Social & Economic Factors Education Employment Income Family & Social Support Community Safety Search Policies & Programs

hints
Display All Policies & Programs

Speed enforcement detection devices

Health Factors: Community Safety Housing & Transit
Decision Makers: Local Government State Government
Evidence Rating: Scientifically Supported
Population Reach: 100% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: No impact on disparities likely

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

Speed enforcement detection devices include speed cameras and radar and laser devices. Speed enforcement devices can be permanently placed in a location and operate automatically or can be used manually by law enforcement officers (CDC-Speed camera). Devices may capture instantaneous speeds with a speed camera at a single point or may calculate average speeds using a series of cameras, known as average speed enforcement (Soole 2013). Speed cameras may also be used in a roadway corridor approach by periodically moving them along the length of a road (Hu 2016). Penalties associated with speed violations in an area with speed enforcement detection devices are often more lenient than penalties issued by law enforcement officers (GHSA-Speed cameras).

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Reduced fatal and non-fatal injuries
Reduced traffic speed

Evidence of Effectiveness

There is strong evidence that speed enforcement detection devices reduce traffic speed, traffic injuries, and fatalities (Cochrane-Wilson 2010, Hu 2016, Blais 2015, Pilkington 2005).

Speed cameras have been shown to reduce road traffic speed, collisions, injuries, and related casualties (Cochrane-Wilson 2010, Pilkington 2005). Cameras that are periodically moved along a road as part of a roadway corridor approach (Hu 2016) and cameras used for average speed enforcement have been shown to reduce crash injuries and fatalities (Soole 2013). Cameras used for average speed enforcement can also reduce speeds, and may improve traffic flow (Soole 2013).

In an Arizona-based study, speed cameras reduced speeds on municipal streets and arterials (Washington 2007). In a Barcelona-based study, fixed speed cameras reduced crashes and injuries on medium to high speed beltway roads; effects were not significant on lower speed roads or roads with traffic lights (Novoa 2010).

Combining speed cameras with vertical features such as speed bumps can produce larger speed reductions than cameras alone (Mountain 2005). Visible campaigns about speed camera programs can generate speed reductions beyond targeted streets, often called spillover reductions, particularly if a roadway corridor approach is used (Hu 2016).

France’s automated speed enforcement program (ASEP), which uses fixed speed cameras on highways and urban roads and mobile speed cameras operated by law enforcement officers on rural and urban roads, has been shown to reduce traffic injuries and fatalities for passenger vehicles, motorcycles, and trucks (Blais 2015). Safety Tuto, an automated section speed enforcement system in Italy that determines average speed over a long distance, has also been shown to reduce traffic injuries and fatalities (Montella 2012).

A Barcelona-based cost benefit analysis suggests that speed cameras in urban areas generate positive net benefits (Mendivil 2012).

Implementation

United States

Twelve states, Washington DC, and the US Virgin Islands use speed cameras for automated enforcement of traffic violations. Thirteen states prohibit this practice and 28 states do not have laws specific to speed cameras (GHSA-Speed cameras).

As of July 2017, 142 US communities have speed camera programs, typically established via state law or city ordinance (IIHS-Automated enforcement).

Wisconsin

Wisconsin law prohibits automated photo-radar enforcement, but speed detection devices are used manually by law enforcement officers (GHSA-Speed cameras, CDC-Speed camera).

Implementation Resources

GHSA-Speed cameras - Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA). Speed and red light camera laws. Accessed on July 12, 2017
NHTSA-Speed cameras - Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Speed enforcement camera systems operational guidelines. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation (US DOT); 2008. Accessed on July 12, 2017

Citations - Description

CDC-Speed camera - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Motor vehicle safety. Intervention fact sheet: Automated speed-camera enforcement. 2015. Accessed on July 25, 2017
GHSA-Speed cameras - Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA). Speed and red light camera laws. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Hu 2016* - Hu W, McCartt AT. Effects of automated speed enforcement in Montgomery County, Maryland, on vehicle speeds, public opinion, and crashes. Traffic Injury Prevention. 2016;17(Suppl 1):53-58. Accessed on July 25, 2017
Soole 2013* - Soole DW, Watson BC, Fleiter JJ. Effects of average speed enforcement on speed compliance and crashes: A review of the literature. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2013;54:46-56. Accessed on July 25, 2017

Citations - Evidence

Blais 2015* - Blais E, Carnis L. Improving the safety effect of speed camera programs through innovations: Evidence from the French experience. Journal of Safety Research. 2015;55:135-145. Accessed on July 25, 2017
Cochrane-Wilson 2010* - Wilson C, Willis C, Hendrikz JK, Le Brocque R, Bellamy N. Speed cameras for the prevention of road traffic injuries and deaths. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010;(11):CD004607. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Hu 2016* - Hu W, McCartt AT. Effects of automated speed enforcement in Montgomery County, Maryland, on vehicle speeds, public opinion, and crashes. Traffic Injury Prevention. 2016;17(Suppl 1):53-58. Accessed on July 25, 2017
Mendivil 2012* - Mendivil J, García-Altés A, Pérez K, Marí-Dell’Olmo M, Tobías A. Speed cameras in an urban setting: A cost-benefit analysis. Injury Prevention. 2012;18(2):75–80. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Montella 2012* - Montella A, Persaud B, D’Apuzzo M, Imbriani L. Safety evaluation of automated section speed enforcement system. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2012;2281:16-25. Accessed on July 25, 2017
Mountain 2005* - Mountain LJ, Hirst WM, Maher MJ. Are speed enforcement cameras more effective than other speed management measures? The impact of speed management schemes on 30 mph roads. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2005;37(4):742–54. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Novoa 2010* - Novoa AM, Pérez K, Santamariña-Rubio E, Marí-Dell’Olmo M, Tobías A. Effectiveness of speed enforcement through fixed speed cameras: A time series study. Injury Prevention. 2010;16(1):12–6. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Pilkington 2005* - Pilkington P, Kinra S. Effectiveness of speed cameras in preventing road traffic collisions and related casualties: Systematic review. BMJ. 2005;330:331-4. Accessed on July 12, 2017
Soole 2013* - Soole DW, Watson BC, Fleiter JJ. Effects of average speed enforcement on speed compliance and crashes: A review of the literature. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2013;54:46-56. Accessed on July 25, 2017
Washington 2007 - Washington S, Shin K, van Schalkwyk I. Evaluation of the city of Scottsdale loop 101 photo enforcement demonstration program: Final report AZ-684. Phoenix: Arizona Department of Transportation (DOT); 2007. Accessed on July 12, 2017

Citations - Implementation

CDC-Speed camera - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Motor vehicle safety. Intervention fact sheet: Automated speed-camera enforcement. 2015. Accessed on July 25, 2017
GHSA-Speed cameras - Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA). Speed and red light camera laws. Accessed on July 12, 2017
IIHS-Automated enforcement - Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). Red light running: Automated enforcement. 2017. Accessed on July 25, 2017

Page Last Updated

July 25, 2017

* Journal subscription may be required for access.