Crash risk and subjective risk perception during urban cycling: Accounting for cycling volume

Integrating visual factors in crash rate analysis at Intersections: An AutoML and SHAP approach towards cycling safety

Cycling crashes constitute a significant and rising share of traffic accidents. Consequently, exploring factors affecting cycling safety has become a priority for both governmental bodies and scholars. However, most existing studies have neglected the vision factors capable of quantitatively describing the city-level cycling environment. Moreover, they have relied on limited models that lack interpretability and fail to capture the spatial variations in the contribution of factors. To address these gaps, this research proposed a framework that used origin-destination-based cycling flow and vision factors generated from Google Street View images to identify the leading factors. It also employed the comparative Automatic Machine Learning and interpretable SHAP value-based geospatial analysis to explain each factor's contribution to the cycling crash risk, with a particular focus on the spatial variations in the influence of vision factors. The effectiveness of this framework was validated by a case study in Manhattan, which examined the leading risk factors of cycling crash rates at intersections. The results showed that the LightGBM model, with selected subsets of factors, outperformed other models. Through SHAP explanations of global feature importance, the study identified the proportion of road barriers, the proportion of open sky, and the number of visible trucks as the leading visual risk factors. Additionally, using SHAP-based geospatial analysis, the study revealed the local variations in the effects of these three factors and identified eight areas with higher cycling crash rates. Based on these findings, the study provided practical measures for a safer cycling environment in Manhattan.

Assessing bicycle crash risks controlling for detailed exposure: A Copenhagen case study

A better understanding of factors associated with bicycle crashes can inform future efforts to limit crash risks. Many previous studies have analysed crash risk based on crash databases. However, these can only provide conditional information on crash risks. A few recent studies have included aggregate flow measures in their crash risk analyses. This study incorporates detailed bicycle flow to investigate factors related to bicycle crashes. Specifically, the study assesses the relative crash risk given various conditions by applying Palm distributions to control for exposure. The study specifically investigates the relationship between weather and time conditions and the relative risk of bicycle crashes at a disaggregate level. The study uses bicycle crash data from police reports of bicycle crashes from 2017-2020 in the greater Copenhagen area (N = 4877). The relations between the bicycle crash risk and the air temperature and wind speeds are found to be highly non-linear. The relative risk of bicycle crashes is elevated at low and high temperatures (0 °C ¿ x, x ¿ 21 °C). The results also show how decreasing visibility relates to increasing bicycle crash risk. Meanwhile, cycling during the early morning peak (7-8) and afternoon peak hours (15-18) is related to an increased risk of bicycle crashes. While some of the effects are likely spurious, they highlight specific conditions associated with higher relative risk. Finally, the results illustrate the increased risk at weekend night times when cyclists are likely to bike under the influence of alcohol. In conclusion, the analysis confirms that visibility, slippery surfaces, and intoxication are all factors associated with a higher risk of bicycle crashes. Hence, it is relevant to consider how infrastructure planning and preventive measures can modify the bicycle environment to minimise these risks.

Contraflows and cycling safety: Evidence from 22 years of data involving 508 one-way streets

Contraflow cycling on one-way streets is a low cost intervention that research shows can improve the cycling experience and increase participation. Evidence from several studies suggest that cyclists on contraflows have a lower crash risk. However, implementing contraflow cycling is often controversial, including in the United Kingdom (UK). In this paper we examine whether contraflow cycling on one-way streets alters crash or casualty rates for pedal cyclists. Focusing on inner London boroughs between 1998 and 2019, we identified 508 road segments where contraflow cycling was introduced on one-way streets. We identified road traffic crashes occurring within 10 m of these segments and labelled them as pre-contraflow, contraflow or contraflow removed crashes. We calculated rates using the number of crashes or casualties divided by the time exposed and generated 95 % confidence intervals using bootstrap resampling. We adjusted the rates for changes in cordon cycling volume and injury severity reporting. There were 1498 crashes involving pedal cyclists: 788 pre-contraflow, 703 contraflow and 7 following contraflow removal. There was no change in adjusted overall pedal cyclist crash or casualty rates when contraflow cycling was introduced. Proximity to a junction doubled the crash rate. The crash rate when pedal cyclists were travelling contraflow was the same as those travelling with flow. We have found no evidence that introducing contraflow cycling increases the crash or casualty rate for pedal cyclists. It is possible that such rates may indeed fall when contraflow cycling is introduced if more accurate spatio-temporal cycling volume data was available. We recommend all one-way streets are evaluated for contraflow cycling but encourage judicious junction design and recommend UK legislative change for mandatory-two-way cycling on one-way streets unless exceptional circumstances exist.

How safe do you feel? - A large-scale survey concerning the subjective safety associated with different kinds of cycling lanes

There is ample evidence that adequate cycling infrastructure increases cyclists' safety. There is less research to what extent the specific design of cycling lanes affects subjective safety. We address this question by analysing data from a large-scale online survey, where participants rated images illustrating a wide range of cycling infrastructure designs for the anticipated level of subjective safety when imagining to cycle at the displayed location. Cycling tracks are perceived as safer than cycling lanes, which in turn are preferred over cycling on the street. Physical separations from the car lane, a greater lane width, and a coloured surface contribute most to a high subjective safety of cycling lanes. Additional buffers on the left- and right side of cycling lanes can have varying effects. On narrower cycling lanes, people experience extensive buffer designs as rather constraining and as impairing their safety. Combining several safety features (i.e. a sufficient demarcation of the left buffer and a coloured surface) is not necessarily beneficial for subjective safety. Our findings are mostly in line with findings on the factors benefitting or impairing objective safety. However, the relation of subjective and objective safety requires further attention.