Keith Vodden Dr. Douglas Smith - Transports Canada

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix A—Detail on Calculations of the Ontario Model Exhibit A-6 Revisions for 2004 Reflecting the Transfer of PDO Collisions involving Allocated Injuries to Injury Collisions Characteristic of average injury collision Number of injuries to transfer from PDO collisions Like PDO collisions needed to transfer injuries Transfer if based on maximum collisions needed Actual transfer from PDO to injury collisions (#) (#) (#) (#) Collisions 1.00 11878 Injuries: Major 0.09 637 7,361 1,028 637 Minor 0.96 11,366 11,878 11,366 11,366 Minimal 1.02 7,119 7,007 12,068 7,119 Vehicles damaged: Demolished 0.21 2,527 Severe 0.45 5,304 Moderate 0.52 6,233 Light 0.52 6,179 None 0.18 2,163 Given the characteristics of an average collision involving injury 7,361; 11,878; or 7,007 collisions would need to be transferred depending on whether the transfer decision was based on the 637; 11,366; or 7,119 major, minor, or minimal injuries respectively estimated as occurring in PDO collisions. Because we need to transfer all injuries from the revised PDO category we transfer 11,878 collisions (the number needed to transfer all minor injuries based on the average characteristics of injury collisions), the vehicles by damage severity involved in these collisions, all (11,366) minor injuries and the available major (637) and minimal (7,119) injuries. Exhibit A-7 (a section from spreadsheet O2 in the model) illustrates the results of these transfers among collision severity categories to adjust for fatalities occurring in injury collisions and injuries occurring in PDOs. The result of these transfers is to increase the number of fatal collisions by 12 (with a corresponding reduction in injury collisions) and to increase the number of injury collisions by 11,878 (with a corresponding reduction in PDO collisions). The total number of collisions is not affected nor is the number of vehicles involved. However there is a redistribution of collisions and motor vehicles damaged by collision severity, as well as an increase in fatalities and injuries to reflect the better data available from the Coroner’s Office (fatalities), MOH&LTC (major and minor injuries) and Chipman re-analysis (minimal injuries). TNS Canadian Facts, Social and Policy Research 127
Analysis and Estimation of the Social Cost of Motor Vehicle Collisions in Ontario Exhibit A-7 Adjusted Data for Ontario Model—Number of Collisions, Fatalities, Injuries and Damaged Vehicles (2004) Collision Severity Fatal Injury PDO TOTAL Collisions 730 61,814 169,004 231,548 Fatalities 813 813 Injuries: Major 317 4,961 5,279 Minor 1,574 59,152 60,726 Minimal 968 57,855 58,822 Vehicles damaged: Demolished 723 13,150 4,107 17,980 Severe 200 27,605 30,903 58,708 Moderate 157 32,436 105,753 138,345 Light 133 32,158 148,879 181,170 None 48 11,258 19,443 30,748 In 2004 and subsequent years this transfer is conducted automatically based on decision rules influenced by the proportion of injuries and number of injuries needing to be transferred by severity of injury. C. OTHER CHARACTERISTICS OF INJURED INDIVIDUALS This section identifies further characteristics of those injured in motor vehicle collisions. 1. Number of total and partial permanent disabilities Some injuries will result in total or partial permanent disabilities. The likelihood of such disabilities varies by injury severity as identified in the Databook on Nonfatal Injury: Incidence, Costs and Consequences (Ted Miller, et. al.). These probabilities (factors used in 2004 and later years) are identified in Exhibit A-8. 128 TNS Canadian Facts, Social and Policy Research
Page 1 and 2:
TP 14800F Analysis and Estimation o
Page 3 and 4:
APPENDIX A: DETAIL ON CALCULATIONS
Page 5 and 6:
• Large truck. Collisions involvi
Page 8:
ABBREVIATIONS CAC Criteria Air Cont
Page 11 and 12:
Analysis and Estimation of the Soci
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 22 and 23:
III ONTARIO MODEL This chapter desc
Page 24 and 25:
Ontario Model redistribution. Simil
Page 26 and 27:
Ontario Model • Pedestrian Injure
Page 28 and 29:
Ontario Model Based on this analysi
Page 30 and 31:
Ontario Model Step 3 Allocate addit
Page 32 and 33:
Ontario Model damaged based on this
Page 34 and 35:
Ontario Model 1. Number of total an
Page 36 and 37:
Ontario Model 2.99; specialist—1.
Page 38 and 39:
Ontario Model 5. Tow trucks Tow tru
Page 40 and 41:
Ontario Model Exhibit III-5 Core WT
Page 42 and 43:
Ontario Model We combine this value
Page 44 and 45:
Ontario Model 6. Ambulance The Onta
Page 46 and 47:
Ontario Model individuals who self-
Page 48 and 49:
Ontario Model threatening injury, p
Page 50 and 51:
Ontario Model d) Additional Polluti
Page 52 and 53:
Ontario Model VARIABLE DATA LOST TI
Page 54:
Ontario Model We have no data to gu
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 64 and 65:
V ONTARIO SUB-MODELS AND THEIR SOCI
Page 66 and 67:
Ontario Sub-Models and Their Social
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86: Analysis and Estimation of the Soci
Page 120: Appendix A Detail on Calculations o
Page 135: Analysis and Estimation of the Soci
Page 168 and 169: APPENDIX B: MAKING CHANGES TO THE M
Page 170 and 171: Appendix B—Making Changes to the
Page 172 and 173: Appendix B—Making Changes to the
Page 174: Appendix C The Value of Human Conse
Page 184 and 185: APPENDIX D: VALUE OF HUMAN CONSEQUE
Page 186 and 187:
Appendix D—Value of Human Consequ
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196:
Page 200 and 201:
APPENDIX E: REFERENCES Audrey, J. a
show all

Keith Vodden Dr. Douglas Smith - Transports Canada

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?