13.09.2014 Views

Keith Vodden Dr. Douglas Smith - Transports Canada

Keith Vodden Dr. Douglas Smith - Transports Canada

Keith Vodden Dr. Douglas Smith - Transports Canada

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Analysis and Estimation of the Social Cost of Motor Vehicle Collisions in Ontario<br />

Next adjustments were made to transfer the number of collisions and the vehicles<br />

involved in them to injury and PDO collisions. The characteristics of a fatal collision<br />

were used to transfer a sufficient number of collisions that would have involved extra<br />

fatalities from injury to fatal collisions. Note that only the number of collisions and their<br />

associated vehicles by damage severity were transferred since the model had already<br />

correctly allocated the extra fatalities and injuries among collision severity categories.<br />

The characteristics of an injury-only collision were used to transfer an appropriate<br />

number of collisions and their associated vehicles by damage severity from PDOs to<br />

injury collisions. A maximum number of collisions was calculated based on which injury<br />

severity category would be the hardest to achieve given the number of injuries allocated<br />

and the proportion of injuries by severity category in the average injury collision. The<br />

number of vehicles by damage severity category was estimated for this maximum number<br />

of collisions. This number of vehicles, subject to the maximum vehicles available by<br />

damage category, was transferred from PDOs to injury collisions. Recall that the model<br />

had already allocated the correct number of injuries to injury collisions based on the<br />

Ontario overall result.<br />

The redistribution of collisions moves injury collisions that would involve<br />

fatalities to fatal collisions and PDO collisions that would involve injuries to injury<br />

collisions while maintaining the total number of collisions. As a result the number of fatal<br />

and injury collisions increases while PDOs declined. The model also keeps the number of<br />

vehicles and the proportion by damage severity constant. However these are redistributed<br />

among collision severity categories. The results of these adjustments are shown in Exhibit<br />

V-2.<br />

Note that the model for pedestrian involved collisions transferred injury to fatal<br />

collisions but no PDOs to injury collisions. Because there were no demolished vehicles in<br />

PDO collisions, no extra injuries were assigned to PDOs by the model and consequently<br />

no collisions and their associated vehicles were transferred to injury collisions.<br />

Data from ORSAR identify 133 PDOs involving a pedestrian and as appropriate<br />

to the definition of a PDO, none involved an injury either to the pedestrian or vehicle<br />

occupants. After adjustment the model continues to retain the 133 PDOs involving a<br />

pedestrian but with no injuries.<br />

B. SOCIAL COST OF MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISIONS RELATED TO<br />

ONTARIO SUB-MODELS<br />

Social costs related to each cost category of the Ontario core model are also<br />

applied to Ontario sub-models. The same flexibility exists over cost parameters as<br />

provided in the Ontario model. The analyst selects the valuation method for human<br />

consequences, values assigned to human consequences, and year in which values are<br />

presented. Social costs presented in this section used the willingness to pay—medium<br />

scenario.<br />

58 TNS Canadian Facts, Social and Policy Research

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!