1. Introduction
Transport systems move people and goods, contribute to the development of national economies and facilitate access to employment and services, improving overall the society's quality of life. However, the traffic of vehicles at high speeds has major adverse impacts in terms of road accidents with consequent deaths and injuries, as well as material, economic and environmental impacts, such as noise and pollutant emissions [
1]. Major risk factors that trigger accidents were identified [
2]: lack of use of seat belts and child restraint systems, non-use of helmets, driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs, lack of adequate infrastructure and inadequate or excessive speed [
3]. Based on the recommendations of the World Report on road traffic injuries and the Commission for Global Road Safety, it was recommended that new road projects should be as tolerant as practicable to reduce the consequences of driver errors and failures.
In the period between 2011 and 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) proclaimed the “First Decade of Action for Road Safety”, for the purpose of stabilizing and reducing the forecast level of road traffic fatalities around the world by increasing activities conducted at the national, regional and global levels [
3]. Regarding the period between 2021 and 2030, WHO proclaimed the “Second Decade of Action for Road Safety” to reduce the number of traffic accidents by half [
4].
It may be observed that the number of traffic accidents remains unacceptably high worldwide: more than 1.35 million people being killed and up to 50 million injured per year. Developing countries concentrate 90% of all the victims, being the leading cause of death worldwide for children and young people between 15 and 29 years of age [
4]. Air quality traffic related deaths also increased worldwide. Air pollution is among the five biggest causes that contribute to global mortality, accounting for around 4 million deaths per year [
5]. Cities with accelerated urban surface growth are deeply impacted by air pollution, leading to a scenario of environmental degradation and unsustainable standards [
6].
An important question for the authorities is whether speed limits should be lowered to bring good results to society and associated cost-benefits. Although the lowering of speed limits implies increases in transportation costs and travel time, also reduces pollution rates, fuel consumption and accidents [
7]. Hosseinlou et al. [
8] used a mathematical model to determine the optimal speed for the vehicles depending on location, socio-economic and technological factors. Aarts and Van Schagen [
9] reviewed empirical studies and concluded that the crash rate increases with speed increases: vehicles that move much faster than the surrounding traffic have an increasing crash rate. Kroyer et al. [
10] developed a risk curve in urban environments observing that increases in vehicle speed have significant impacts on fatal accident risks (cautions need to be taken when considering the increase in speed and other parameters). Automotive safety systems designed to avoid accidents and road safety are also important [
11]. In this sense, Doecke et al. [
12] studied the relationship between speed limits and injury severities for different crash types and results have demonstrated a generally positive exponential relationship between speed limits and fatality rates. Highways permitting motorists to drive more than 100 km/h are only safe from fatal accidents if they have excellent conditions of use, good geometrical project, and safe roadside design. These studies found that for fatality rate threshold of 1 in 100 crashes, the safe speed limits are: 40 km/h for pedestrian crashes, 50 km/h for head-on crashes, 60 km/h for hit fixed object crashes, 80 km/h for right angle, right turn, and left road/rollover crashes and 110 km/h or more for rear-end crashes. Drivers' attitudes and behaviors can also influence the occurrence of accidents [
13].
WHO stresses the importance of the local authorities to legislate on speed limit reduction [
14] at schools and commercial areas, representing traffic generator hubs attracting large vehicle and pedestrian flows. The city of São Paulo, in compliance with the United Nations (UN) recommendations, started a life protection program in 2013, with the objective of reducing death rates from traffic accidents to a maximum of three deaths for every 100,000 inhabitants in by 2030 [
3]. A study carried out in the city of São Paulo concluded that the speed reduction programs applied since 2015 had reduced both the average speed of motor vehicles and mortality resulting from traffic accidents, the latter being more pronounced among people over 50 years old [
15,
16]. In addition to reducing the number of accidents, lowering the speed limit can also help reduce polluting emissions, fuel consumption and travel time [
8]. In studies carried out in Spain, the authors demonstrated that the percentages of reduction of these factors vary according to the characteristics of each locality [
7].
The vehicle fleet in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo consists of more than 7 million vehicles, including heavy vehicles such as trucks, buses, minibuses, pickup trucks and vans [
17]. In 2015, the speed limit was modified on several roads in the city of São Paulo, including those on the Tietê and Pinheiros highways [
18]. These highways represent two of the most important roads in the city, which interconnect the main highways, have a large flow of vehicles (with a consequent large emission of pollutants) and concentrate ~4.1% of fatal traffic accidents (occupying the first two positions of this type of accidents within the area under the responsibility of the municipality). In January 2017, speed limits on the two marginals returned to their highest values in 2015, although they remained at more restrictive levels on other roads in the city [
19]. A study in São Paulo showed that this speed reduction policy adopted in 2015 led, in its first 18 months of operation, to a 21.7% reduction in the number of accidents, including those with and without fatalities [
20]. A similar reduction percentage was previously achieved in the region of Catalonia (Spain), where road speeds were reduced from 120 km/h and 100 km/h to 80 km/h in July 2007. As was the case of São Paulo, the newly elected government revoked this measure in February 2011, allowing a return to previous speed limits and masking impacts of the policy [
21].
Our objective in this paper is to analyze whether the reduction in the speed limit on marginal roads in São Paulo contributed to the decrease in the occurrence of traffic accidents, and whether the reduction on other roads in the city, still in force, also had an influence. The study period is between 2010 and 2020, covers the period of the United Nations “Decade of Action for Traffic Safety” and uses a 10-year database from São Paulo to assess the impacts of speed reduction and increase policies on traffic safety: frequency of accidents, fatalities, and injuries. Finally, improvements in air quality due to speed reduction strategies are tested in the Pinheiros highway (considered as a case study).
2. Materials and Methods
The Tietê marginal has an extension of ~ 23 kilometers, interconnecting the Ayrton Senna and Pinheiros highways, having three classes of lanes, with a road classification composed of fast rapid transit (FT), central lanes (C) and arterial lanes (A). The Pinheiros marginal also has an extension of ~ 23 kilometers, interconnecting the Tietê marginal and important avenues. This highway has two classes of lanes, with a road classification composed of fast rapid transit and arterial lanes. In the two marginals, speeds have been reduced from 07/20/2015 to 01/24/2017 and increased again since 01/25/2017.
Table 1 shows the dates and speed limits adopted in each period for the two highways and for light and heavy-duty vehicles (LDVs and HDVs).
Figure 1 shows the layout of the two marginals and their surroundings. The Tietê and Pinheiros marginals have 51 and 26 locations, respectively, with radar surveillances installed in their corresponding segments [
18]. Supplementary material provides information about the other roads.
In addition, forty other roads in the area under the responsibility of the municipality were studied. These forty local roads have a total length of ~ 246 km: 19 roads with radar and speed bumps (47.5%), 15 roads with only radar (37.5%) and 6 roads with only speed bumps (15%). In the forty other local roads, speeds have been reduced to 50 km/h in July 2015 and continued at their reduced level.
3.1. Accident Modelling
Data on traffic accidents from 2010-2020, including dead and injured, were provided by the São Paulo Traffic Engineering Company (CET) through reports and other requests for information [
22]. A General Linear Model (GLM) was fitted to the monthly data on traffic accidents and victims (death and injured), using as independent variables (fixed factors): location, year, month and speed reduction/increase policies (speed scenarios). In the accident model, the combinations of year and month of implementation/removal of the transport policy within each year were used as random factors. There were months in the city in which the number of accidents decreased significantly due to the decrease in speed, especially starting from the year 2015. The regression model estimated the accidents in month
t, during the period 2011-2020, using the number of dead and injured on the marginal roads Pinheiros and Tietê and the other forty roads:
where
Pt is a dummy variable ranging from 1 to 0 (1 for months with implementation of a speed reduction policy and 0 for months without such a reduction), reflecting month
t related to traffic speed restrictions;
a0 (intercept) and
a1 (slowdown scenario effect) are regression coefficients obtained by ordinary least squares. Time trends at location
j were included to control for the effects of transport policies in the data period. Therefore,
Wt is a vector of annual records that can impact
i accidents because of the implementation of the measures and
a2w are the regression coefficients related to the years 2011 to 2020.
3.2. Interactions between Traffic Parameters, Accidents and Air Quality
In January 2017, a technical note appeared advocating for speed variations based on studies of traffic flows (and their respective braking distances for light and heavy vehicles) and levels of service that take into consideration ranges of vehicle density per traffic lane [
23]. The level of service is a qualitative assessment of the road traffic operating conditions. The level of service considers speed, travel time, traffic restrictions or interruptions, degree of freedom of maneuver and comfort. Finally, the level of service classifies road segments based on their speed and corresponding traffic volumes [
24]. Additionally, this technical note recommended some measures that should be implemented especially on marginal roads along with speed increments. The main recommended measures were the improvement of speed regulation signage, educational and warning signage (such as prohibition of mobile phone use while driving, implementation of pedestrian crossings at junctions, use variable electronic message boards, increased inspection of motorcycles, expansion of traffic operational equipment on these roads and inhibition of the presence of street vendors). Along with these measures, pavement conditions can also have a strong impact on the number of accidents [
25].
The relationships between main traffic parameters, flow
F (number of vehicles/h/lane), mean speed
s (in km/h) and density
D (vehicles/km/lane), are defined according to the following equation:
The capacity
C of a road is the maximum value of the vehicle flow that can circulate through a section with uniform characteristics. This maximum value corresponds to the critical density. Transport policy measures that avoid exceeding the capacity of roads are preferred to reduce accidents and pollution simultaneously [
7,
21].
4. Conclusions
The results in this study show a clear reduction in the number of accidents without victims on the roads of the city of São Paulo starting in 2010. There was a reduction in accidents on both marginal roads and other roads. However, when there was an increase in speed on the marginal roads, the relevant numbers began to move away. There was an increase in the total number of accidents, including injuries and deaths on the Pinheiros and Tietê marginal roads. A factor that may also have contributed to the increase in accidents would be the difference between the speed limits for light and heavy vehicles in the same and between lanes, since heavy vehicles circulate in the right lane, but this lane is also used by other vehicles (
Table 1). The increase in speed had also an impact on air quality worsening in the Pinheiros marginal road (
Figure 6).
The results of the model showed that reducing speed on other roads in São Paulo caused a decrease of 30 fatalities per year. Considering that the victims in the marginal roads accounted for ~ 20% of the fatalities in the period studied, ~ 6 deaths could have been avoided annually in the marginal roads. When there was an increase in speed on marginal roads, studies have shown that travel time decreased by 5.5% [
20]. However, when traffic accidents occur, the road is blocked due to the rapid assistance of rescue teams. The shorter travel time, which is the main justification for increasing speed, is not advantageous in these situations and the consequences of the accident can include economic losses, injuries, and lost lives. The number of accidents on marginal roads remains high and the problem may be related to the legal speed limit, which is incompatible with WHO and safety guidelines. Increasing speed limits can lead to more congestion events, increasing pollutant concentrations, as shown in
Figure 4 and
Figure 5.
It can be said that the policy of reducing the speed limit in the city, together with the rest of the measures adopted, came close to the objective of saving lives, meeting the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 3.6 of halving the number of deaths from road accidents in 2020 (
Figure 2). It is necessary to adopt new policies, such as the review of the speed limit on marginal roads, through technical and scientific knowledge, with the participation of civil society through road education campaigns [31; 45]. It is still necessary to achieve the objective of reducing the number of deaths from traffic accidents by 2030, to a maximum of 3 per 100,000 inhabitants (
Figure 2). The latest report released by the traffic engineering company [
18] shows that the Pinheiros and Tietê marginal highways continue to be the ones with the most accidents in the city. Other objectives related to compliance with air quality standards must be achieved simultaneously with road safety in the next ten years.
Author Contributions
P.J. Pérez-Martínez: Project administration, Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. D. Gonçalves: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – _original draft, Writing – _review & editing. C. Daroncho & J. Dunck: Formal analysis, Investigation, Validation, Writing – _original draft. F. Teixeira: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – _original draft, Writing – _review & editing. J. Dias Oliveira: Investigation, Visualization, Writing – _original draft, Writing – _review & editing. R.M. Miranda: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – _original draft, Writing – _review & editing.
Figure 1.
Layout of the Tietê and Pinheiros highways: location of bridges/viaducts/ramps (in white), train stations (in yellow and blue) and main road connections (Dutra, C. Branco and A. Senna highways). Source: adapted from [
19].
Figure 1.
Layout of the Tietê and Pinheiros highways: location of bridges/viaducts/ramps (in white), train stations (in yellow and blue) and main road connections (Dutra, C. Branco and A. Senna highways). Source: adapted from [
19].
Figure 2.
Numbers of deaths per capita from traffic accidents in the City of São Paulo. Source: adapted from [
18].
Figure 2.
Numbers of deaths per capita from traffic accidents in the City of São Paulo. Source: adapted from [
18].
Figure 3.
Trend in the period of the monthly number of fatalities and injuries on marginal highways and forty other roads between 2010 and 2020.
Figure 3.
Trend in the period of the monthly number of fatalities and injuries on marginal highways and forty other roads between 2010 and 2020.
Figure 4.
Relationships of S-speed (in km/h), D-density (in # vehicles/km/lane) and uninterrupted F-flow of vehicles (in # vehicles/h/lane) in the Pinheiros marginal, measured by a permanent radar located next to the station CETESB in the direction Castelo Branco, in a speed reduction scenario from 29/05/2015 to 24/01/2017. Notes: colors represent the frequency of speed/density/flow combinations (heat map); free flow speed (70 km/h, maximum speed, red bars), maximum density (total lockdown at 60 veh/km/lane) and maximum capacity (~ 1600 veh/h/lane, ~ 35 veh/km/lane and ~ 45km/h) are determined by the three parameters of the traffic fundamental Equation 2; green triangle areas underlined graph regions with forced traffic.
Figure 4.
Relationships of S-speed (in km/h), D-density (in # vehicles/km/lane) and uninterrupted F-flow of vehicles (in # vehicles/h/lane) in the Pinheiros marginal, measured by a permanent radar located next to the station CETESB in the direction Castelo Branco, in a speed reduction scenario from 29/05/2015 to 24/01/2017. Notes: colors represent the frequency of speed/density/flow combinations (heat map); free flow speed (70 km/h, maximum speed, red bars), maximum density (total lockdown at 60 veh/km/lane) and maximum capacity (~ 1600 veh/h/lane, ~ 35 veh/km/lane and ~ 45km/h) are determined by the three parameters of the traffic fundamental Equation 2; green triangle areas underlined graph regions with forced traffic.
Figure 5.
Relationships of S-speed (in km/h), D-density (in # vehicles/km/lane) and uninterrupted F-flow of vehicles (in # vehicles/h/lane) in the Pinheiros marginal, measured by a permanent radar located next to the station CETESB in the direction Castelo Branco, in a speed increase scenario from 25/01/2017 to 31/12/2018. Notes: colors represent the frequency of speed/density/flow combinations (heat map); free flow speed (90 km/h, maximum speed, red bars), maximum density (total lockdown at 60 veh/km/lane) and maximum capacity (~ 1600 veh/h/lane, ~ 35 veh/km/lane and ~ 45km/h) are determined by the three parameters of the traffic fundamental Equation 2; green triangle areas underlined graph regions with forced traffic.
Figure 5.
Relationships of S-speed (in km/h), D-density (in # vehicles/km/lane) and uninterrupted F-flow of vehicles (in # vehicles/h/lane) in the Pinheiros marginal, measured by a permanent radar located next to the station CETESB in the direction Castelo Branco, in a speed increase scenario from 25/01/2017 to 31/12/2018. Notes: colors represent the frequency of speed/density/flow combinations (heat map); free flow speed (90 km/h, maximum speed, red bars), maximum density (total lockdown at 60 veh/km/lane) and maximum capacity (~ 1600 veh/h/lane, ~ 35 veh/km/lane and ~ 45km/h) are determined by the three parameters of the traffic fundamental Equation 2; green triangle areas underlined graph regions with forced traffic.
Figure 6.
NOX and CO vehicle related pollution during speed scenarios in the Pinheiros marginal (direction Interlagos, IT): NOX (a) and CO (b) monthly concentrations and trends (in μg/m3 and ppm), NOX (c) and CO (d) hourly concentrations (in μg/m3 and ppm) by car flow bins (in number of LDVs/hour, 7 a.m-8 p.m.) during the speed reduction period (from 29/05/2015 to 24/01/2017, green bars), and NOX (e) and CO (f) hourly concentrations (in μg/m3 and ppm) by car flow bins (in number of LDVs/hour, 7 a.m.-8p.m.) during the speed increase period (from 25/01/2017 to 31/12/2018, red bars).
Figure 6.
NOX and CO vehicle related pollution during speed scenarios in the Pinheiros marginal (direction Interlagos, IT): NOX (a) and CO (b) monthly concentrations and trends (in μg/m3 and ppm), NOX (c) and CO (d) hourly concentrations (in μg/m3 and ppm) by car flow bins (in number of LDVs/hour, 7 a.m-8 p.m.) during the speed reduction period (from 29/05/2015 to 24/01/2017, green bars), and NOX (e) and CO (f) hourly concentrations (in μg/m3 and ppm) by car flow bins (in number of LDVs/hour, 7 a.m.-8p.m.) during the speed increase period (from 25/01/2017 to 31/12/2018, red bars).
Table 1.
Dates and speed limits adopted in each period for the Tietê and Pinheiros highways and for the vehicle types (heavy and light duty).
Table 1.
Dates and speed limits adopted in each period for the Tietê and Pinheiros highways and for the vehicle types (heavy and light duty).
Lane types |
Light duty vehicles |
Heavy duty vehicles |
Light duty vehicles |
Heavy duty vehicles |
Light duty vehicles |
Heavy duty vehicles |
|
Until 07/19/2015 |
From 07/20/2015 to 01/24/2017 |
Since 01/25/2017 |
FT1
|
90 km/h |
70 km/h |
70 km/h |
60 km/h |
90 km/h |
60 km/h |
C2
|
70 km/h |
70 km/h |
60 km/h |
60 km/h |
70 km/h |
60 km/h |
A3
|
70 km/h |
70 km/h |
50 km/h |
50 km/h |
60 km/h |
60-50 km/h |
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics of accidents with fatalities and injuries on marginal roads and other roads per year.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics of accidents with fatalities and injuries on marginal roads and other roads per year.
Year |
Mean fatalities (±sd)1
|
Sum of fatalities2
|
Difference in fatalities (%)3
|
Mean injuries (±sd)1
|
Sum of injuries2
|
Difference in injuries (%)3
|
Pinheiros marginal |
|
2010 |
0.03±0.18 |
20 |
_ |
1.22±0.56 |
764 |
_ |
2011 |
0.06±0.28 |
28 |
40.00 |
1.21±0.58 |
607 |
-20.55 |
2012 |
0.04±0.20 |
25 |
-10.71 |
1.21±0.58 |
762 |
25.54 |
2013 |
0.04±0.19 |
23 |
-8.00 |
1.18±0.50 |
725 |
-4.86 |
2014 |
0.05±0.23 |
30 |
30.43 |
1.21±1.80 |
755 |
4.13 |
2015 |
0.05±0.23 |
18 |
-40.00 |
1.15±0.56 |
435 |
-42.38 |
2016 |
0.04±0.20 |
11 |
-38.89 |
1.11±0.45 |
281 |
-35.40 |
2017 |
0.06±0.24 |
14 |
27.27 |
1.19±0.63 |
270 |
-3.91 |
2018 |
0.09±0.33 |
22 |
57.14 |
1.21±1.08 |
297 |
10.00 |
2019 |
0.06±0.24 |
13 |
-40.91 |
1.12±0.62 |
230 |
-22.56 |
2020 |
0.13±0.34 |
16 |
23.08 |
1.09±0.67 |
132 |
-42.61 |
Total |
|
220 |
|
|
5,258 |
|
Tiete marginal |
2010 |
0.08±0.30 |
53 |
_ |
1.19±0.69 |
744 |
_ |
2011 |
0.08±0.29 |
54 |
1.89 |
1.25±0.92 |
808 |
8.60 |
2012 |
0.07±0.27 |
47 |
-12.96 |
1.19±0.71 |
785 |
-2.85 |
2013 |
0.06±0.26 |
38 |
-19.15 |
1.18±0.64 |
774 |
-1.40 |
2014 |
0.07±0.26 |
38 |
0.00 |
1.16±0.64 |
645 |
-16.67 |
2015 |
0.07±0.29 |
28 |
-26.32 |
1.15±0.60 |
441 |
-31.63 |
2016 |
0.07±0.27 |
15 |
-46.43 |
1.19±0.72 |
259 |
-41.27 |
2017 |
0.09±0.32 |
20 |
33.33 |
1.12±0.87 |
264 |
1.93 |
2018 |
0.06±0.24 |
14 |
-30.00 |
1.12±0.54 |
250 |
-5.30 |
2019 |
0.08±0.28 |
21 |
50.00 |
1.17±0.68 |
297 |
18.80 |
2020 |
0.12±0.32 |
17 |
-19.05 |
1.07±0.68 |
158 |
-46.80 |
Total |
|
345 |
|
|
5,425 |
|
Other forty roads |
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
0.06±0.26 |
262 |
_ |
1.30±0.93 |
5750 |
_ |
2011 |
0.06±0.27 |
276 |
5.34 |
1.26±0.85 |
5415 |
-5.83 |
2012 |
0.05±0.24 |
244 |
-11.59 |
1.26±0.83 |
5846 |
7.96 |
2013 |
0.05±0.22 |
211 |
-13.52 |
1.21±0.70 |
5270 |
-9.85 |
2014 |
0.06±0.27 |
263 |
24.64 |
1.20±0.83 |
4870 |
-7.59 |
2015 |
0.04±0.20 |
142 |
-46.00 |
1.19±0.67 |
4070 |
-16.43 |
2016 |
0.06±0.25 |
160 |
12.68 |
1.17±0.67 |
3035 |
-25.43 |
2017 |
0.07±0.27 |
150 |
-6.25 |
1.20±0.70 |
2598 |
-14.40 |
2018 |
0.08±0.28 |
155 |
3.33 |
1.17±0.65 |
2348 |
-9.62 |
2019 |
0.09±0.32 |
213 |
37.41 |
1.14±0.68 |
2595 |
10.52 |
2020 |
0.08±0.29 |
137 |
-64.32 |
1.22±0.73 |
2088 |
-19.54 |
Total |
|
2,213 |
|
|
43,885 |
|
Table 3.
Effects of speed reduction policies and temporal trends on road safety in São Paulo; forecast of injury and death rates during the months of the 2010-2020 period; data for the Pinheiros and Tietê marginals and other roads1.
Table 3.
Effects of speed reduction policies and temporal trends on road safety in São Paulo; forecast of injury and death rates during the months of the 2010-2020 period; data for the Pinheiros and Tietê marginals and other roads1.
Var (Uni.) |
Injuries (#/month) |
Fatalities (#/month) |
Var (Uni.) |
Injuries (#/month) |
Fatalities (#/month) |
Var (Uni.) |
Injuries (#/month) |
Fatalities (#/month) |
Pinheiros marginal |
Tietê marginal |
Other roads |
Speed reduction policy 2
|
Speed reduction policy 2
|
Speed reduction policy 2
|
|
-14.1±5.7* |
-0.5±0.7 |
|
-5.7±4.4 |
-0.1±0.8 |
|
-43.4±22.7* |
-2.5±2.8 |
Time trend |
Time trend |
Time trend |
2010 |
52.7±4.6* |
0.3±0.6 |
2010 |
48.8±3.6* |
3.0±0.6* |
2010 |
261.8±27.0* |
7.9±3.3* |
2011 |
39.6±4.6* |
1.0±0.6 |
2011 |
54.2±3.6* |
3.1±0.6* |
2011 |
233.9±27.0* |
9.1±3.3* |
2012 |
52.5±4.6* |
0.7±0.6 |
2012 |
52.2±3.6* |
2.5±0.6* |
2012 |
269.8±27.0* |
6.4±3.3 |
2013 |
49.4±4.6* |
0.6±0.6 |
2013 |
51.3±3.6* |
1.7±0.6* |
2013 |
221.8±27.0* |
3.6±3.3 |
2014 |
51.9±4.6* |
1.2±0.6* |
2014 |
40.6±3.6* |
1.8±0.6* |
2014 |
188.5±27.0* |
8.0±3.3* |
2015 |
32.3±5.4* |
0.4±0.7 |
2015 |
25.9±4.0* |
0.9±0.7 |
2015 |
136.3±21.1* |
-1.3±2.6 |
2016 |
26.5±7.3* |
0.1±0.9 |
2016 |
14.1±5.7* |
-0.1±1.0 |
2016 |
78.9±14.7* |
1.9±1.8 |
2017 |
12.7±4.6* |
-0.1±0.6 |
2017 |
9.3±3.6* |
0.3±0.7 |
2017 |
42.5±14.7* |
1.1±1.8 |
2018 |
13.7±4.6* |
0.5±0.6 |
2018 |
7.7±3.6* |
-0.2±0.6 |
2018 |
21.7±14.7 |
1.5±1.8 |
2019 |
8.2±4.6 |
-0.3±0.6 |
2019 |
11.6±3.6* |
0.3±0.6 |
2019 |
42.2±14.7* |
6.3±1.8* |
2020 |
- |
- |
2020 |
- |
- |
2020 |
- |
- |
Regression 3
|
Regression 3 |
Regression 3
|
R2
|
0.79 |
- |
R2
|
0.84 |
- |
R2
|
0.92 |
- |
Mean |
34.8 |
1.5 |
Mean |
39.0 |
2.6 |
Mean |
331.8 |
16.7 |
Table 4.
Studies included in the analyses of the relationships between traffic parameters, accident and pollution variations.
Table 4.
Studies included in the analyses of the relationships between traffic parameters, accident and pollution variations.
Ref. |
Transport policy study/ measures and highlights
|
Time span |
Speed reduction |
Traffic variation |
Accident variation |
Pollution variation |
Pollutant type |
[7] |
Speed reduction and pollution in Madrid (Spain) |
2011-2017 |
from 120 to 110 km/h in rural roads |
-15% |
-20% |
-18% |
Fuel consumption and CO |
|
|
|
from 90 to 70km/h in urban roads |
-20% |
|
|
[9] |
Speed reduction policy on crash accidents |
2006 |
from 60 to 46 km/h in urban roads |
-60% |
|
|
|
|
|
from 100 to 76 km/h in rural roads |
-20% |
|
|
[20] |
Speed reduction policy on crash accidents |
2015-2016 |
from 90 to 70km/h |
|
-22% |
-23% |
PM2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-35% |
CO |
[34] |
Influence of traffic on PM in Madrid |
1999-2001 |
|
|
-30% |
-20% |
PM2.5-PM10
|
[21] |
Speed reduction policy in Barcelona |
2008-2009 |
from 100-120 to 80km/h |
-6% |
-7% |
-5.6% |
PM10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-2.5% |
NOX
|
[27] |
Relationship between speed and traffic fatalities in US |
1987-1995 |
from 100 to 85 km/h rural interstate roads |
no traffic variation |
-21% |
|
|
[35] |
Weather, air pollution and traffic accidents in Taipei (Taiwan) |
2018 |
|
|
-28% |
-13% |
PM2.5
|
[36] |
Mitigation measures, PM2.5 in Beijing (Olympics) |
2007-2011 |
|
-50% |
|
-16% |
PM2.5
|
[37] |
Emission reduction measures during red air pollution alert in Beijing (China) |
2015 |
emission reduction measures and traffic restrictions |
-28% |
|
-15% |
PM2.5
|
[28] |
Impact of speed variations on freeway crashes in UK |
2017 |
from 80 to 60km/h |
-10% |
-8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-25% |
-20% |
|
|
[13] |
Relationship between speeding and crashes in British Columbia (Canada) |
1985-1990 |
speed reduction from maximum speed limits |
-22% |
-31% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-37% |
|
|
[38] |
Weather effect on air pollution and traffic in Khuzestan State (Iran) |
2008-2015 |
|
_ |
-65.4% |
-25% |
NOX
|
|
|
|
|
_ |
-5.0% |
-25% |
NO2
|
[12] |
Optimal speed limits to reduce car accidents in Australia |
2000-2014 |
from 80 to 50km/h from 110 to 80 km/h |
-38% -27% |
-90% -64% |
|
_ |
[11] |
Speed reduction policy and Metanalyses in Oslo (Norway) |
2004-2005 |
from 80 to 60km/h from 90 to 40 km/h |
-25% -56% |
-67% -94% |
|
|
[39] |
Teleworking effects on Switzerland cities |
2002-2013
|
|
-3% |
|
-3% |
NO2
|
|
|
|
|
-3% |
|
-4% |
CO |
[40] |
Air pollution alerts and respiratory diseases in South Korea |
2015-2019 |
|
|
|
-8% |
PM2.5
|
[8] |
Speed optimization to reduce road accidents and pollution in Shiraz (Iran) |
2011 |
from 82 to 72km/h |
|
-10% |
-4% |
Several pollutants |
[41] |
Traffic related pollution in Danish cities (Copenhagen/Roskilde) |
2005 |
from 80 to 40 km/h |
-36% |
|
-19% |
NO2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-6% |
dB |
[10] |
Accident analyses worldwide |
2009-2011 |
from 70 to 50 km/h |
-25% |
-62% |
|
|
|
|
|
from 40 to 36 km/h |
-15% |
-30% |
|
|
[42] |
Weather effect on air pollution and traffic in Madrid (Spain) |
2006 |
|
-27% |
|
-6% |
PM10
|
[33] |
Traffic and pollution relationships in São Paulo (Brazil) during COVID-19 lockdown |
2019-2020 |
|
-39% |
|
-15% |
PM2.5
|
|
|
|
|
-39% |
|
-23% |
CO |
|
|
|
|
-39% |
|
-15% |
NO2
|
[43] |
Influence of road traffic emissions on air quality in Barcelona (Spain) |
1999-2007 |
|
-14% |
|
-42% |
PM1
|
[26] |
Speed reduction effect on car accident in Sweden |
2014-2015 |
from 50 to 40 km/h |
-4% |
-11% |
|
|
[44] |
Reduction of residential speed limits and traffic behavior in Edmonton (Canada) |
2004-2009 |
from 50 to 40 km/h |
-9% |
-14% |
|
|
[45] |
Health effects for PM2.5 emission reductions in Beijing |
2017 |
|
-26% |
|
-32% |
PM2.5
|
[46] |
War conflict, reduction in traffic volumes and urban pollution in Israel |
2005-2006 |
traffic reduction due to socioeconomic conditions |
-40% |
|
-38.5 |
NO2
|
[31] |
Risk factors in urban accidents in Zagreb (Croatia) |
1999-2000 |
increase from upper speed limits |
_ |
65% |
|
|
[47] |
Air pollution in Beijing |
1998-2013 |
|
|
|
-37% |
PM10
|
This study |
Reduction of speed limits at marginal roads in São Paulo |
2015-2019 |
from 90 to 70 km/h
|
-7%
|
-27% |
-24% |
NOX
|