Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 92
F-1 APPENDIX F USER SAFETY BENEFITS The prevailing argument is that enhanced facilities--bike lanes, motor vehicles (104). Less severe crashes tend to occur at intersections bikeways and special intersection modifications--improve cyclist or at locations where motor vehicles and bicycles come in contact safety (83). This claim, however, is the source of a rich controversy with each other (105); it is further suggested that crashes are caused within the literature as evidenced by the debate between Forester by differing expectations between auto drivers and bicyclists (106). (57) and Pucher (58). Part of the controversy around this topic However, there is increasing evidence to suggest that some bicycle is fueled by differences between what cyclists state they prefer crashes do not involve any other party (107, 108); this is especially true (i.e., their perception) and what studies with collision data actu- for children (109). ally reveal. The degree to which perception of safety translates into actual It is widely acknowledged that increased perception of safety is increased safety, however, is still debated. It proves difficult to trans- important to encourage cycling as a means of transportation and re- late perceived measures of safety into quantifiable or economic creation (51, 110). Subsequently, providing separated bicycle facil- estimates. Additional confounding factors are that prevailing guide- ities along roadways is mentioned as a key ingredient in increased lines recommend a variety of solutions. For example recent research perception of safety according to the burgeoning literature related to suggests that both bicycle lanes and wide curb lanes can and should bicycle related stress factors (111), bicycle interaction hazard scores be used to improve riding conditions and safety for bicyclists (http:// (112), relative danger index (113), compatibility indexes (114). www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/99035/intro.htm). Existing literature on the safety of bicycle facilities usually con- In the end, bicycle safety data are difficult to analyze, mostly siders one of three outcome measures: the number of fatalities, the because bicycle trip data (and thus accident probability per trip) are number of crashes, and perceived levels of comfort for the cyclist. Key hard to uncover. As more research and conclusive findings become explanatory variables behind these outcome measures are myriad available, it will likely be possible to understand the safety benefits and complex to identify. For example, the overwhelming majority of bicycle facilities in more detail--at such time, a model could then of bicycle crashes resulting in fatalities are caused by collisions with be developed and incorporated into the guidelines.