American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Special Committee on Research and Innovation

 

FY2023 NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT TEMPLATE

 

Problem Number:  2023-G-05

 

Problem Title

Integrated Strategies for Managing High Travel Speeds

 

Background Information and Need For Research

High traffic speeds are arguably the largest contributor to traffic deaths in the United States. High speeds contribute to crash occurrence and their direct influence on impact speeds determine crash severities (Aarts & van Schagen, 2006; Hussain et al, 2018). Moreover, specific populations, i.e., traditionally marginalized, and underserved communities, bear a disproportionate burden of our collective traffic injury problem (Hamann, Peek-Asa, & Butcher, 2020).  Despite the existence of isolated interventions to curtail higher speeds—e.g., speed safety cameras, traffic calming road design, concordance between land use and road classifications—few of them have been widely and equitably adopted, and none get at the deeply rooted and interconnected causes of the problem, such as people’s harried lifestyles, thrill-seeking behaviors, the consumption of increasingly more powerful vehicles, prioritizing speed over competing values of concern for self and others, among many other interacting factors.

 

Literature Search Summary

The reasons people drive at high travel speeds are complex and often situation specific. For example, many drivers strongly believe that most other drivers speed and that therefore, speeding must be a normal, even expected behavior (Yannis, Louca, Vardaki, and Kanellaidis, 2013). And as most drivers consider themselves as better than the average driver, they tend to think that they are immune to being injured when driving at high speeds (Mouter, van Cranenburgh, and van Wee, 2018). Furthermore, as most drivers overestimate how much time they can save by driving at high speeds (Peer, 2010), the driving public tends to rationalize speeding, arguing that sometimes it is necessary to drive fast (Fleiter, Lennon, and Watson, 2010). More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic and associated dampening of commuting and leisure travel has provided us with an “unnatural experiment” into how travel speeds have tended to increase in response to a decrease in traffic volumes (e.g., Lee, Porr, and Miller, 2020).

 

In short, driving at high speeds is often conceived as normal, expected, not too risky, nearly always time saving, and simply necessary in many circumstances. Therefore, it should not be surprising that often uncoordinated education, enforcement, and engineering interventions fail to incite lasting reductions in people driving at high speeds (Naumann et al, 2020).

 

To manage traffic speeds proactively and over longer periods of time, professionals need to both recognize the complexity of this public health issue and to broaden their repertoire of ways to address it. Relevant here are cross-sectoral partnerships and tools to help teams of partners to visualize the complex processes that could be driving an outcome of interest (Arnold and Wade, 2015). To ultimately develop integrated strategies to managing travel speeds in various contexts, teams will need to draw upon traditional data (e.g., crashes, roadway inventory, traffic speed and volume data, freight transport) and less traditional data (e.g., indicators of land use density and mix; perceiving those who speed as “cool”; in-vehicle feedback on drivers’ travel speeds; consumer trends privileging vehicles of increasing size, weight, and horsepower; and workplace and social group “culture” and policies surrounding high travel speeds) to consider the interacting elements of the system that influence high travel speeds. These integrated strategies should also be adaptable enough to contend with disruptions that could impact travel speeds, such as global pandemics, siloed funding of disconnected parts of the system, increased awareness of social injustices and inequities in transportation safety and access, natural disasters, and technological breakthroughs.

 

Research Objective

As mentioned, there are several efficacious speed-reducing tools (e.g., speed safety cameras, traffic calming road design, concordance between land use and road classifications), yet these are often not widely or equitably applied, and none address the complex array of reasons that people drive at high speeds. For example, traffic calmed streets can reduce operating speeds, however, they fail to make people feel less hurried in their lives. This research would build upon a foundation of work focused on speed limit setting (e.g., NCHRP Research Report 966; NCHRP 17-79), street redesign, traffic signal coordination, and automated speed enforcement toward enhancing pedestrian safety (e.g., NCHRP Synthesis 535) to examine the confluence of factors that influence travel speeds. This research would bring to bear a package of promising practices (e.g., speed limit setting, land use, workplace, congestion pricing), transportation investments (e.g., transit provision, speed-oriented school and workplace practices), communications strategies (e.g., media framing of travel speeds and traffic congestion), and interventions (e.g., intelligent speed adaptation [ISA], speed safety cameras and their equitable placement, operation, and re-investment schemes) that can be incorporated into a unified, adaptable framework for managing high travel speeds. The research should also shed light on strategies that do not work, or that may have unintended consequences to help free agencies from defaulting to costly and ineffectual schemes and to encourage working with partners to improve outcomes.

 

Research objective-related tasks could unfold over four phases:

          The first phase in this research project would be to synthesize a broad literature on speed reduction strategies, as well as community-based injury reduction interventions to expand the suite of potential strategies to expand upon in subsequent project phases and begin to address the root causes of high travel speeds among various road user demographic (e.g., based upon gender, race/ethnicity, income, age) and modal groups (e.g., drivers of trucks, cars, SUVs, motorcyclists).

          In the second phase, diverse teams of researchers, practitioners, and policymakers would convene and engage in systems thinking exercises to generate insights on speed-related dynamics (e.g., workplace practices that knowingly or unknowingly incentivize high travel speeds among employees), feedbacks (e.g., sprawling land uses that incite high speeds to cover increasingly distances), and potential leverage points for intervention (e.g., incorporating safe design speeds in traffic impact assessment [TIA] procedures) that will support continued effectiveness. Combined with the literature review in the first phase, this will provide a comprehensive and holistic view of what we know about factors generating high travel speeds, where current interventions attempt to intervene on the problem, weak points in these strategies, and where we might need to consider additional interventions or supports given varying legal, financial, and cultural contexts. 

          A third phase in this project would be to incorporate strategies identified in the literature review and second phase into a prototype Integrated Strategies for Speed Management Framework for managing high travel speeds in an integrated manner that DOTs and their partners can use to manage travel speeds across the network and within various community (e.g., schools) and institutional (e.g., DOTs, county public health departments, local hospitals, local news media) environments, as well as overcoming barriers to securing funding and additional resources to help mitigate travel speeds.

          The fourth and final phase would draw from results of the third phase to design prospective demonstration studies with local, regional, and state partners on the implementation of the Integrated Strategies for Speed Management Framework. These prospective studies would be designed to assess real-world applications of the framework, provide tips on carrying out a formative evaluation of the demonstration, and recommendations for refining the framework based upon formative evaluation results. It is anticipated that this prospective demonstration study would seek guidance on best practices for identifying partners, policies, practices, and interventions which, when used in appropriate contexts and in combination, can help manage travel speeds across various spatial and time scales.  

 

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Road user safety is foundational to all state DOTs’ missions. As such, developing and implementing ways to curtail high travel speeds—the largest contributor to traffic deaths in the United States through their direct influence on impact speeds, which determine crash severities (Aarts & van Schagen, 2006; Hussain et al, 2018)—is, or should be, a central, organizing goal of most DOTs.

Given that more recent traffic monitoring studies have revealed average travel speeds increasing throughout 2020, and a 7.2 percent year-over-year increase in the number of people (38,680 in 2020) dying in motor vehicle crashes in the US, the largest increase in fatalities since 2007 (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2021), the consequences of failing to meaningfully address the dangers of high travel speeds will result in many more deaths and serious road injuries. Plus, the potential benefits of attenuating high travel speeds are sizable, including reductions in deaths, injuries, and suffering, as well as improved public health via lower ambient noise and air pollution (Distefano, & Leonardi, 2019). To optimize the many benefits for managing travel speeds, state DOTs and their cross-sectoral partners would profit from more than a synthesis of existing speed management practice, and instead engage with an expanded, coordinated set of strategies to help address root causes and issues in speed management that are virtually impossible to fully tackle by any single agency or strategy (e.g., solely relying on speed safety cameras to address the problem).

 

The AASHTO Committee on Safety ranked this its #6 priority.

 

Implementation Considerations

Considering the use of the research results from the proposed effort, staff within state DOTs who conduct safety research, design roadways, approve driveway permits and posted speed limits on state-owned and operated roads, those who develop the departments’ street classifications and cross-sectional design guides, those who work on school travel, parking, and circulation, and administrators seeking ways of enhancing their employees’ traffic safety culture and safety performance, among others, will find results from this research practical and readily adaptable in their workflows.

An increasing number of state DOTs are committing to “Towards Zero Deaths” initiatives, which many recognize requires coordinated action among multidisciplinary players who set out to solve complex road safety problems, including the critical issue of speed management (FHWA, 2020).  Thus, a few anticipated steps for state DOTs to take to implement the proposed project’s research findings within their organizational structures would be to consider agencies’ roles in supporting safer speeds on our roadways, and to acquire a deeper understanding of how they can work with partners to effectively reduce travel speeds and do so in a sustainable manner.

Processes to support adoption and implementation of the research could take the shape of demonstration projects coupled with peer exchanges and tailored trainings, wherein the research team partners with several state DOTs to experiment with applying key recommendations of the project and transmitting lessons learned to additional agencies. The project team would likely seek assistance from the NCHRP Implementation Support Program to carry out the following.

To foster awareness and facilitate widespread implementation of the proposed Integrated Strategies for Managing High Travel Speeds framework, research teams could develop brief, two-page summaries of the project’s background, methods, results, and practical implications, and then share the summaries via social media and through various email lists; establish an “academy” around coordinated and innovative means of tempering travel speeds, one that requires agencies to apply to participate, connects participants with others to problem-solve, receive coaching, engage in systems thinking, etc.; the demonstration projects referenced above; and accessible multi-media (text and video) “stories” that feature academy and demonstration project participants implementing integrated and holistic speed management strategies, thereby demystifying the project’s complexity, and inspiring colleagues through processes of imitation as facilitated through peer exchanges and expert coaching. 

 

Recommended Research Funding and Research Period

$500,000 over 24 months.

 

Problem Statement Author(S): For each author, provide their name, affiliation, email address and phone.

Seth LaJeunesse, UNC Highway Safety Research Center, lajeune@hsrc.unc.edu, 919-962-4236

Libby Thomas, UNC Highway Safety Research Center, thomas@hsrc.unc.edu, 919-962-7802

Becky Naumann, UNC Injury Prevention Research Center, rnaumann@email.unc.edu, 919-843-3530

 

Potential Panel Members: For each panel member, provide their name, affiliation, email address and phone.

Charles Brown, Equitable Cities, LLC, charlesbrown@equitablecities.com, 908-514-9300

Barb Chamberlain, Washington State DOT, chambba@wsdot.wa.gov, 206-716-1130

Margaret Herrera, Maricopa Association of Governments (AZ), mherrera@azmag.gov, 602-452-5072

Amin M. Hezaveh, NCDOT, amohamado-hezaveh@ncdot.gov, 919-814-5131

Franz Loewenherz, floewenherz@bellevuewa.gov, City of Bellevue, WA, 425-452-4077

Anusha Musunuru, Kittelson & Associates, amusunuru@kittelson.com, 916-822-5354

Keshia Pollack-Porter, Johns Hopkins University, kpollac1@jhu.edu, 410-502-6272

Rebecca Sanders, Safe Streets Research & Consulting, LLC, rebecca@safestreetsresearch.com, 510-316-5940

Donald Sweezy, NYSDOT, donald.sweezy@dot.ny.gov, 518-485-8785

Person Submitting The Problem Statement: Name, affiliation, email address and phone.

Adnan Qazi, P.E.

Arkansas Department of Transportation

AASHTO Committee on Safety, Research Subcommittee Chair

501-569-2642

Adnan.Qazi@ardot.gov