine-component analytical framework for developing, comparing, and evaluating road safety strategies. The nine components are: (1) vision; (2) objectives; (3) targets; (4) action plan; (5) evaluation and monitoring; (6) research and development; (7) quantitative modelling; (8) institutional framework; and (9) funding. While thefirstfour components are essential for the formulation of a road safety strategy, the remaining components are key to its successful implementation. To demonstrate the usefulness of this comparative framework, we examine the road safety strategies of six selected administrations: Australia, California, Great Britain, Japan, New Zealand, and Sweden. In these case studies, we extract and highlight good practices in the formulation and implementation of their road safety strategies. The proposed framework also provides a systematic approach for assessing road safety strategies in other administrations. The evaluation of the six case studies forms a benchmarking platform for the planning, formulation, and implementation of good practices for road safety strategies. © 2005 Taylor & Francis.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/01441647.aspen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofTransport Reviewsen_HK
dc.titleRoad safety strategies: A comparative framework and case studiesen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0144-1647&volume=25&spage=613&epage=639&date=2005&atitle=Road+safety+strategies:+A+comparative+framework+and+case+studiesen_HK
dc.identifier.emailLoo, BPY:bpyloo@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, SC:hhecwsc@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLoo, BPY=rp00608en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, SC=rp00191en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/01441640500115892en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-25444467448en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros101134en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-25444467448&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume25en_HK
dc.identifier.issue5en_HK
dc.identifier.spage613en_HK
dc.identifier.epage639en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000231534700006-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLoo, BPY=7005145560en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHung, WT=7201803618en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLo, HK=36786895900en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, SC=24323361400en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats