3. p1
John Dawson –
iRAP Chairman
Every year 1.3 million people
are killed in road crashes
worldwide. Up to 3% of the
world’s GDP is lost through
crashes. If we continue with
‘business as usual’ then
worldwide we can expect to
see 250 million people killed
or seriously injured over the next 20 years. Road crashes will
remain the leading cause of death among the young.
In 2006, iRAP won the generous support of the FIA Foundation
for an ambitious investment programme to develop tools to
help low and middle income countries find the high social
and economic returns possible through the provision of safer
roads. The major Road Assessment Programmes in developed
countries (AusRAP, EuroRAP and USRAP) worked in
partnership with global road safety research organisations and
local experts to develop and test these tools.
These tools allow assessment of road safety performance of
roads in the absence of reliable crash data. The iRAP results
include:
• ‘Star Rating’ tables and maps showing the safety of roads
for car occupants, motorcyclists, bicyclists and pedestrians
• A road inventory database with over 30 inspected attributes
describing the inspected network
• An estimate of the numbers being killed and seriously
injured on each inspected road
• A recommended cost-effective, network-wide
countermeasure programme for consideration by local
stakeholders and funding bodies
iRAP was invited to work in four pilot countries: South Africa,
Malaysia, Chile and Costa Rica. These countries offered
exposure to a variety of road safety scenarios from a high
proportion of motorcyclists in Malaysia to single carriageway
roads with high speed limits in South Africa.
I am deeply grateful to the ACCR and Government of Costa
Rica for inviting iRAP to pilot its important new methodology
and undertake inspections of 2,800kms of the roads in Costa
Rica where many are killed. I welcome the willingness of
the Government and ACCR to share the results of these
inspections in order that lessons learnt in Costa Rica can be
used across South America and the rest of the world.
Combined, it is estimated that the recommended programmes
in the four pilot countries could save more than 70,000 deaths
and serious injuries over 20 years. The total benefit for all four
recommended programmes is estimated at ₡ 3500 billion for
an investment of ₡ 200 billion.
In Costa Rica the recommended programme is estimated
to cost ₡ 26 billion with a Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) of 22,
delivering ₡ 595 billion in benefits over 20 years.
The recommendations in this report are for a first programme
of basic safety improvements such as provision of footpath
and crossing facilities for pedestrians, sealing of shoulders
and improvements to intersections. They are targeted where
they should save lives. Over a 20 year period an estimated
14,700 fatal and serious injuries could be avoided from the
proposed investment programme.
The recommended programme assumes posted speed limits
are generally obeyed, however we have also illustrated the
implications if speeds are permitted in practice to be 10km/h
to 20km/h higher – in that case the recommended programme
will deliver even higher benefits and there will be many
additional locations where investment is justified.
This new methodology offers ‘vaccines for roads’ – simple,
affordable, high-return countermeasures that will prevent tens of
thousands of lives and serious injuries over the next 20 years.
www.irap.net
About iRAP
The International Road Assessment Programme (iRAP) is dedicated to saving
lives in developing countries by promoting safer road design.
iRAP targets high-risk roads where large numbers are killed and seriously
injured, and inspects them to identify where affordable programmes of safety
engineering can reduce large numbers of deaths and serious injuries.
The initiative relies on a strong partnership of key local stakeholders and
international experts to work together to make roads safe.
iRAP aims to:
• Generate and prioritise large, affordable, high-return programmes of safety
engineering countermeasures using a globally consistent methodology
• Operate on a scale that is cost-efficient and can be project managed
to deliver reductions in the cost of death and crippling injury that are
economically significant
• Provide the methodology and procedures to implement performance tracking
so that funding agencies are able to track outcomes and outputs and enable
continuous global improvement in safety performance
• Provide the training, technology and reporting tools to build and sustain
national, regional and local capability
• Share experience and knowledge of effective road safety programmes
worldwide
4. p2
Karla Gonzalez –
Costa Rica Minister
for Public Works
and Transportation
Road crashes are sudden
and violent and our young
are the most involved. If we
do not act, over the next 20
years we can expect 100,000
of our people to be killed or
seriously injured on our roads. Almost no-one in our country
will be unaffected personally by a tragedy.
The loss and hurt to loved ones on this huge scale is enough
reason to act. The costs to our economy of pointless death
and injury make it a priority to act.
The world experience is that major reductions in road
casualties can quickly be achieved by taking action on basics
- wearing seat belts and helmets, obeying speed limits,
preventing drink driving, keeping vehicles in roadworthy
condition and providing safe road infrastructure. The
government is taking action on these basics. Our programme
for improving seat belt use for example, has been recognised
worldwide because of the reduction in deaths that followed.
Every Costa Rican knows our roads need basic improvements
to their safety. The challenge for the Government is to set
priorities and spend the limited amount of money available
where it will save the most lives. Many countries worldwide
are now looking at the safety of road infrastructure and
gaining new understanding using tools provided by the iRAP
programme. I am very pleased that iRAP have come to Costa
Rica and presented their findings in this report. Our engineers
will now study the recommendations carefully and we will
develop a priority programme to improve the safety of our
roads.
Our Government has rightly made road safety a national
priority. To succeed in cutting road tragedies we must draw
both on our own experience and the experience of the rest
of the world. Our ‘Por Amor wear a seatbelt’ campaign took
international know-how, and we in Costa Rica made it work
for us and have saved many, many lives. I was proud to be
associated with that initiative and I was proud to propose that
iRAP might work with our government to see how our roads
could be made safer.
I am very grateful again to the FIA Foundation for funding
this major pilot programme examining how the safety of our
road infrastructure can be improved in an affordable way. I
would encourage other auto clubs and safety organisations
worldwide to study what can
be achieved and how their
Governments can be helped
to take effective action to
Make Roads Safe.
Carlos Macaya –
President
Automobile Club
of Costa Rica
5. p3
A global epidemic
Deaths and injuries from road traffic crashes are a major and
growing public health epidemic.
Each year 1.3 million people die in road crashes and the
number of seriously injured could be as high as 50 million.
Road crashes are now the leading cause of death for children
and young people aged between 10 and 24.
The burden of road crashes is comparable with malaria and
tuberculosis, and costs 1-3% of the world’s GDP.
More than 85% of global road deaths and serious injuries
occur in developing countries. Whereas road deaths are
expected to fall in high-income countries, they are likely to
increase by more than 80% in the rest of the world.
In developing countries it is the poor that are most vulnerable.
Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists and those using informal
public transport are many times more likely to be harmed on
the roads.
The role of the road
Most crashes are caused by human error. For this reason,
road safety initiatives have traditionally focussed on ‘fixing’
the driver in order to prevent crashes. Approaches typically
involve education, testing and enforcement. However, to ‘err
is human’; psychology tells us that people will always make
mistakes.
More recently, engineers have focussed on mediating the
outcome of a crash by designing safe vehicles and safe roads.
It is possible to protect the road user in the event of a crash by
designing vehicles and roads to work together to ensure crash
energies do not overwhelm the human. For vulnerable road
users the road design must work even harder to ensure they
are not exposed to high-speed traffic.
In leading developed countries where great progress
has already been made on driver behaviour and vehicle
safety, national safety strategies show investment in safer
infrastructure is expected to deliver twice the casualty saving
provided by investment in either behaviour or vehicles.
There are still many countries in which fundamental
road-safety education and enforcement (seat belts, helmets,
drink-driving and general adherence to traffic law) are not in
place. In these countries basic infrastructure, such as clear
signs and road markings, is essential if road users are to
know what they are expected to do and if traffic law is to be
effectively enforced.
Getting organised
What can give us hope is that other health epidemics that
seemed impossible to fix have been eliminated. As recently
as 1967, some 10-15 million cases of smallpox claimed two
million lives every year, with many survivors left disfigured
or blind. In 1967, the World Health Organization launched
a mass vaccination programme that was later followed by
Operation Smallpox Zero – a programme with a vision to
eliminate the disease altogether. The vision zero was brought
to fruition when the last case of smallpox was reported in
Somalia in 1977. The programme was described as a triumph
of management, not of medicine.
In the same way, we know what can be done to prevent road
deaths. However, in order to combat this public health epidemic
we must ensure that we create a sustainable and structured
approach to aim for vision zero – we must get organised to make
roads safe.
6. Designing safer roads
Safe roads are designed to be self-explaining and forgiving.
Self-explaining roads show all road users where they should
be and how to use the road safely. Clear road layouts not only
explain where road users are expected to be, but they also
take into account the road user’s ability to process information
and make decisions.
An inexpensive, simple pedestrian refuge island not only
shows where to cross but makes safe crossing much easier
– the pedestrian has to check only one stream of oncoming
traffic at a time. The refuge also calms drivers’ speed and
restricts overtaking at the crossing point.
Forgiving roads are designed to protect road users in the
event of a crash. The design of the road must recognise
that crashes can occur and ensure that fatalities and injuries
are minimised by protecting road users from hazards.
Engineering features, such as safety barriers can be used to
separate fast moving traffic from people and cushion crashes
when they happen.
Crashes are less likely to occur on self explaining roads and
injuries are less severe on forgiving roads.
Crashes that kill
Vulnerable road users
Pedestrians are most vulnerable when they must cross busy
roads without crossing facilities, and where they have to mix
with motorised traffic as they move along a road because
separate facilities are not provided.
In developing countries motorcyclists and moped riders can
account for a high percentage of road deaths; in some Asian
countries over 70% of road deaths are motorcyclists.
Engineering countermeasures that work to reduce the
likelihood of a serious or fatal crash for vulnerable
road users include:
• Exclusion of traffic from areas where there is high
pedestrian activity
• Slowing of traffic (traffic calming) in areas where there is
high pedestrian activity
• Paths for pedestrians and bicyclists so they do not mix with
motorised traffic
• Crossing facilities that follow crossing demand and show
where pedestrians are expected to cross and reduce the
complexity of crossing the road
• Provision of separate motorcycle lanes or facilities
• Crash barriers that are passively safe for motorcyclists
Vehicle occupants
For vehicle occupants, fatal and serious crashes fall into three
main categories:
• Run-off crashes – typically a single vehicle leaves the
carriageway and crashes into a fixed object such as a tree
or lighting column
• Junction crashes – the most serious crashes occur at
T-junctions or crossroads where side impacts occur at high
speeds
• Head-on crashes – vehicles travelling in opposing
directions have high-energy collisions
Engineering countermeasures that work to reduce the
likelihood of a serious or fatal crash for vehicle occupants include:
• Clearing roadsides of fixed objects (such as trees, lighting
columns, road signs), replacing fixed objects with passively
safe alternatives (e.g. deformable signposts and lighting
columns), or protecting the road user with crash barriers
• Limiting the number of minor accesses to main roads,
providing turning pockets, and replacing cross roads and
T-junctions with roundabouts and grade separated
junctions
• Separating opposing traffic travelling at high-speeds with a
safety barrier or wide median
p4
7. p5
Formal safer road
infrastructure programmes
The casualty reduction strategy for any country at any stage
of its road safety development needs to define the contribution
that simple, affordable infrastructure improvements can make.
Footpaths, paint and fencing save lives.
Designing, building, financing, procuring and evaluating a
motorway scheme is possible nearly everywhere in the world.
But projects that upgrade the safety of an entire route or
network are rare, even though they would often offer the most
competitive economic returns in a national, regional or local
project pool.
Affordable road infrastructure improvements have the
potential to cut road casualties on a scale significant at the
national level in the short, medium and long term. This is
only possible if whole routes and networks, on which large
numbers of deaths and serious injuries are concentrated,
are targeted systematically with the application of effective
countermeasures.
Network safety management
In order to effectively manage the safety of an existing road
network, three basic activities need to be established:
• Reliable crash data should be collected. Police and
statisticians must work together to ensure that serious
crashes are recorded accurately – according to
internationally accepted protocols and definitions. iRAP
Risk Mapping can be produced using these data in order to
show where people and communities face high levels of
risk.
• Road authorities must have information about the level
of safety and traffic flow on their network. They must
have an understanding of how road features on their
network contribute to risk and the potential for a serious
or fatal crash. Star Rating inspections document this road
attribute information and more detailed road safety audits
can be used to identify specific sites and problems.
• As safety treatments are used, the outcomes must be
measured, analysed and recorded so that lessons can be
learnt about the impact of different schemes. The evidence
base should direct future action, ensuring that the most
efficient life-saving measures are implemented.
Effective safety management should involve infrastructure
improvements at targeted locations throughout the road
network and should not focus on just a few black spots that
might have high short-term crash experience.
Risk Mapping and
Performance Tracking
Where complete, accurate, and plentiful data are available,
two RAP protocols that use real crash data can provide clear
information on risk and can guide infrastructure improvements.
Risk Mapping: Maps are produced using crash history data,
showing the risk of being killed or seriously injured.
Performance Tracking: RAP enables tracking of the rate at
which high-risk roads are eliminated. Performance tracking
identifies ‘consistently high-risk roads’ where authorities
need to do more and the ‘most improved roads’ to highlight
good practice and encourage competition in excellence. To
date, the RAP programmes have used Risk Mapping data to
track performance based on historical crash data, however it
will also be possible to use road inspection data to measure
improvements in road infrastructure.
Good quality crash history data are rarely available in low
and middle income countries, so it is necessary to use other
methods for assessing safety upgrading needs.
8. Star Rating roads for safety
The Star Rating of roads provides a methodology to measure the safety performance of a road network. This is particularly valuable where crash
data records are unavailable, inaccurate or sparse.
1 Inspect
Video data are collected
using specialised
equipment
2 Rate
Road attributes are
recorded by inspectors
3 Generate
Data are analysed
and options generated
p6
9. Inspectors record over 30 road attributes known to influence the likelihood and severity outcome of road crashes. The road attributes are scored and
combined to reflect the overall safety of the road for car occupants, motorcyclists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Scores are then assigned 1-5 stars,
allowing cartographic presentation.
The examples below show urban and rural roads that would achieve a low Star Rating (black and red) and a high Star Rating (yellow and green).
4 Appraise
High-return investment
programmes are
recommended
5 Design
Detailed design of
schemes is undertaken
6 Build
Safety upgrades are
implemented
p7
10. The iRAP process
The diagram below shows the scope of the iRAP methodology, from road selection through to the recommendation of a
network level investment programme. Local knowledge and detailed planning and design are then required to finalise the exact
countermeasure programmes to be implemented.
Define the road network where
fatal and serious injuries are
likely to be concentrated
Inspect the roads and map the
safety quality of the road network
Appraise investment options
and recommend general shape
of a high-return programme
Local examination of
proposed iRAP countermeasure
schemes and locations
Preliminary scheme
investigation studies
Detailed design, costing, final
evaluation and implementation
Estimate average
cost of schemes
Estimate average
value of
casualty savings
=iRAP input
=Local input
=Shared
responsibility
p8
11. iRAP in Costa Rica
Population: 4.4 million
Roads: 30,000 km, 14% paved
Fatalities: 616 (2005)
Death rate per 100,000 population: 14.0
Road safety
Vulnerable road users: The proportion of pedestrian fatalities
is particularly high, at 57% of all road deaths. Bicyclists are
also over represented in the accident data.
Location: Approximately 70% of traffic fatalities occur in
urban areas.
iRAP team
The usRAP team coordinates work in Costa Rica. The
regional team consists of ACCR (Automobile Club Costa
Rica), AAAFTS (AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety), MRI
(Midwest Research Institute), ISU (Iowa State University),
and RACC (Spain). The project is supported by the Road
Safety Council (Cosevi), and the Ministry of Public Works and
Transportation (MOPT).
iRAP project
iRAP road inspections in Costa Rica took place in February
and March 2007. Inspections to iRAP protocols were
completed using the Hawkeye 2000 system, developed by
ARRB Group. Multi-view video were collected during the
inspections and coded in the laboratory using specialised
software in June and July 2007.
The iRAP inspections covered 2,801 km of roads,
approximately 64% of Costa Rica’s paved national highways.
The inspected network included nearly all paved roads on the
national highway system with over 2,000 vehicles per day.
This includes the Pan American Highway (Routes 1 and 2)
from Nicaragua to Panama.
Star Rating results
The Star Ratings represent the safety of the road
infrastructure as it relates to the risk faced by an individual
member of each road user group. In Costa Rica, results for
three road user groups were calculated (Car Occupants,
Bicyclists and Pedestrians).
• A five star rating represents the safest road infrastructure
design for the prevailing speed environment
• A one star rating represents a road with relatively poor
infrastructure design for the prevailing speed environment
It is important to note that the Star Rating represents the
safety risk faced by an individual road user if they (or the
traffic around them) are travelling within the speed limit.
Traffic flow and estimates of actual speeds are not included
in the calculation. For example, speed limits in Costa Rica
appear significantly lower than many countries, and in South
Africa they appear significantly higher. These differences
impact upon the Star Ratings achieved regardless of the
actual speed of traffic.
p9
Road type Length Area type Length
2 lane
(single carriageway) 88%, 2,468 km Rural 58%, 1,615 km
4 or more lane
(single carriageway) 6%, 178 km Semi-urban 24%, 669 km
6 or more lane
(dual carriageway) 6%, 155 km1
Urban 18%, 517 km
1 Considering each carriageway separately, per the iRAP inspection protocol
12. p10
Car Occupant Star Ratings
This map shows the individual risk faced by a car occupant travelling within the speed limit on the inspected road network in
Costa Rica.
A 5-star rating represents the safest road infrastructure design for the prevailing speed environment; a 1-star rating represents a
road with relatively poor infrastructure design.
LA CRUZ
Murcielago
UPALA
Cuatro Bocas
Potrerillos
San Rafael
LIBERIA
Boca Arenal
BAGACES
SARDINAL
Puerto Viejo
Tilaran
Puerto NuevaCANAS
Tempate
Bebedero
Bolson QUESADA
Juntas
SANTA CRUZ
San Antonio
GUAPILES
NICOYA
MANSION Abangaritos NARANJO
SAN RAMON POASMarbella SIQUIRRES MATINA
San Pablo ALAJUELACueste Grande
HEREDIA
CorinaESPARZA
PUERTO LIMON
OROTINALEPANTO JUAN VINAS
SAN JOSEGarza TURRIALBA Bomba
CARTAGOBejuco
SANTIAGO
TUCURRIQUE
ChirripoPital
Cahuita
SAN MARCOS Santa Maria
Puerto Viejo
Esterillos Este
Katsi
Savegre
SAN ISIDRO
Dominical
BUENOS AIRESPejibaye
Potrero Grande
Sabanilla
Venecia
Guaria
UNION
Punto Jimenez LA CUESTA
1
2
4
10
36
247
21
14
27
237
923
141
250
243
248
142
216
125
238
140
230
745
23
742
17
240
151
219
126
144
154
228
145
118
232
148
249
618
806
107
224
130
231
114
206
757
136
805
235
311
220
217
127
150
105
135
714
2
1
10
1
35
3232
21
2
35
18
4
34
1
4
140
2
141
1
32
4
3
126
124
248
1
32
4
3
1
1
36
1
1
146
2
2
4
21
32
2
21
142
34
22
34
2
2
209
141
21
239
2
C
artag oSan José
Alajuela
Heredia
Limó
n
Heredia Cartago
Limón
LimónPuntaren
as
Punt
arena
s
S
an
José
Puntarenas
Guanacaste
Guanacaste
Puntaren
as
Alajuela
Guanaca
ste
Alajuela
San José
Puntare nas
A
laj uela
PANAMA
NICARAGUA
0 20 4010 Miles
0 25 5012.5 Km
STAR RATINGS
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_ ^_^_
^_^_
Provincial boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
4 %
57 %
33 %
6 %
0 %
13. p11
Car Occupant Star Ratings in the Central Valley Region
This map shows the individual risk faced by a car occupant travelling within the speed limit on the inspected road network in
Costa Rica Central Valley region.
218
2
39
251
209
214
106
130
113
409
228
216
231
123 114
221
202
22
129
171
310
108
311
128
102
205
211
206
220
103
119
109
110
105
215
236
117
153
233
101
3
1
22
202
239
118
10
119
2
126
220
126
3
127
2
112
105
125
107
32
32
5
32
124
111
218
2
121
104
210
3
124
122
1
1
27
121
219
212
2
10
147
POAS
ALAJUELA
HEREDIA
TIBAS
GUADALUPE
San Pedro
SAN JOSE
DESAMPARADOS
CARTAGO
0 2 41 Miles
0 3 61.5 Km
Provincial boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
STAR RATINGS
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_ ^_^_
^_^_
14. p12
Bicyclist Star Ratings
This map shows the individual risk faced by a bicyclist travelling on the inspected road network in Costa Rica.
A 5-star rating represents the safest road infrastructure design for the prevailing speed environment; a 1-star rating represents a
road with relatively poor infrastructure design.
LA CRUZ
Murcielago
UPALA
Cuatro Bocas
Potrerillos
San Rafael
LIBERIA
Boca Arenal
BAGACES
SARDINAL
Puerto Viejo
Tilaran
Puerto NuevaCANAS
Tempate
Bebedero
Bolson QUESADA
Juntas
SANTA CRUZ
San Antonio
GUAPILES
NICOYA
MANSION Abangaritos NARANJO
SAN RAMON POASMarbella SIQUIRRES MATINA
San Pablo ALAJUELACueste Grande
HEREDIA
CorinaESPARZA
PUERTO LIMON
OROTINALEPANTO JUAN VINAS
SAN JOSEGarza TURRIALBA Bomba
CARTAGOBejuco
SANTIAGO
TUCURRIQUE
ChirripoPital
Cahuita
SAN MARCOS Santa Maria
Puerto Viejo
Esterillos Este
Katsi
Savegre
SAN ISIDRO
Dominical
BUENOS AIRES
Pejibaye
Potrero Grande
Sabanilla
Venecia
Guaria
UNION
Punto Jimenez LA CUESTA
1
2
4
10
36
247
21
14
27
237
923
141
250
243
248
142
216
125
238
140
230
745
23
742
17
240
151
219
126
144
154
228
145
118
232
148
249
618
806
107
224
130
231
114
206
757
136
805
235
311
220
217
127
150
105
135
714
2
1
10
1
35
32
32
21
2
35
18
4
34
1
4
140
2
141
1
32
4
3
126
124
248
1
32
4
3
1
1
36
1
1
146
2
2
4
21
32
2
21
142
34
22
34
2
2
209
141
21
239
2
C
artag oSan José
Alajuela
Heredia
Limó
n
Heredia
Cartago
Limón
LimónP
untaren
as
Punt
arena
s
S
an
José
Puntarenas
Guanacaste
Guanacaste
Puntaren
as
Alajuela
Guanaca
ste
Alajuela
San José
Puntare nas
A
laj uela
PANAMA
NICARAGUA
0 20 4010 Miles
0 25 5012.5 Km
Provincial boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
STAR RATINGS
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_ ^_^_
^_^_
Very low/no bicycle flow
0 %
27 %
40 %
32 %
1 %
15. p13
Bicyclist Star Ratings in the Central Valley Region
This map shows the individual risk faced by a bicyclist travelling on the inspected road network in Costa Rica Central Valley
region.
218
39
251
209
214
106
130
113
409
228
216
231
123 114
221
202
22
129
171
310
108
311
128
102
205
211
206
220
103
119
109
110
105
215
236
117
153
233
101
3
1
22
202
239
118
10
119
2
126
220
126
3
127
2
112
105
125
107
32
32
5
32
124
111
218
2
121
104
210
3
124
122
1
1
27
121
219
212
2
10
147
POAS
ALAJUELA
HEREDIA
TIBAS
GUADALUPE
San Pedro
SAN JOSE
DESAMPARADOS
CARTAG
0 2 41 Miles
0 3 61.5 Km
Provincial boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
STAR RATINGS
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_ ^_^_
^_^_
Very low/no bicycle flow
16. p14
LA CRUZ
Murcielago
UPALA
Cuatro Bocas
Potrerillos
San Rafael
LIBERIA
Boca Arenal
BAGACES
SARDINAL
Puerto Viejo
Tilaran
Puerto NuevaCANAS
Tempate
Bebedero
Bolson QUESADA
Juntas
SANTA CRUZ
San Antonio
GUAPILES
NICOYA
MANSION Abangaritos NARANJO
SAN RAMON POASMarbella SIQUIRRES MATINA
San Pablo ALAJUELACueste Grande
HEREDIA
CorinaESPARZA
PUERTO LIMON
OROTINALEPANTO JUAN VINAS
SAN JOSEGarza TURRIALBA Bomba
CARTAGOBejuco
SANTIAGO
TUCURRIQUE
ChirripoPital
Cahuita
SAN MARCOS Santa Maria
Puerto Viejo
Esterillos Este
Katsi
Savegre
SAN ISIDRO
Dominical
BUENOS AIRES
Pejibaye
Potrero Grande
Sabanilla
Venecia
Guaria
UNION
Punto Jimenez LA CUESTA
1
2
4
10
36
247
21
14
27
237
923
141
250
243
248
142
216
125
238
140
230
745
23
742
17
240
151
219
126
144
154
228
145
118
232
148
249
618
806
107
224
130
231
114
206
757
136
805
235
311
220
217
127
150
105
135
714
2
1
10
1
35
32
32
21
2
35
18
4
34
1
4
140
2
141
1
32
4
3
126
124
248
1
32
4
3
1
1
36
1
1
146
2
2
4
21
32
2
21
142
34
22
34
2
2
209
141
21
239
2
C
artag oSan José
Alajuela
Heredia
Limó
n
Heredia
Cartago
Limón
Limón
P
untaren
as
Punt
arena
s
S
an
José
Puntarenas
Guanacaste
Guanacaste
Puntaren
as
Alajuela
Guanaca
ste
Alajuela
San José
Puntare nas
A
laj uela
PANAMA
NICARAGUA
0 20 4010 Miles
0 25 5012.5 Km
STAR RATINGS
^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_^_
^_ ^_^_ ^_
^_ ^_^_
^_^_
Provincial boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
Pedestrian Star Ratings
This map shows the individual risk faced by a pedestrian travelling on the inspected road network in Costa Rica.
A 5-star rating represents the safest road infrastructure design for the prevailing speed environment; a 1-star rating represents a
road with relatively poor infrastructure design.
19 %
50 %
29 %
1 %
0 %
18. p16
Separated bicycle path
Paved shoulder for bicycle use
Narrow unpaved shoulder for bicycle use
Bicyclists riding in a narrow road
Dual carriageway road with median barrier, grade separated
junctions and good delineation
Straight single carriageway road with relatively clear
roadsides and some paved shoulders
Single carriageway road with sharp curves, narrow paved
shoulders and road side obstacles
Single carriageway with side friction and roadside obstacles
Examples of roads achieving each Star Rating
BicyclistCar occupant
No illustrative example available
A 5-star Car occupant road would
be median separated, have clear
roadsides, have only a few grade
separated junctions with long
merging lanes and would have a
speed limit suitable for the design
environment
A 5-star road for Bicyclists would
have bicycle facilities physically
separated from the main road
carriageway with either a barrier or
a wide run-off zone
No illustrative example available
19. p17
Separated paved sidewalk with deep ditch
Separated paved sidewalk
Unpaved shoulder for pedestrian use
Pedestrians walking in a narrow road
Pedestrian
A 5-star road for Pedestrians would
either be a pedestrian zone where
motorized traffic is excluded, or
a road where pedestrian facilities
are physically separated from
the main road carriageway with
signalized crossings available where
pedestrians wish to cross
No illustrative example available
20. p18
Costa Rica recommended countermeasure programme
The iRAP team has recommended that those countermeasures with a minimum BCR of 5 be considered for future funding.
The recommended programme with an initial construction cost of ₡ 25 billion is expected to save 14,700 lives and serious
injuries over 20 years. On average, each life and serious injury would cost ₡ 1.8 million to save and overall the investment
benefits are estimated to be worth ₡ 595 billion.
Top 5 recommended countermeasures
Within the programme, the top 5 countermeasures for immediate investigation are shown in the following table:
In Costa Rica, 57% of the national fatalities are pedestrians. The provision of safe road infrastructure for pedestrians is essential
to minimise the risk of death and injury. Pedestrian footpaths represent an important network-wide countermeasure that has the
potential to save many lives in Costa Rica.
Estimated initial construction cost/ ₡ 25 bn
Estimated cost to build and maintain (20 years)/ ₡ 26 bn
KSIs saved (20 years) 14,700
Value of safety benefit (20 years)/ ₡ 595 bn
Cost per KSI saved/ ₡ 1.8 m
Overall programme Benefit-Cost Ratio 22
Countermeasure type Length or
number
of sites
Estimated initial
construction
cost/ ₡
Estimated cost
to build and maintain
(20 years)/ ₡
KSIs
saved
(20 years)
Value of
safety benefit
(20 years)/ ₡
Cost per KSI
saved
(20 years)/ ₡
Programme
Benefit-Cost
Ratio (BCR)
Pedestrian footpath 190 km 6.9 bn 6.9 bn 6,900 269.4 bn 1.0 m 38
Pedestrian crossing 170 sites 4.5 bn 5.5 bn 2,500 99.2 bn 2.1 m 19
Shoulder sealing/provision 180 km 3.0 bn 3.0 bn 1,500 59.7 bn 2.2 m 18
Intersection - signalise 80 sites 4.5 bn 4.5 bn 900 33.7 bn 4.9 m 8
Intersection - roundabout 230 sites 1.5 bn 1.5 bn 700 27.6 bn 2.0 m 20
Current road network Proposed countermeasure scheme
Without facilities With facilities
Inspection data Recommended upgrade
Length/ km 190
Estimated initial construction cost/ ₡ 6.9 bn
Estimated cost to build and maintain (20 years)/ ₡ 6.9 bn
KSIs saved (20 years) 6,900
Value of safety benefit (20 years)/ ₡ 269 bn
Cost per KSI saved/ ₡ 1 bn
Programme Benefit-Cost Ratio 38
Priority countermeasure programme
Pedestrian flow along road Length/ km %
Low 332 12
Medium 1,058 38
High 1,410 50
Footpath provision Length/ km %
Physical barrier 3 0
Non-physical separation 3m 52 2
Non-physical separation 1m ≤ 3m 249 9
Adjacent to traffic 338 12
None 2,160 77
The full recommended countermeasure programme for Costa Rica can be found in the appendix.
Safety benefits are present value figures discounted over 20 years at a rate of 4% per annum. All currency conversions - 1 Costa Rican colon = 0.00201635 US dollars (rate on 6th
March 2008).
Priority life-saving countermeasure – pedestrian footpaths
21. 20 year casualty savings in Costa Rica
The map below shows the casualty savings over 20 years expected as a result of the recomended programme in Costa .
LA CRUZ
Murcielago
UPALA
Cuatro Bocas
Potrerillos
San Rafael
LIBERIA
Boca Arenal
BAGACES
SARDINAL
Puerto Viejo
Tilaran
Puerto NuevaCANAS
Tempate
Bebedero
Bolson QUESADA
Juntas
SANTA CRUZ
San Antonio
GUAPILES
NICOYA
MANSION Abangaritos NARANJO
SAN RAMON POASMarbella SIQUIRRES MATINA
San Pablo ALAJUELACueste Grande
HEREDIA
CorinaESPARZA
PUERTO LIMON
OROTINALEPANTO JUAN VINAS
SAN JOSEGarza TURRIALBA Bomba
CARTAGOBejuco
SANTIAGO
TUCURRIQUE
ChirripoPital
Cahuita
SAN MARCOS Santa Maria
Puerto Viejo
Esterillos Este
Katsi
Savegre
SAN ISIDRO
Dominical
BUENOS AIRESPejibaye
Potrero Grande
Sabanilla
Venecia
Guaria
UNION
Punto Jimenez LA CUESTA
1
2
4
10
36
247
21
14
27
237
923
141
250
243
248
142
216
125
238
140
230
745
23
742
17
240
151
219
126
144
154
228
145
118
232
148
249
618
806
107
224
130
231
114
206
757
136 805
235
311
220
217
127
150
105
135
714
2
1
10
1
35
32
32
21
2
3518
4
34
1
4
140
2
141
1
32
4
3
126
124
248
1
32
4
3
1
1
36
1
1
146
2
2
4
21
32
2
21
142
34
22
34
2
2
209
141
21
239
2
CartagoSan José
Alajuela
Heredia
Limó
n
Heredia
Cartago
Limón
Limón
P
untaren
as
Punt
arena
s
San
José
Puntarenas
Guanacaste
Guanacaste
Puntaren
as
Alajuela
Guanaca
ste
Alajuela
San José
Puntare nas
A
laj u ela
PANAMA
NICARAGUA
0 20 4010 Miles
0 25 5012.5 Km
KSI Saved per Km over 20 Years
State boundaries
Dual carriageway roads
Single carriageway roads
Other primary roads
0
0.01 - 1.50
1.51 - 4.50
4.51 - 14.00
14.00
p19
22. p20
Conclusions
The pilot programme had a number of objectives – to develop
the new iRAP tools; to test these tools in real applications in a
variety of environments across the world; and to explore how
partnerships can best be put together to apply them.
iRAP tools
The iRAP inspection methodology has been successfully
applied in a variety of environments. In Costa Rica the video
capture system followed by rating in the laboratory worked
well in an environment where it was necessary to capture data
in predominantly urban and semi-urban areas.
In Costa Rica the Star Rating of roads for each of three
different user groups (car occupants, bicyclists and
pedestrians) was successful. Scope for continuous
improvement is built into the architecture of the Star Rating
calculation: as more inspections are done, the learning can be
captured and the Star Ratings improved.
The challenging task of triggering and evaluating possible
countermeasures based on the inspection results also worked
well. The volume of data involved in considering the attributes
attached to sections of road every 50 or 100 metres over
thousands of kilometres is formidable. The logical analysis
behind the generation and discarding of possible options
for countermeasures is complex even before the economic
analysis.
In this report, summary data have been presented,
however iRAP results include a detailed breakdown of the
countermeasure programme and the precise locations where
they should be considered for implementation.
A key moment arises when the iRAP team and local engineers
come together after the inspections have been completed
to review, sense check and refine the recommended
countermeasure programmes generated by the tools. The pilot
results were convincing in this respect and pilot countries are
already beginning to plan to implement recommendations.
A suitable method of economic analysis was developed with
support from the World Bank. This can be applied satisfactorily
to any country at any point of economic development.
Speed management
The main issue to emerge was how posted speed limits, which
may not be obeyed, should be handled. Vehicle speeds have
an important role in the safety level of a road network. Speed
management is a critical aspect of managing a safe road
system. The risk of death or serious injury is minimised in any
crash, where:
• Vulnerable road users (e.g. motorcyclists, bicyclists and
pedestrians) are physically separated from cars and heavier
vehicles, or traffic speeds are 40km/h or less
• Opposing traffic is physically separated and roadside
hazards are well managed
• Traffic speeds are 70km/h or less for occupants of cars on
roads where opposing traffic is not physically separated or
roadside hazards exist
iRAP star ratings are based on the posted speed limits of the
inspected roads and so implicitly assume that traffic operates
at that speed. However, where posted traffic speeds are not
enforced or accompanied by other engineering solutions such
as traffic calming, their effectiveness may be reduced.
Traffic speeds also vary greatly during the day as a function
of congestion, volumes, side friction, incidents, enforcement
activities and the general conformance of the driving
population with speed limits.
In the iRAP results, roads with very low posted speed limits
may achieve a relatively high star rating (e.g. four or five
star), even though the engineering features may be of a
lower standard and/or the road environment does not support
the speed limit (e.g. lack of traffic calming). The detailed
measurement of actual speed profiles does not form part of
the iRAP assessment and may be considered as part of more
detailed site assessments at the project planning level.
The example shows the location of a recommended improvement to horizontal alignment in Malaysia.
23. p21
The iRAP model may therefore underestimate the casualties
and associated countermeasure benefits on roads where typical
speeds are in excess of the posted speed limit. Moreover, traffic
calming countermeasures may not be triggered, even though
they may offer good investment returns.
On the roadway network in Costa Rica, the posted speed limits
appear to be particularly low with respect to actual roadway
conditions. The roadway design for much of the network in
Costa Rica permits and, in some cases, may encourage
motorists to travel at speeds above the posted speed limit.
Thus, the resulting star ratings for Costa Rican roads shown
may be significantly safer than the reality. The impact on the
safety of the network, according to iRAP Star Ratings, from
general speeds being well in excess of speed limits is shown
in the chart. The chart shows the iRAP Star Ratings for Car
Occupants, Bicyclists, and Pedestrians on the Costa Rican
network as a whole based on:
• Firstly, the posted speed limit as used in the rest of this
report
• Secondly, assuming general travel speeds are 10 km/h
above posted speed limits
• Thirdly, assuming general travel speeds are 20km/h above
posted speed limits
If posted speed limits were generally obeyed then some 60%
of the network is rated 4 or 5 star. But if actual speeds were
20km/h higher than posted speed limits, then for Car Occupants
only 6% of the network is rated this high and for Bicyclists
97% of the network has only one or two stars. If speeds are in
practice higher, and are permitted to remain higher, then the
iRAP recommended programme can be expected to deliver
even higher returns than estimated and there will also be many
more locations which will be a priority for investment.
The raw condition data collected as part of the iRAP process
will provide a valuable resource to authorities investigating
appropriate speed management initiatives. This may include
a more detailed analysis of results to investigate where there
are low speed limits without accompanying engineering
solutions, or may include a review of the speed limits and
facilities in place on roads that rate poorly for pedestrian or
bicycle safety.
Partnership building
Success in each of the pilot countries has been largely
dependent on the formation of an enthusiastic and
highly-skilled multi-agency team to steer, lead and help
execute the programmes. The local Costa Rican partners
have provided excellent practical support for the project
and their involvement in the project from an early stage
has ensured that the inspection results can be used to their
maximal effect in Costa Rica.
In Costa Rica, ACCR have led and executed the in-country
aspects of the programme and have ensured that the aims of the
programme have been communicated effectively in the media.
They have provided an excellent representation of civil society
and have provided links to the other stakeholders including
government officials and other local road safety experts.
Posted Speed
Speed Limit +
Speed Limit +
CAROCCUPANTBICYCLISTPEDESTRIAN
Posted Speed
Speed Limit +
Speed Limit +
Posted Speed
Speed Limit +
Speed Limit +
1 Star
2 Star
3 Star
4 Star
5 Star
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
24. iRAP recommended countermeasure
programme
Costa Rica’s highest priority road safety challenge is reducing
deaths and serious injuries to pedestrians and bicyclists.
Over 60% of annual road deaths in Costa Rica involve these
vulnerable road users.
The recommended programme has the potential to save
1,300 lives and prevent 13,000 serious injuries over a 20-year
period. The programme involves an initial expenditure of
₡ 25 billion, with an additional expenditure of ₡1-2 billion
needed to renew improvements with shorter lives at
intervals over a 20-year period. The programme, when fully
implemented, is estimated to provide annual savings of 65
lives and 650 serious injuries, equivalent to an 11% reduction
in Costa Rica’s annual highway fatalities.
Key cost-effective countermeasures that will reduce deaths
and injuries involving vulnerable road users include:
• Footpaths for pedestrians, including footpaths separated
from or adjacent to the roadway
• New pedestrian crossings, including both signalised and
unsignalised crossings
• Shoulder sealing, which will provide a hard surface for
pedestrians and bicyclists outside the travel lanes
• New signalised intersections that include pedestrian
crossings
• New bicycle lanes, including lanes separate from or
adjacent to the roadway
These improvements for vulnerable road users, many of
which improve safety for vehicle occupants as well, constitute
approximately 75% of the recommended programme.
Key cost-effective improvements to improve safety for vehicle
occupants include:
• New signalised intersections
• Provision of roundabouts at existing intersections
• Shoulder sealing, which provides a recovery area for
vehicles before they run off the road
• Roadside barriers to reduce the consequences of running
off the road
• Installation of turn lanes at intersections
The iRAP software toolkit provides countermeasure
recommendations for each road section on the 2,800km road
network considered in the study. These recommendations
provide a starting point for detailed engineering studies to
plan the most appropriate safety improvements for each road
section.
Early action is desirable to begin achieving benefits from
the highway infrastructure safety improvement programme.
Implementation of the recommended programme over
the next three to five years should be considered. This
would require an annual expenditure of ₡ 5-8 billion. A key
component of the programme implementation should be traffic
volume and accident data collection for a before-and-after
evaluation of the improvements that will demonstrate their
success and enable a second-phase improvement programme
for the next three to five years to be developed based on
documented local experience.
Using the iRAP results
The iRAP results are being considered by the Ministry of
Transportation and Public Works (MOPT) and the Road
Safety Council (Cosevi) in decisions concerning future road
safety improvements and will continue to work closely with
all government and non-government agencies with a vested
interest in making roads safe. Plans for early implementation
of key projects based on iRAP results are being formulated.
Together, with international partners for the iRAP initiative,
the team will continue to contribute to road safety knowledge
globally and help drive investment programs that will save many
lives every year.
p22
28. iRAP
Worting House, Basingstoke
Hampshire, UK, RG23 8PX
Telephone: +44 (0) 1256 345598
Email: icanhelp@irap.net
MINISTRY OF WORKS MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT
iRAP is grateful for the support of
www.irap.net iRAP supports
Published January 2009
Deaths and injuries from road traffic crashes are a major and growing public health epidemic. Each year 1.3 million people die and as many as
50 million are injured or permanently disabled in road crashes. Road crashes are now the leading cause of death for children and young people
aged between 10 and 24. The burden of road crashes is comparable with malaria and tuberculosis, and costs 1-3% of the world’s GDP.
Costa Rica took world acclaimed action on seat belts, saving 20% of casualties with this one effective measure. But saving lives needs a
combination of action to ensure that there are safe drivers, in safe vehicles, on safe roads.
The iRAP inspections in Costa Rica bring a focus to the need for safer road infrastructure. They brought together a great partnership of
organisations working towards the goal of saving life and serious injuries on the roads of Costa Rica.
In 2007, iRAP inspected 2,800kms of roads where there is a concentration of serious and fatal crashes. The new iRAP methodology delivers:
• ‘Star Rating’ tables and maps showing the safety of roads for car occupants, motorcyclists, bicyclists and pedestrians
• a road inventory database with 30 inspected attributes describing the inspected network
• an estimate of the numbers being killed and seriously injured on each inspected road
• a recommended network-wide countermeasure programme for consideration by local stakeholders and funding bodies
• an analysis of how safety on the network varies with the speeds vehicles drive
The results of the inspections in this report suggest that investment in a programme of infrastructure safety countermeasures is likely to save
11% of Costa Rica’s road fatalities and serious injuries over the next 20 years. The results particularly identify countermeasures that will save
the lives of many pedestrians, such as footpaths, safe crossing points and attention to safety detail.
The countermeasure package should pay back up to 20 times its cost in terms of casualty savings and offer a significant boost to the Costa
Rican economy.
This new methodology offers ‘vaccines for roads’. There is demand for inspections from across the world but the pace with which they can be
rolled out globally will depend upon the speed with which leading aid donors and the development banks recognise the scale of the road injury
crisis and commit to action.
