Equity Analysis of Proactively- vs. Reactively-Identified Traffic Safety Issues

Abstract

Traffic safety issues often impede bicyclist and pedestrian trips, preventing potential users from realizing the benefits of active transport. Traditional active transportation safety analyses, however, take a reactive approach to traffic safety, only accounting for people currently walking or bicycling by analyzing crashes, injuries, and fatalities. This begs the question: which populations are most affected by traffic safety issues neglected by traditional crash analyses? To answer this, we developed a tool to proactively measure perceived traffic safety issues. We focused on child pedestrian and bicycle trips to and from schools in Denver, Colorado by measuring the number of children that would encounter roads perceived as unsafe. We converted these perceptions into barriers in a geographic information system network analysis to estimate trip suppression and used that as a proactive indicator of traffic safety. We finally examined—reactively and proactively—the socio-demographics of those affected via linear regression models and bivariate choropleth mapping. Results of both analyses suggest that negative impacts are borne disproportionately by low-income, low-education, Hispanic, and black neighborhoods. Proactive analyses results identified perceived safety issues in north and northeast Denver neighborhoods neglected by reactive analyses results. Findings suggest the inequitable distribution of traffic safety issues identified in past crash-based literature is graver than conventional reactive analysis would lead one to believe. By incorporating the proactive tool into traditional traffic safety analyses, we hope to better define the places and people that could most benefit from traffic safety improvements, thereby more effectively facilitating the benefits of walking and biking.