Accident Analysis and Prevention 32 (2000) 271 275

www.elsevier.com/locate/aap

Road safety engineering: an effective tool in the fight against

whiplash injuries
Frank Navin a, Sany Zein b, Emmanuel Felipe b,*
a

Department of Ci6il Engineering, Uni6ersity of British Columbia, Vancou6er, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4
b
Hamilton Associates, 9th Floor, 1199 West Hastings Street, Vancou6er, BC, Canada V6E 3T5
Accepted 8 June 1999

Abstract
Road safety engineering can play an integral part in the prevention of whiplash injuries. While improvements to vehicle design
can reduce the severity of whiplash injuries when a crash occurs, improvements to road safety can prevent whiplash-inducing
crashes from occurring in the first place. Whiplash injuries are most commonly associated with rear end crashes. Unfortunately,
rear end crashes are also the most common type of crash at urban signalized intersections, where the majority of crashes occur
in British Columbia, Canada. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC), through the road improvement program,
has been funding road improvements in order to reduce the frequency of collisions at high crash locations in British Columbia.
Several road safety engineering countermeasures specifically targeted at rear end collisions have been researched and deployed.
These countermeasures include simple and affordable solutions such as signal visibility enhancements, as well as complex and
expensive solutions such as intersection geometric upgrades. When appropriately used, these countermeasures have proven to be
extremely cost-effective in reducing the frequency of rear end collisions. Widespread application of signal visibility enhancements
is now being pursued to further decrease the risk of rear end collisions and whiplash injuries. Costs are the direct cost of the ICBC
portion of the investment and benefits are only those associated with reduced insurance claims over a 2-year period. 2000
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Road safety; Rear end collisions; Whiplash injuries

1. Introduction
The impacts of neck and back-related whiplash injuries resulting from motor vehicle collisions are considerable. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia
(ICBC), insurer of approximately 2.5 million vehicles in
the province of British Columbia, Canada, spent $600
million (Canadian dollars) in 1996 for whiplash-related
claims. This represents 27% of the total claim cost
incurred by ICBC in 1996 (ICBCs world wide web site,
1998). ICBC indicated that whiplash injuries account
for more than 70% of all bodily injury claims. Whiplash
injury is a symptom of rear end collisions and this type
of collision most commonly occurs at urban signalized
* Corresponding author. Present address: Dessau-Soprin Inc., 1200
boulevard St martin Ouest, Bureau 300, Laval, Quebec, Canada H75
2E4. Tel.: + 1-514-281-1033.
E-mail address: emmanuel.felipe@dissausoprin.com (E. Felipe)

intersections. Rear end collisions represent approximately 21% of all collisions in British Columbia and
36% of all collisions in the City of Vancouver.
Like other associations and agencies around the
world, ICBC has funded research to better understand
the issue of whiplash associated disorders and to reduce
the frequency of whiplash-related claims. In this direction, ICBC has deployed the following programs that
target the three elements involved in a typical driving
environment; the driver, the vehicle and the road::1(0)
1. the driver and passenger head restraint educational
program aimed at informing vehicle users on the
adequate positions of the head restraints (Geddes et
al., 1997);
2. the design of the head restraint measuring device
aimed at assessing the head restraint relative positions and adjustment characteristics of any vehicles;
3. the road improvement program aimed at increasing
the safety of the road environment.

0001-4575/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 0 1 - 4 5 7 5 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 7 7 - 9

272

F. Na6in et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 271275

It is often difficult to evaluate the success of such

programs. However, since the road improvement program applies to particular road locations for which
analyses of collision history can be performed, it has
been possible to monitor the net benefits made by
ICBC with the road improvement program. The program has permitted, through the use of road safety
engineering countermeasures, to target and reduce rear
end collisions at high crash locations and consequently,
to reduce the number of soft tissue neck and back
injuries.

2. ICBC road improvement program

Since 1993, through the road improvement program,
ICBC has provided funding for road improvements
with the objective of reducing the frequency and the
severity of motor vehicle collisions. The magnitude of
ICBC funding since 1993 is summarized in Fig. 1. In
1996, the first estimation of the success of the program
indicated that ICBC achieved an overall benefit cost
ratio between 6:1 and 18:1 (Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1997a). Cost includes only ICBC contribution to the improvement and benefits are only those
associated with reduced insurance claims over a 2-year
period.
ICBC works in co-operation with the municipalities
and the BC Ministry of Transportation and Highways
to identify roadways with high accident frequency.
Then, a comprehensive road safety review is conducted
along these roadways to identify locations with over
represented collisions, to propose improvements at
these locations and to estimate ICBCs contribution for
the improvements according to the methodology described by Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd
(1997b). ICBC considers financing an improvement if it
represents a favorable investment opportunity to reduce
the number of motor vehicle collisions and therefore,
claim costs. Improvements with a 2:1 return to investment ratio (typically within 2 years) at a 90% reliability
level are considered to be favorable investment opportunities for ICBC.

4. excessive vehicle speed or erratic manoeuvers due to

aggressive driver behaviour;
5. defective pavement conditions;
6. unfavorable road geometric characteristics;
7. insufficient and inconsistent road information.
Although human factors are involved in 93% of
collision in British Columbia (Sayed et al., 1995) road
factors contribute about a third. Road engineering
countermeasures have the potential to directly and indirectly influence the three elements and reduce the frequency of rear end collisions.
The research and the techniques in road safety engineering provide road safety engineers with tools to
identify the causes of rear end collisions at a particular
location and to target the problem with engineering
countermeasures. Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd
(1997c) has developed a database that regroups and
summarizes published articles and reports which have
documented the safety benefits of road engineering
countermeasures. Ogden (1996) has published tables of
potential collision reduction factors for various roadway treatments. Some examples of intersection treatments and the potential rear end collision reductions
are presented in Table 1.
As presented in Table 1, simple improvements such
as enhancing signal visibility can be very effective in
decreasing the frequency of rear end collisions. Signal
visibility enhancement can be achieved using various
methods such as installing signal heads on mast arm,
increasing the size of the signal lenses or increasing the
number of signal heads. Human factors studies have
found that drivers can recognize information within a
relatively narrow field of view. This field of view corresponds to the fovea, the area of the human retina that
provides the most acute vision. The fovea range is
typically between two and four degrees on either side of
the drivers focal point. For intersections with at least
two through approach lanes, a single overhead traffic
signal display may be outside a drivers fovea range,
depending on the position of the vehicle. Furthermore,

3. Countermeasures for rear end collisions

Research effort on human factors and on road safety
have led to a better understanding of the causes of rear
end collisions. The causes may be related to the driver,
the vehicle, the road environment or any combination
of these three elements that compose a typical driving
environment. Rear end collisions may occur due to:1(0)
1. defective vehicle braking system;
2. inadequate vehicle tyre conditions;
3. late braking action due to driver inattention;

Fig. 1. ICBC road improvements funding summary.

F. Na6in et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 271275

273

Table 1
Causes of rear end collisions at signalized intersections, potential treatment and corresponding accident reduction factorsb
Reason for rear end collision

Treatment

Reduction in rear end

collision in %

Large number of turning vehicles and/or shared left turn and

through lane

Create left or right turn lanes

2040

Median with turn protection

Provide special phase for left turning
vehicles
Prohibit turns
Acceleration/deceleration lanes

2030
NAa

Inadequate intersection lighting

Slippery surface

Lighting
Resurfacing

2030
3040

Excessive speed

Staggered intersection
Traffic calming technique

6080
NAa

Inadequate intersection geometry characteristics

Poor signal visibility
Inconsistent signal timing
Poor sight distance
Slippery surface and steep grade
Inadequate stopping sight distance

Realignment and reconstruction

Increase signal visibility
Review signal timing
Clearway and parking restrictions
Skid resistant treatment
Improve horizontal alignment
Improve vertical alignment

1020
3040
NAa
2030
4060
3045
4050

Lack of pedestrian crossing conspicuity

Lighting pedestrian crossing / provide

proper signs

1020

a
b

NAa
5080

NA, not available.

References: Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd (1997c), Ogden (1996).

a single overhead signal display may be easily obscured

by a large vehicle traveling in an adjacent lane. The
presence of a second overhead traffic signal display may
minimize the potential failure by a driver to recognize a
traffic signal and increase the safety at the intersection.
The typical traffic signal configurations in British Columbia are presented in Fig. 2. The Motor Vehicle Act
Regulations of British Columbia (British Columbia,
1997) indicates that the minimum requirement at a
signalized intersection is one primary and one secondary signal head.

5. Research study on the benefits of signal visibility

enhancement
Recognizing the success of enhancing signal visibility
at these intersections, ICBC sponsored a research study
to evaluate the potential collision reduction and claim
saving for the provision of additional primary signal
heads at signalized intersections. The analysis focused
on right-angle and rear end collision types because

4. ICBC targets rear end collisions

As part of the 1993 Road Improvement Program,
ICBC provided funding for the installation of tertiary
signal heads at six major signalized intersections in the
City of Vancouver. The total contribution by ICBC for
these improvements was $45 200. A simple 1 year before and after collision analysis at these intersections
indicated that rear end collisions were reduced by up to
40% (Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1997a). A
detailed economic analysis for the six intersections estimated that $1.3 million per year were saved by ICBC at
the end of the 2 year project life. This saving represents
an average annual reduction of 60 collisions and 20
injuries.

Fig. 2. Relative positions of various signal heads.

274

F. Na6in et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 271275

previous experiences have proven that these are the

types of collisions that are likely reduced through signal
visibility improvements. The safety benefits were evaluated using four methods (Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1998):
1. comparison of collision rates between two sets of
intersections: one set having one primary signal
head per approach, the second set having two primary signal heads per approach;
2. simple before and after comparison of collision history at intersections where additional primary signal
heads were recently installed;
3. Empirical Bayes technique, a before and after type
of analysis that separates unrelated effects from the
treatment effect and accounts for the random fluctuation of collisions around the average frequency
(regression to the mean);
4. Multi-variate Empirical Bayes technique, a before
and after type of analysis using a General Linear
Regression Model (GLIM) that predicts the expected number of collisions at signalized intersections (Sayed and Feng, 1997). This method, like the
classical Empirical Bayes method, takes into account the regression to the mean effect.
The study results indicated that the installation of a
second primary signal head at all approaches could
reduce the total number of collisions by 20 30%, and
rear end collisions by 30 45%. In addition, the economic analysis revealed that if additional primary signal heads were provided at 34 intersections identified
during the study, ICBC would save between $1.3 and
$2.5 million in insurance claim cost per year, with a
minimum project life of 2 years. Interview based studies
of drivers who had been involved in a rear end collision
have indicated that about 35 40% of drivers suffered
whiplash injuries (Ryan, 1999). Using this information,
a reduction of between 20 and 35 whiplash injuries per
year may be expected with the installation of a second
primary signal head at the 34 intersections.

6. Widespread application of signal visibility

enhancement
Based on the results of this study and on previous
experiences with signal visibility enhancement at other
intersections in the City of Vancouver, ICBC, in co-operation with the Cities of Surrey, Vancouver and Richmond has launched an area wide signal visibility
enhancement program. As part of this 2 year program,
ICBC is providing funding to upgrade all signalized
intersections in the City of Surrey. The improvement
consists of replacing the existing primary signal heads
by larger signal heads and adding a tertiary signal head
for all approaches at 30 high-crash intersections. The
program should be completed in the year 2000 for a

total cost of $2.0 million. In the City of Vancouver, the

program consists of upgrading the traffic signal visibility of about 30 intersections by increasing the size of
the primary signal heads and by installing tertiary
signal heads. The total cost of this program is $300 000.
In the City of Richmond, for a total cost of $250 000,
the signal visibility will be enhanced by providing larger
secondary signal heads with yellow backplates at all
signalized intersections. ICBCs contribution to this
area wide program represents 50% of the total cost of
$2.55 million. With this area wide enhancement of
signal visibility, ICBC expects to reduce the frequency
of rear end collisions and, consequently, reduce the
frequency of whiplash injuries.
Although it is assumed that the frequency of
whiplash injuries decreases with the reduced frequency
of rear end collisions, a detailed analysis of the severity
of rear end collisions at the upgraded locations is
needed. The study could determine the impact of rear
end collision reduction on whiplash injuries.

7. Conclusions
Rear end collisions can be effectively reduced by
using recognized engineering accident countermeasures.
Through the ICBC road improvement program, low
cost countermeasures such as signal visibility enhancement have proven to be cost effective in reducing
collisions at signalized intersections. ICBCs area wide
signal visibility enhancement program is expecting to
reduce rear end collisions by 3045% at the upgraded
intersections. The potential ICBC claim cost saving is
considerably higher than the overall cost of the program. This small part of the road improvement program is addressing ICBCs mission statement: to help
British Columbians take the risk out of the road
transportation.
A reduction in rear end collisions means a reduction
of whiplash injuries. Further studies are needed to
correlate the frequency of rear end collision to the
frequency of neck and back-related whiplash injuries.

Acknowledgements
Mavis Johnson, Manager of the Road Improvement
Program at ICBC, has encouraged and supported the
research and deployment of road engineering countermeasures described in this paper.

References
British Columbia. Motor Vehicle Act: Motor Vehicles Act Regulations, 1997. Division 23 and Regulation 23.09, pp. 114 115.

F. Na6in et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 271275

G.D. Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1997. Evaluation of the
road improvement program. Report prepared for the Insurance
Corporation of British Columbia, p. 56.
G.D. Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1997. Update to the
economic evaluation method for road improvement investments.
Report prepared for the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, p. 20.
G.D. Hamilton Consulting Ltd, 1997. Prediction of road safety
benefits, technical memorandum No. 2, Information system for
predicting accident reduction (ISPAR). Report prepared for the
insurance corporation of British Columbia, p. 14.
G.D. Hamilton Associates Consulting Ltd, 1998. Safety benefits of
additional primary signal heads. Report prepared for the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, p. 24.
Geddes, E., Fockler, S., Felipe, E., 1997. Observational Study of
Driver and Passenger Head Restraint Positions. Proceedings of

275

the Canadian Multi-Disciplinary Road Safety Conference X,

Toronto, ON, Canada, pp. 442 453.
Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 1998. http//
www.ICBC.com/World Wide Web site published by ICBC.
Ogden, K.W., 1996. Safer Roads: A Guide to Road Safety Engineering. Ashgate, Brookfield VT.
Ryan, G.A., 1999. Factors Affecting the Aetiology and Outcomes of
Whiplash Injury. World Congress on Whiplash Associated Disorders Compendium/Traffic Safety and Auto Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp. 22 31.
Sayed, T., Abdelwahab, W., Navin, F., 1995. Identifying accidentprone locations using fuzzy pattern recognition. Journal of Transportation Engineering Nb, 352 359.
Sayed, T., Feng S., 1997. Accident Prediction Models for Signalised
Intersections in British Columbia. Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, Canada, p. 24.