Social costs of road crashes: An international analysis

Abstract

This paper provides an international overview of the most recent estimates of the social costs of road crashes: total costs, value per casualty and breakdown in cost components. The analysis is based on publications about the national costs of road crashes of 17 countries, of which ten high income countries (HICs) and seven low and middle income countries (LMICs). Costs are expressed as a proportion of the gross domestic product (GDP). Differences between countries are described and explained. These are partly a consequence of differences in the road safety level, but there are also methodological explanations. Countries may or may not correct for underreporting of road crashes, they may or may not use the internationally recommended willingness to pay (WTP)-method for estimating human costs, and there are methodological differences regarding the calculation of some other cost components. The analysis shows that the social costs of road crashes in HICs range from 0.5% to 6.0% of the GDP with an average of 2.7%. Excluding countries that do not use a WTP- method for estimating human costs and countries that do not correct for underreporting, results in average costs of 3.3% of GDP. For LMICs that do correct for underreporting the share in GDP ranges from 1.1% to 2.9%. However, none of the LMICs included has performed a WTP study of the human costs. A major part of the costs is related to injuries: an average share of 50% for both HICs and LMICs. The average share of fatalities in the costs is 23% and 30% respectively. Prevention of injuries is thus important to bring down the socio-economic burden of road crashes. The paper shows that there are methodological differences between countries regarding cost components that are taken into account and regarding the methods used to estimate specific cost components. In order to be able to make sound comparisons of the costs of road crashes across countries, (further) harmonization of cost studies is recommended. This can be achieved by updating and improving international guidelines and applying them in future cost studies. The information regarding some cost components, particularly human costs and property damage, is poor and more research into these cost components is recommended.

Prevalence and Factors Associated with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol in Brazil: An Analysis by Macroregion

“…A mortality rate by RTIs of 21 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants was observed in Brazil in 2013, with the highest rate found in the Central-West macroregion [4]. Estimates show that RTIs-related deaths can result in costs of up to 6% of gross domestic product (GDP) [5]. In Brazil, The sampling strategy of the NHS has been described previously [25].…”

Geospatial analysis of severe road traffic accidents in Singapore in 2013–2014

“…(3) An international analysis of 17 high-income countries, including Singapore, showed that the social cost of RTAs ranged from a low of 0.5% to a high of 6% (average 2.7%) of a country's gross domestic product. (4) This economic burden is most significant, especially in the most severely injured. Even at three years post discharge, the cumulative mortality rate among RTA survivors is higher than that of the general population.…”

Cost of Production Loss for Long-term Disability due to Road Crashes

“…This approach depends on the current employment situation and the future earnings projection of the victim. Even if a person is unemployed, they contemplate the option of entering the labour market [18]. In fact, this loss of job opportunity can affect the economy in general by losing the consumption capacity [19].…”

“…It also includes a discount factor or money update that decreases the weight of payments by bringing forward the future costs [20]. the Willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach is usually the model used to fix the moral damage produced by the road crash, although there are alternatives, such as the value resolved in the courts for the loss of life [19,21] or the value of insurance premiums paid to cover the traffic accidents [18,[22][23][24]. This method is complementary to HC [25] and it is therefore, recommended to assess the loss of quality of life and the moral damage due to an accident [26].…”