Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Safety Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsr

A case study analysis to examine motorcycle crashes in Bogota, Colombia

Adriana Jimenez a,⁎, Juan Pablo Bocarejo a, Roberto Zarama b, Joël Yerpez c
a
Universidad de los Andes, Carrera 1 N° 18A- 12, Edificio Mario Laserna ML, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Bogota, Colombia
b
Universidad de los Andes, Carrera 1 N° 18A- 12, Edificio Mario Laserna ML, Department of Industrial Engineering, Bogota, Colombia
c
Institut Français des Sciences et Technologies des Transports, de l'Aménagement et des Réseaux IFSTTAR, Laboratoire Mécanismes d´accidents, Chemin de la Croix Blanche, 13300,
Salon-de-Provence, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Introduction: Contributory factors to motorcycle crashes vary among populations depending on several aspects
Received 26 May 2014 such as the users' profiles, the composition and density of traffic, and the infrastructure features. A better under-
Received in revised form 27 September 2014 standing of local motorcycle crashes can be reached in those places where a comprehensive analysis is per-
Accepted 10 December 2014 formed. This paper presents the results obtained from a case study analysis of 400 police records of accidents
Available online 5 January 2015
involving motorcycles in Bogota. Method: To achieve a deeper level of understanding of how these accidents
occur, we propose a systemic approach that uses available crash data. The methodology is inspired by accident
Keywords:
Motorcyclist
prototypical scenarios, a tool for analysis developed in France. Results: When grouping cases we identified
Accident factor three categories: solo motorcycle accidents, motorcyclist and pedestrian accidents, and accidents involving a mo-
Systems theory torcycle and another vehicle. Within these categories we undertook in-depth analyses of 32 groups of accidents
Crash data obtaining valuable information to better comprehend motorcyclists' road crashes in a local context. Recurrent
Road safety contributory factors in the groups of accidents include: inexperienced motorcyclists, wide urban roads that incite
speeding and risky overtaking maneuvers, flowing urban roads that encourage high speed and increased inter-
action between vehicles, and lack of infrastructure maintenance. Practical Applications: The results obtained are
a valuable asset to define measures that will be conveniently adapted to the group of accident on which we
want to act. The methodology exposed in this paper is applicable to the study of road crashes that involve all
types of actors, not only the motorcyclists, and in contexts different than those presented in Bogota.
© 2014 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
1.1. Motorcycles: use and accident rate
In Colombia, the representation of motorcycles in the total number
of vehicles increased from 29.1% in 2003 to 49.6% in 2012 (RUNT,
2013). Some of the reasons that led to its growth are accessible prices,
financing options, simple registration processes, work tools, the possi-
bility of maneuvering in traffic jams, an alternative option to public
transport in areas where coverage and frequency are deficient, and an
alternative option in cities with circulation restrictions for private cars.
In 2010, motorcyclists represented 39% of the deaths from road
crashes in Colombia, and in 2012 this percentage rose to 42% (INMLCF,
2013). On average, six motorcyclists died every day in Colombia. In
2011, fatalities collided mainly with a fixed object or the pavement
(33.7%), car freight (18.2%), or a private vehicle (17.5%). The majority
of motorcyclist fatalities (55%) occurred in urban areas (Universidad
de los Andes y Corporación Fondo de Prevención Vial – CFPV, 2012).
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: a.jimenez243@uniandes.edu.co (A. Jimenez),
jbocarej@uniandes.edu.co (J.P. Bocarejo), rzarama@uniandes.edu.co (R. Zarama),
joel.yerpez@ifsttar.fr (J. Yerpez).
The institutions that set road safety standards at rural and urban
levels are municipal and urban offices, as well as the Ministry of Trans-
portation. In Colombia, the National Transit Code (Ley 769 de, 2002),
contains the regulations that motorcyclists must follow; and there are
no specific differences regarding the cylinder capacity. There are two
types of license: type A1 for driving motorcycles with a cylinder capacity
of up to 125 c.c. or B1 for driving motorcycles, motorized bicycles and
motorized tricycles with a cylinder capacity of more than 125 c.c. The av-
erage cylinder capacity in Colombia is comparatively minor than the ca-
pacity of the motorcycles circulating Spain or France. This aspect means
that the types of hits that the motorcyclist receives, in case of accident or
control loss, differ according to the context where they are studied.
According to official data of the motorcycles registered in Bogota,
the number of motorcycles has a general growth trend; between
2002 and 2011 the number of motorcycles was multiplied by 20. Mo-
torcycles currently represent 21% of the total number of motor vehi-
cles in the capital city, while in 2003 motorcycles did not reach 3% of
the total. There are 27 people per motorcycle in Bogota. Motorcycles
in Bogota are relatively recent: 9.3% are before 2002, 20.8% are
models from 2003 to 2007, and 69.8% are models from 2008 to
2013. In Bogota, 95.30% of the motorcycles have less than or equal
to 250 c.c. cylinder capacity (Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá, 2012). This
is defined by its use as an everyday means of transportation and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2014.12.005
0022-4375/© 2014 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
30 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38
the possibility to use the vehicle as a work tool. One hundred percent
of motorcyclists and passengers use a helmet in Bogota.
Current conditions in terms of infrastructure in Bogota are not ade-
quate for safe mobility of motorcyclists. Thirty percent of 3.752 lane ki-
lometers of the arterial road network is in regular or bad state, as well as
46% of 3150 lane kilometers of the intermediate road network, and 79%
of 8496 lane kilometers of the local road network (Instituto de Desarrollo
Urbano IDU, 2014; Fig. 1). Motorcyclists share the road with other users,
including those roads in which cross-sections are over 10 meters wide.
The city does not have an exclusive infrastructure for the circulation of
motorcycles.
The particularities of motorcycle circulation in Bogota, from a per-
spective of human, vehicle, and environment as components, make
those accidents involving these actors different from those occurring
within other contexts (e.g., France). This aspect highlights the need to
investigate recurring factors that contribute at a local level.
1.2. Approaches to analyzing motorcyclist road crashes
Motorcycle crashes have gained interest in research. International
projects such as the OCDE/ITF project have focused on the motorcycle
user's safety. Accident scenarios and contributory factors, the develop-
ment and implementation of an integrated road safety strategy for mo-
torcyclists, and the critical situation in low- and middle-income
countries are issues addressed by the project (Van Elslande, 2012).
Some studies examine past research related to specific topics about
riders' motorcycle safety; for example, automobile-motorcycle acci-
dents that occur when a driver violates a motorcyclist's right of way
(Chih-Wei Pai, 2011).
Techniques based on deductive analyses, primarily psychological,
have been developed to study motorcycle road crashes. Research exam-
ines motorcyclist behavior and risk perception by analyzing compo-
nents related to experience and training, speeding, use of safety
equipment, traffic and control error, and stunts (Di Stasi, Contreras,
Cándido, Cañas, & Catena, 2011; Maestracci, François, Aurélie, &
Florian, 2012; Özkan et al., 2012; Perez-Fuster, Rodrigo, Luisa, & Jaime,
2013; Tunnicliff et al., 2012). It was found that the combination of low
age, low experience, risky behavior and “unsafe” attitudes constitutes
a risk factor (Bjørnskau, Tor-Olav, & Juned, 2012); riding during the
night, on weekends, for leisure purposes, and along roads in perfect con-
ditions are predictor factors of offences among motorcyclists (Perez-
Fuster et al., 2013); motorcyclists perceive a greater risk when faced
with other drivers changing lanes, while more accidents are caused by
left-turn, right-turn, and U-turn maneuvers (Maestracci et al., 2012); in-
experienced riders are prone to accidents because of a lack of awareness
of the impending dangers, not necessarily because of a tendency to
drive faster (Di Stasi et al., 2011); drivers who also held a motorcycle li-
cense did not perform better when presented with a motorcycle braking
event (Ohlhauser, Shaunna, & Caird, 2011); the detection of a motorcy-
cle depends on how much contrast there is between the motorcycle and
Source: own photographic record
Fig. 1. Photographic record of the roads in Bogota. Source: own photographic record.
its surroundings—the denser the surroundings, the more difficult it is to
generate a contrast (Clabaux, 2006; Hole & Tyrrel, 1995).
Techniques focused on inductive analyses have been used to analyze
accident crash data. Studies state that the risk is bigger when motorcy-
cle users are 20 years old and live in urban areas (Keall & Newstead,
2012); riders were more likely to be at fault when they were under
the influence of alcohol, riding without insurance, or not wearing a hel-
met, and they were less likely to be at fault when the crash occurred at
night and near signalized intersections (Schneider, William, Savolainen,
Dan, & Rick, 2012); among motorcycle accidents, nearly 43% involve a
single motorcycle on an open road with dry surfaces with the main
cause being excessive speed (Sraml, Tomaz, & Marko, 2012); factors at-
tributed to a higher risk of death over time for motorcycle drivers are
older age, crashing into trees, night-time driving, driving on curved
roads, and driving on local roads (Huang & Lai, 2011); night-time con-
spicuity of motorcycles, riding on wet surfaces, specific hazardous inter-
actions, and the influence of speed differentials affect motorcycle safety
(Haque, Hoong Chor, & Ashim Kumar, 2012). With regard to crash con-
sequences, it was demonstrated that lower extremities are the most
commonly affected and that there are different levels of severity de-
pending on the time variable and the number of vehicles involved
(Formana et al., 2012; Wilson, Begg, & Ari, 2012).
One concept for addressing road crashes is the systems theory ap-
proach (Emmerik, 2001; Larsson, Dekker Sidney, & Claes, 2010;
Leveson, 2004; Salmon, Rod, & Stanton, 2012). The systems approach
solves the limitations of traditional approaches to managing road safety
and provides opportunities for improvement to the whole system of
road safety (Emmerik, 2001). Road and transport systems are consid-
ered a complex system composed of elements that continuously inter-
act, though not simple interactions. Road safety measures from this
approach integrate human, vehicle, and environment components and
take into account combined effects among components. From the sys-
tems theory approach, road crashes constitute an emergent property
of the system resulting from its malfunction.
The goal of this paper is to study motorcyclist crashes in Bogota in
order to improve understanding of how accidents happen among
these particular users. This leads to dealing with road crashes from a sys-
temic approach in a context in which crash data exist but are not com-
plete, as in the case of Bogota. This goal could be achieved by a
methodological proposition that includes: an inductive approach that
uses crash information from local police records, a qualitative approach
based on case studies that aims to explain “how” the crashes occur, and a
multifactorial approach that allows the identification of a multiplicity of
accident factors that interact within an accident group. In a context like
Colombia, crash information is available but lacks some details; several
characteristics of crashes are known but not linked to the understanding
of the accident as a whole. Road safety programs are established but are
usually focused on only one of the human, vehicle, and environment
components, and the combined effects produced with other programs
carried out are unknown. Based on this, the added value of this paper
is to examine that through the proposed methodology, it is possible to
 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38 31

Problem definition and identification of the target population *1

Dimension, location and timing

Identification of the primary source of information*2 Filtering of the Case study

Contains the data relative to the problem main source selection *3

Collection of complementary sources of information *4 Summary sheet Case by case

Data that contribute further elements to describe the problem design *5 study

Actions Detailed characterization per Grouping Comparison between the

per group cases cases studied and definition
group*6 Sequential description, accident of the criteria of grouping
factors and other descriptive elements
Source: Author’s own

Fig. 2. General steps of the methodology undertaken in the study. Source: Author's own. Notes: *1 The problem has to be recurrent, it must occur in multiple cases and last over time. *2 The
quality of the content from the primary source and the degree of detail indicate how detailed the analysis can be. *3 The number of cases that can be covered depends on the resources
available; the size of the sample tends to be limited because this is a detailed analysis that is time-consuming and expensive. *4 The methodology seeks to include the greatest number of
explicative or characteristic elements relating to the problem. *5 The ease with which cases can be grouped depends on the sheet design, and the relevance of the results depends on its
content. *6 Actions are very specific to each group in order to act from different perspectives. Their implementation will favorably affect the reduction or elimination of the problem.

reach a higher level of understanding on how road accidents occur. The
acquisition of this knowledge provides the possibility to generate more
suitable actions that can impact the improvement of road safety. The
demonstration is made through the application of the methodology to
a specific type of user; the motorcyclist that transits throughout Bogota.
2. Methodology and data
One concept that is used to address road crash studies and that inte-
grates systems theory is the accident prototypical scenario (APS)
(Fleury & Brenac, 2001). The APS concept requires a detailed crash
data collection (inductive approach) that aims to understand accident
occurrence through the characterization of the sequence of facts (qual-
itative approach), and takes into account multiple accident factor inter-
actions (multifactorial approach). One accident prototypical scenario is
the result of a case-grouping process dependent on the way the events
were triggered through the sequential phases of the accident: driving
situation, accident situation, emergency situation, and crash situation
(Fleury & Brenac, 2001). To construct accident prototypical scenarios,
researchers use detailed information that provides multiple elements
relative to human behavior and cinematic crash conditions. This tech-
nique is supplemented by the EDA (Étude détaillée d´accident), which
integrates the psychological approach and the data crash analysis
from a multidisciplinary group of researchers. The EDA methodology
is characterized by collecting data from the accident scene.
The accident prototypical scenarios tool has been applied, for exam-
ple, to analyze motorcycle accident rates in Paris (Maestracci et al.,
2012) and to investigate the influence of speed at urban intersections,
in situations in which the driver with right of way did not see the motor-
cycle even though there was no obstacle to visibility (Clabaux et al.,
2012). As was mentioned in 1.1, the specific features of each context
create variations on the way facts are triggered as well as on the contrib-
uting factors, which makes it incorrect to use the results obtained in
studies in France to directly define measures for the case of Bogota.
This research sought to use accident prototypical scenarios to ana-
lyze local police records from a set of crashes involving at least one mo-
torcycle rider in Bogota. To better characterize accident groups, we
collected complementary information such as photographs, map im-
ages, insurance data, technical information about motorcycles, and a da-
tabase of drivers' licenses. A reflection on the needs, the methodological
transfer, and its benefits has already been set out (Jiménez, Yerpez,
Bocarejo, & Parraud, 2012).
The accident database in Bogota contains data collected by police of-
ficers when a crash happens. Although it has many fields of data, there is

Source: Prepared from the accident database of the SDM

Fig. 3. Sample selection.

32 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38
Fig. 4. Probability of not obtaining from a sample of size x at least two cases (or five cases) of
one accident prototypical scenario with a representation of 2% of the total population.
a lack of information, for example, on users' decisions and perceptions
and traffic conditions. Since the available information was less detailed
than the data used in France, we could not define accident prototypical
scenarios, but accident groups. This made it necessary to establish a
methodology based on the analysis of cases and the conformation of ac-
cident groups. The criteria for grouping cases were the difficulties en-
countered by motorcyclists, the maneuvers performed by drivers, and
the infrastructure characteristics. The methodology provides significant
knowledge regarding local road crashes with fewer elements relative to
human behavior and cinematic crash conditions than required by the
accident prototypical scenarios. The study yields accident factors that
had not previously been identified for motorcyclists in Bogota using tra-
ditional approaches. Fig. 2 shows the methodology followed.
We selected the cases to be studied from the crash database in
Bogota (Secretaría Distrital de Movilidad, 2010) (See Fig. 3). The basic
criteria for filtering the cases were accidents that: (a) took place in the
urban area of Bogota in 2009, (b) resulted in serious injury or death,
and (c) involved at least one motorcycle. The filter was based on the ac-
cident rate database made up of three modules: accident, vehicle, and
victim. By joining the three modules, difficulties arose in some of the re-
ports due to a lack of information regarding one or two modules. This
limitation led to the establishment of an additional filter criterion to se-
lect only the accidents for which complete information was available.
To obtain the sample size we applied the law of probability distribu-
tion of Pascal to the 1,852 serious accidents involving at least one
Source: Author’s own
Fig. 5. Schema of one accident group obtained from the analysis – A3: Unexpected appear-
ance of a moving obstacle, or interaction with another user.
Source: Author’s own
Fig. 6. Schema of one accident group obtained from the analysis – B6: Infant pedestrian ap-
pears suddenly.
motorcycle user (Brenac & Megherbi, 1996; Fig. 4). We randomly select-
ed a sample of 400 accidents.
X
x
2 ðt−2Þ
Probability ¼ 1 − ðt−1Þ0:02 ð0:98Þ 
t¼2
3. Results
Three categories of accident were created: solo motorcycle accident,
accident involving motorcycle and pedestrian and accident between
motorcycle and other vehicle(s) (Table 1) Figures 5, 6 and 7 show an ex-
ample of each category.
In each category a set of accident groups was formed (Tables 2, 4 and
6). For each group of accidents, we obtained a set of contributory factors
related to human, vehicle, and environment components (Tables 3, 5,
and 7). Conversely, an accident factor reflects interactions between
components. For example, for speeding, the human component is
contained in the speed used by drivers when the accident took place,
the geometric designer of the road where the accident was triggered,
and the staff responsible for its maintenance and signaling. The vehicle
Source: Author’s own
Fig. 7. Schema of one accident group obtained from the analysis – E2: The other user drives
through an intersection with a stop sign and does not respect right of way.
 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38
Source: Author´s own
Fig. 8. Accident factors, accident groups and the contribution of accident factors to the occurrence of accident groups.
component is in the vehicle; it allows drivers to reach high speed and
behave in a certain manner during emergency and crash situations.
The environment component is present on the road; it permits travel-
ling at high speed.
In addition, an accident is not only the result of a single factor but of
the interaction between several factors identified from case studies.
Within the results, we present contributory factors evidenced from
available data. Other factors like motorcycles' low conspicuity, lack of
anticipation of risky situations when driving the motorcycle, and motor-
cyclists' overconfidence were not quantifiable from the available data
but were sensed from the literature. We obtained a total of 32 accident
groups and 53 accident factors that show the complexity of the road ac-
cident rate in the urban areas for the motorcycle rider.
3.1. Solo motorcycle accidents
For the solo motorcycle category we obtained eight accident groups
(Table 2). The last contains cases where factors could not be deter-
mined, for example where no information was available about the loca-
tion of the accident or no sketch of the accident site was available
because the police report was compiled in the hospital where the
rider was being treated. The groups were established based on the en-
counter difficulty. The main contributory factor was revealed by the po-
lice officer or extracted from the available information (Table 3).
One kind of solo motorcycle accident occurs when an obstacle is
present in a motorcyclist's path, leading to a loss of control. Such obsta-
cles vary in nature: they may be associated with deficiencies in the road
infrastructure, fixed obstacles that are not part of the road infrastruc-
ture, and mobile obstacles, particularly other road users. The motorcy-
clist is usually young, with less than three years of driving experience.
Table 1
Summary of accident categories.
Category Cases Accident groups
Total 400 32
Records not suitable for examination 18 – A5 Road geometry difficulty
Isolated cases 3 –
Solo motorcycle 99 8 A7 Atypical loss of control
Motorcycle and pedestrian 74 6 X1 Undetermined loss of control—difficulty in identifying
Motorcycle and other vehicle(s) 206 18
Source: Data compiled by the author.
33
Cases also occurred where riders were proceeding in a straight line.
The reasons for loss of control are unknown. Cases involving drunken
riders include failure to maintain a straight line, and hitting objects at
the roadside. In addition, there may be fixed objects at the roadside
that aggravate the effects of the accident (pavement, central reserva-
tion, concrete wall).
Other difficulties were associated with the road design, such as
steep rises or difficult curves, which are very common in road infra-
structure and lead to accidents. These accidents are often related to
motorcyclists riding under the effects of alcohol, leading them to
misjudge circumstances or fail to respond to challenges they en-
counter in the road. Cases also occurred where the motorcycle was
carrying too many passengers, causing changes in the handling and
problems of instability. Other kinds of accident involve difficulties
associated with the road surface, such as lack of grip, wetness, or
rough surfaces. Finally, atypical loss of control may occur as a result,
for example, of tire failures that do not allow riders to respond ade-
quately to emergency situations or that lead directly to them. Anoth-
er loss of control classified as atypical involves late braking at an
intersection controlled by traffic lights. In 25% of solo motorcycle ac-
cidents, information is limited, specifying only that the rider hit a
moving or stationary object. In 75% of the remaining case reports, it
appears that the rider lost control, but further details of what hap-
pened to the rider and/or passengers are not always available.
Table 2
Accident groups: solo motorcycle.
I. Solo motorcycle—Accidents associated with loss of control 99 Cases
A1 Unexpected appearance of a fixed obstacle associated 10 Cases
with infrastructure maintenance
A2 Unexpected appearance of a non-permanent fixed obstacle, 6 Cases
with immediate effects
A3 Unexpected appearance of a moving obstacle, or interaction 16 Cases
with another user
A4 Loss of control in a straight line 25 Cases
19 Cases
A6 Road surface difficulty 10 Cases
7 Cases
6 Cases
accident factors
Source: Data compiled by the author.
34 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38

Table 3
Contributory factors evidenced for each group belonging to the category solo motorcycle—number of cases.

Contributory factors A1 A fixed A2 A A3 A moving A4 In a A5 Road geometry A6 Road surface A7 Atypical loss
obstacle non-permanent obstacle straight line difficulty difficulty of control
obstacle

Obstacles associated with deficiencies in 10 – – – – 1 –

the road infrastructure⁎1
Non-permanent fixed objects in the road⁎2 – 6 – – – – –
Interaction with moving obstacles⁎3 – – 16 – – – –
Drunk driving – 1 – 5 8 – –
Road geometry difficulty⁎4 3 2 – – 19 1 –
Road surface difficulty⁎5 2 2 2 1 2 10 –
Mechanical failure of the motorcycle – – – – – – 1
Wide road over 6 meters 10 6 13 21 13 8 6
Presence of fixed objects at the roadside 2 – 1 3 8 – 5
Vehicles parked on the road – – 1 – – – 3
Commercial zones that can originate visual overload 1 3 6 4 6 4 –
Powerful motorcycles (more than 200 cc) 1 – 1 3 3 1 2
Inexperienced motorcyclists 6 4 11 17 9 6 5
(less than three years' experience)
Motorcycle riders are young men, under 30 years 3 4 10 13 12 5 5
Excess passengers – – – – 1 – –
Motorcyclist carrying out work-related activity 2 – 2 2 4 1 1
Late braking – – – – – – 1

Source: Data compiled by the author.

Notes: For the fields without information, the presence of a contributory factor cannot be evidenced.
⁎1 Obstacles associated with deficiencies in the road infrastructure: potholes, a branch had been placed on the road to indicate a missing manhole cover, or missing manhole covers.
⁎2 Fixed obstacles: vendor's cart, package, traffic cones indicating roadworks, concrete object to impede vehicle access, various objects that have fallen from trucks.
⁎3 Moving obstacles to the origin of accidents: another driver about whom information is usually lacking, or a cyclist, a child pedestrian, a dog in the street, a horse and cart at a crossroads.
⁎4 Road geometry difficulty: curves, downhill section, a transition between a flat road and an elevated section.
⁎5 Road surface difficulty: slippery surface, wet surface, cases resulting from deterioration caused by groundwater.

3.2. Accidents involving motorcyclist and pedestrian
For motorcycle-pedestrian accidents we defined six groups
(Table 4). Groups B1, B2, B3, and B4 respond to the nature of the road
infrastructure (stretch of road or intersection) and the direction of cir-
culation. Group B5 was established to cover cases where the curved
route the motorcyclist is obliged to follow, or the configuration of the in-
frastructure at an intersection, means that riders come up suddenly on
pedestrians who are crossing the road. Group B6 was established to
cover cases where underage pedestrians emerged suddenly into the
road. In these cases it is not known whether the child was crossing the
road or playing in it without the permission of an adult. For the
motorcycle-pedestrian category the groups were formed in relation to
infrastructure features. Contributory factors are presented in Table 5.
Reports indicate situations of risk encountered by pedestrians cross-
ing streets with wide lanes. In addition to constituting a problem for pe-
destrians, as noted previously, wide roads encourage high vehicle
speeds, reducing rider ability to perform maneuvers to avoid accidents
and causing motorcycles to surprise pedestrians.
Roads with high traffic flow rates cause problems for pedestrians.
These roads frequently consist of two carriageways with two lanes per
carriageway, without central reservations; pedestrian crossings are far
apart. Additionally, when the roads that meet at intersections are very
wide it is harder for pedestrians to notice the presence of motorcycles.
Table 4
Accident groups: motorcyclist and pedestrian.
II. Motorcycle–Pedestrian——Running over a pedestrian
B1 Movement in a straight line, on a two-way stretch of road traffic
B2 Movement in a straight line, on a one-way stretch of road traffic
B3 Movement in a straight line, at an intersection or close by,
two-way road traffic
B4 Movement in a straight line, at an intersection or close by,
one-way road traffic
B5 Driving around a curve or turning
B6 Infant pedestrian appears suddenly
Source: Data compiled by the author.
Added to this is the low visibility of motorcycles (principally a result
of their reduced width); this is a factor that grows in importance
when they travel at high speed. Similarly, the ease of perceiving the
presence of a motorcycle depends on the context in which it is travel-
ling: the greater the traffic density, the harder it is to see. Perception
of motorcycles tends to be lower in commercial sectors. Such visual
overload requires greater attention by all parties, meaning that rider
and pedestrian are likely to notice each other at the last minute or
might not be aware of each other at all until after the accident has oc-
curred. On the other hand, factors relevant to accidents included the ig-
norance or disrespect of the presence of a pedestrian. Accidents were
found to occur in cases where the pedestrian was crossing the road
using a protected crossing place or at an intersection.
The proximity of the point of accident to the place of residence was
examined in order to assess the degree of knowledge of the zone, find-
ing that the majority of accidents occurred more than a kilometer from
the motorcyclist's home. By contrast, pedestrians are injured close to
home. Even more markedly, in the case of accidents involving minors,
the victims live in the area where the accident occurs, usually in resi-
dential zones in low-income neighborhoods.
A review of the characteristics of pedestrian victims found that 22%
of cases involved elderly adults, who tend to require more time to
cross wide roads and who generally have slower reaction times in emer-
gency situations. A third of the cases examined correspond to inexpert
riders. Of the accidents analyzed, 64% occurred on open stretches of
road and 36% at or close to an intersection. In the majority of cases ex-
amined, the motorcyclist was not carrying a passenger, and the accident
occurred during the day and involved relatively new motorcycles (less
74 Cases than four years old).
13 Cases
27 Cases 3.3. Accidents between motorcycle and other(s) vehicle(s)
7 Cases
14 Cases For accidents between a motorcycle and another vehicle we obtain-
ed 18 groups (Table 6). These accidents were classified according to the
5 Cases maneuvers carried out by the riders involved. These included overtak-
8 Cases ing on the left, on the right, and between lanes of traffic and zigzagging
between lines of vehicles. Overtaking involving crossing onto the
 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38 35

Table 5
Contributory factors evidenced for each group belonging to the motorcyclist and pedestrian category—number of cases.

Contributory factors B1 Two-way B2 One-way B3 An intersection or close B4 An intersection or close B5 Driving around B6 Infant
road section road section by, two-way road traffic by, one-way road traffic a curve or turning pedestrian

Absence of designated pedestrian crossings⁎1 – – 5 5 2 –

Absence of a central infrastructure for pedestrians 8 –
in two-way roads
Pedestrians crossing road at unauthorized locations⁎2 13 26
Complex configuration of the road infrastructure⁎3 1 –
Infant pedestrians (children under 12 years) – –
Wide road over 6 meters 12 26
Motorcycle turning and a pedestrian appears – –
Vehicles parked on the road – 2
Commercial zones that can originate visual overload 3 8
Powerful motorcycles (more than 200 cc) 1 2
Inexperienced motorcyclists 11 18
(less than three years' experience)
Motorcycle riders are young men, under 30 years 7 10
Drunk pedestrian 1 2
Drunk driving 1 –
Excess passengers – –
Motorcyclist carrying out work-related activity – 3
1 – – –
– – 1 2
2 3 2 3
– – – 6
7 14 5 4
– – 5 –
– – – –
– 5 – –
– – – –
5 9 2 6
4 12 1 5
– – – –
– – 1 –
– – 1 –
– 1 1 1

Source: Data compiled by the author.

Notes:
⁎1 Intersections where there is no delineation indicating a pedestrian passage.
⁎2 Group B2: seven cases that occurred near an intersection or near a pedestrian bridge.
⁎3 Complex configuration: downhill section, wide roads, multiple accesses, multiple maneuvers allowed.

oncoming side of the road also occurred, along with crossing the yellow 3.4. Consequences of accidents
line and advancing for short periods against the direction of traffic. It is
important to bear in mind the low visibility of motorcycles performing The case study provides information about crash severity and vic-
maneuvers, while turning, overtaking, or changing lane. tims' injuries. The consequences of solo motorcycle accidents tend to
The most common interaction leading to accidents in this category be serious for the rider (2 fatal accidents, 8 cases of severe head trauma,
involved a private vehicle, pickup or four-by-four, or a taxi (48% and 2 cases of moderate head trauma, 3 cases of loss of consciousness, 37
29% of cases in the category, respectively). Cases of accidents were cases of fracture of arm, femur, foot and hand phalanges, tibia, fibula,
also found involving public transport vehicles, such as buses, mini- hip, shoulder, clavicle, knee, foot, chin, nose, radius, ankle, leg, finger,
and microbuses. The proportion of accidents between motorcycles and mandible, maxilla, wrist and toes, the lower limbs and hands). The con-
other vehicles that occurred on open stretches of road was 53%, with sequences of accidents involving pedestrian and motorcyclist tend to be
44% at intersections and 3% in other kinds of road infrastructure. The serious for the pedestrians involved and less so for motorcyclists (3 fatal
most common cases occurring at intersections happen when one of accidents, 4 cases of severe head trauma, 12 cases of moderate head
the parties continues their path in a straight line.
In the analysis, accidents occurring at intersections were differenti-
ated from situations where there was a stop sign, traffic lights, or an un-
marked intersection. Failure to respect priority or signage both by Table 6
Accident groups: motorcycles and other vehicle(s).
motorcyclists and other road users was the most common cause, with
other road users more likely to incur this behavior. Other common III—Motorcycle with other vehicle(s) 206
groups of accidents in the cases reviewed included a left-turn maneuver Cases
by the other road user that cut up a motorcycle coming in the opposite C1 Rear impact—the motorcycle does not keep a safe distance 18 Cases
direction. Other characteristics were linked to road infrastructure, such C2 Rear impact—the other user does not keep a safe distance 7 Cases
as the absence of a left-turn lane, which led to sudden braking by the ve- D1 Ignoring the direction of the traffic and crash between vehicles 4 Cases
E1 The motorcycle drives through an intersection with a stop sign 16 Cases
hicle in front. The lack of adequate space for vehicles turning left can and does not respect right of way
lead drivers to perform sudden maneuvers in response to pressure not E2 The other user drives through an intersection with a stop sign 24 Cases
to interfere with following vehicles that are continuing in a straight and does not respect right of way
line. There are rear impacts caused by a failure – most commonly by mo- E3 Ignoring right of way at an intersection with no signage 11 Cases
E4 Ignoring a working traffic light at an intersection 19 Cases
torcycle riders – to maintain a safe distance between vehicles. In rear
F1 Left turn and collision with a motorcycle that appears 21 Cases
impacts, the other road users involved are frequently driving public unexpectedly in the opposite direction
transport vehicles, which are likely to brake suddenly and at times un- F2 The other user turns left and collides with a motorcycle overtaking 6 Cases
expectedly, in order to pick up passengers. Other maneuvers, such as on the left
right turns, entering traffic flow, reversing or U-turns, also caused acci- F3 The motorcyclist turns left and collides with another user 3 Cases
overtaking on the left
dents. Various cases occurred in roads with high traffic flow rates that
G1 Right turn and collision with a motorcycle overtaking on the right 5 Cases
lead to increased levels of interactions between road users. H1 Maneuver to enter traffic flow from a parking space or secondary 13 Cases
One aspect of these accidents is the complex structure of intersec- access
tions. Drivers may require additional time to understand the configura- I1 Overtaking on the right and crash between vehicles 17 Cases
I2 Overtaking on the left and crash between vehicles 8 Cases
tion of these intersections and to make the decisions required to
I3 Overtaking and zigzagging between lanes and crash between vehicles 5 Cases
continue their path safely. Situations also occur that are caused by I4 Overtaking and crossing onto the opposite lane and crash between 4 Cases
road layout, hills, or the presence of curves that are unusually tight vehicles
when compared to the general characteristics of the road infrastructure. J1 U-turn and crash between vehicles 9 Cases
These factors cause accidents or make it more difficult to carry out K1 Lane change and crash between vehicles 16 Cases

emergency maneuvers. Source: Data compiled by the author.

36 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38

Table 7
Contributory factors evidenced for each group belonging to the motorcyclist and other(s) vehicle(s) category—number of cases.

Contributory factors C1 The C2 The other D1 Ignoring E1 The E2 The E3 Ignoring

motorcycle user does the direction of motorcyclist does other user right of way
does not keep a not keep a the traffic not respect right does not at an intersection
safe distance safe distance of way respect right with no signage
of way

Not keeping a safe distance 18 7 – – – –

Moving in a forbidden direction – – 4 – – –
Deficiency or absence of delineation 7 – 3 11 17 11
Deficiency or absence of stop signs – – – – – 11
No respect for the traffic lights – – 1 – – –
Roads with high traffic flow rates 12 6 1 – 2 1
Lack of a dedicated lane turn – – – – – –
Complex configuration of the road⁎1 1 1 2 11 22 8
Wide road over 6 meters 17 6 2 13 21 5
Vehicles parked on the road – – – – – –
Commercial zones that can originate visual overload 5 2 1 2 5 3
Powerful motorcycles (more than 200 cc) 2 – – 1 2 –
Inexperienced motorcyclists (less than 3 years' experience) 12 4 3 11 13 9
Motorcycle riders are young men, under 30 years 11 3 1 12 12 5
Drunk driving motorcyclist 4 – 1 1 1 –
Drunk driving other user 1 3 – – 1 1
Motorcyclist carrying out work–related activity 2 – 1 1 2 1
Other user carrying out work–related activity 9 2 2 12 11 5
Unexpected or illegal maneuvers – – 4 – – 1
Reduced visibility⁎2 5 1 – – 2 1

Source: Data compiled by the author.

Notes:
⁎1 Complex configuration of the road infrastructure: varied road width, two-way road, several lanes, presence of a cycle lane, several roads entering at the same intersection, lack of
continuity in the trajectory of the road. The complexity varies depending on the groups.
⁎2 Reduced visibility*: luminosity, rain, presence of objects at the roadside.

trauma, 2 cases of loss of consciousness, and 18 cases of fracture of clav-
icle, lower limb and ankle, leg, tibia, femur and fibula, radius, hand, foot,
nasal bones). The seriousness of injuries varies with the nature of the ac-
cident between motorcycle and other vehicle. In some groups, such as
F3, H1 and I1, injuries appear to be less serious. However, for most
groups the repercussions are serious both for drivers and motorcycle
riders (2 fatal accidents, 1 case of severe head trauma, 9 cases of moder-
ate head trauma, 1 case of loss of consciousness and 55 cases of fracture
of lower limbs, tibia and fibula, femur, shoulder, toes, fingers and knee,
elbow and radius, clavicle, pelvis, second metatarsal, kneecap, frontal
sinus, malleolus, ankle, ulna, hand, leg, facial bones, broken teeth and
fractured clavicle, shoulder blade, upper limbs, wrist). The other party
in the accident is usually unaffected.
4. Discussion
The proposed methodology provides knowledge that we did not
have before. It overcomes the traditional approaches in Colombia
by describing the interactions between accident factors, factors that
contain multiple components from the human-vehicle-environment
system, and those that are related directly to an accident group, which
means that there is a relation with a specific way that events happen
(Fig. 8).
Based on our current level of knowledge we state that motorcy-
clists are vulnerable road users with a high representation in fatality
rates in Bogota. By analyzing some variables we notice several
aspects that help to better characterize motorcycle accidents. We
know the places of major occurrence, most frequent periods of
time, and the categories of users with most incidents, such as, for
example, taxi drivers. However, we only arrive at a descriptive
level, a photograph, which is not enough to explain how accidents
between motorcyclists and taxi drivers occur.
The discussion of the paper would be very extensive if the results ob-
tained in each group of accident are included. As an example, we will be
specifically focused on accident types E1 and E2 (The motorcyclist/the
other user drives through an intersection with a stop sign and does not
respect right of way). The proposed methodology shows that these
accidents take place in conditions that we could describe in terms of infra-
structure; when both users plan to circulate toward a signalized intersec-
tion during a driving situation; when both users decide to continue their
trajectory in a straight line during an accident situation; when neither
perceives the other user, or one or both of them try to undertake an un-
successful maneuver to avoid a crash during an emergency situation;
and that consequences of these crashes are usually serious for the motor-
cyclist after the crash situation. We also know that these accidents happen
most frequently when the motorcyclist travels along the priority axis. Ad-
ditionally, we can see that accident factors such as a wide road, complex
intersection, inexperienced motorcyclist, and lack of road delineation in-
teract in the occurrence of these kinds of accidents.
Having described the sequential story of these two groups of acci-
dents, as well as identified the contributing factors, a wide range of pos-
sible actions to neutralize or eliminate their recurrence is opened. As an
example, at an environmental level it is possible to work on the verifica-
tion of how visible are stop signals currently according to their location
and condition, on the improvement of the intersection road markings,
as well as on the revision of the configuration of corners and visibility
from the access points, and on the adaptation of elements to the road
that allow to reduce the complexity of intersections. At a human compo-
nent level there could be a definition of programs oriented to the taxi
drivers and motorcyclists to make them aware of the problems that
they could face due to the low visibility that characterizes motorcycles,
and to improve the training of motorcyclists to address emergency situ-
ations in a better way and avoid the collision.
No analysis of the interactions between these factors within a partic-
ular category of accident had been carried out. Driving factors were
found such as: the inexperience of motorcycle riders, reflected in failure
to anticipate or respond adequately to danger or take evasive measures;
the practice of driving at high speed, which limits riders' ability to carry
out emergency measures and avoid crashing or losing control; the exis-
tence of wide roads with high traffic flow rates, which encourage high
speed and increase interaction between vehicles; lane changing and
overtaking maneuvers common among motorcyclists because of the
maneuverability of the vehicle; and the use of powerful motorcycles
above 125 cc, which allows riders to reach high speeds in short
 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38 37

E4 Ignoring a F1 Left turn and a F2 The other user F3 The motorcyclist G1 Right turn H1 I1 I2 I3 I4 Overtaking J1 K1
working traffic motorcycle that turns left and a turns left and and a Maneuver Overtaking Overtaking Overtaking and crossing U-turn Lane
light at an appears in the motorcycle another user motorcycle to enter on the on the left and onto the change
intersection opposite direction overtakes on the overtakes on the overtakes on traffic right zigzagging opposite lane
left left the right flow

– – – – – – – – – – – –
– – – – – – – – – – – –
5 13 5 – 4 7 7 6 1 1 4 5
– – – – – – – – – – – –
19 3 1 – – 1 – – – – 2 –
8 3 2 1 4 5 7 1 3 – 6 11
– 21 – – – – – – – – 2 –
3 14 4 2 4 9 2 2 1 1 6 1
14 18 5 3 4 13 15 7 3 3 9 15
– – – – – 2 – – – – – 1
9 4 3 2 1 3 2 4 4 – – 6
– 2 1 1 – 1 1 1 – 1 1 –
13 12 5 2 5 6 8 3 3 3 7 16
12 13 5 1 2 6 10 6 3 3 6 9
3 2 1 – – – 1 1 1 – 2 1
1 1 – – – – – 1 – – 1 –
– 2 – – – 2 3 – 1 – 1 2
11 10 2 – 2 2 10 5 3 2 3 9
19 2 6 3 5 9 17 1 5 4 9 11
1 1 – – – 2 – 1 2 – 2 –

distances, reducing their ability to brake. To these factors should be
added the fact that motorcyclists are frequently young men who tend
to adopt aggressive riding styles; the presence of parked vehicles that
block lines of sight between users or that aggravate collision conse-
quences; and work-related pressures affecting professional riders that
might encourage excess speed in order to meet delivery targets, cause
tiredness due to long working hours, or lead to the adoption of aggres-
sive riding styles.
The effort to reconstruct the different phases of the accident despite
the limited information is valuable in that it opens up possibilities for ac-
tion in each phase. The results could be even more comprehensive if the
data collection at the scene of the accident were improved. It could be
enriched by including additional fields of information in the police re-
cords. Gaps are related to the driver at the time of the accident (reason
for the journey, previous itinerary, length of driving experience prior to
the accident, and reactions during the accident and emergency situa-
tions). In most of the cases we do not know whether those involved
saw each other before the crash, and we have no information relating to
the state of the traffic on the road at the time of the accident. It would
also be desirable to improve the quality of records by improving traffic po-
lice training and by adopting technologies to systematize data directly
from the accident scene.
Acknowledgements
This research paper is registered within the cooperation agreement –
renewed in 2011 – between the Universidad de los Andes in Colombia
and the IFSTTAR in France. It is proposed as an initiative for transferring
knowledge between the two countries and the two institutions
(Jiménez et al., 2012). Part of the procedure here described was under-
taken in the MA-IFSTTAR of the Salon de Provence, in France.
References
Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá (2012). Movilidad en Cifras 2011.
Bjørnskau, Torkel, Tor-Olav, Nævestad, & Juned, Akhtar (2012). Traffic safety among mo-
torcyclists in Norway: A study of subgroups and risk factors. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 49, 50–57.
Brenac, Thierry, & Megherbi, Brahim (1996). Diagnostic de sécurité routière sur une ville:
Intérêt de l’analyse fine de procédures d’accidents tirées aléatoirement. Recherche
Transports Sécurité, 52, 59–71.
Clabaux, Nicolas (2006). Prototypical accident scenarios involving powered two-wheelers
in urban areas in France and prospects for countermeasures. Advances in transporta-
tion studies. An International Journal, 9, 17–28.
Clabaux, Nicolas, Thierry, Brenac, Christophe, Perrin, Joël, Magnin, Bastien, Canu, & Pierre,
Van Elslande (2012). Motorcyclists’ speed and ‘looked-but-failed-to-see’ accidents.
Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49, 73–77.
Di Stasi, L. L., Contreras, D., Cándido, A., Cañas, J. J., & Catena, A. (2011). Behavioral and
eye-movement measures to track improvements in driving skills of vulnerable
road users: First-time motorcycle riders. Transportation Research Part F, 14,
26–35.
Emmerik, Van A. (2001). A systems approach to road safety. Proceedings of the 24th
Australian Transport Research Forum.
Fleury, Dominique, & Brenac, Thierry (2001). Accident prototypical scenarios, a tool for
road safety research and diagnostic studies, INRETS. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 33, 267–276.
Formana, Jason L., Lopez-Valdesa, Francisco J., Keshia, Pollackb, Rafael, Heredero-Ordoyoa,
Aquilino, Molinerod, Alberto, Mansillae, et al. (2012). Injuries among powered two-
wheeler users in eight European countries: A descriptive analysis of hospital dis-
charge data. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49, 229–236.
Haque, M. d. Mazharul, Hoong Chor, Chin, & Ashim Kumar, Debnath (2012). An investiga-
tion on multi-vehicle motorcycle crashes using log-linear models. Safety Science, 50,
352–362.
Hole, G. J., & Tyrrel, L. (1995). The influence of perceptual ‘set’ on the detection of motor-
cyclists using daytime headlights. Ergonomic, 38(7), 1326–1341.
Huang, Wei-Shin, & Lai, Ching-Huei (2011). Survival risk factors for fatal injured car and
motorcycle drivers in single alcohol-related and alcohol-unrelated vehicle crashes.
Journal of Safety Research, 42, 93–99.
Instituto de Desarrollo Urbano IDU (2014). www.idu.gov.co/web/guest/malla_inventario
Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses INMLCF (2013). Forensis, datos
para la vida. Colombia.
Jiménez, Adriana, Yerpez, Joël, Bocarejo, Juan Pablo, & Parraud, Céline (2012). Réflexions
sur le transfert méthodologique de l’analyse qualitative d’accidents de la circulation
routière issue de l’étude détaillée des accidents (EDA) française aux procédures
d’accidents colombiennes. Recherche Transports Sécurité, 28, 46–65.
Keall, Michael D., & Newstead, Stuart (2012). Analysis of factors that increase motorcycle
rider risk compared to car driver risk. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49, 23–29.
Larsson, Peter, Dekker Sidney, W. A., & Claes, Tingvall (2010). The need for a systems ap-
proach to road safety. Safety Science, 48, 1167–1174.
Leveson, N. G. (2004). A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Safety Science,
42, 237–270.
Ley 769 de (2002). Código Nacional de Tránsito Terrestre República de Colombia.
Maestracci, Marion, François, Prochasson, Aurélie, Geffroy, & Florian, Peccoud (2012).
Powered two-wheelers road accidents and their risk perception in dense urban
areas: Case of Paris. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49, 114–123.
Ohlhauser, Amanda D., Shaunna, Milloy, & Caird, Jeff K. (2011). Driver responses
to motorcycle and lead vehicle braking events: The effects of motorcycling
experience and novice versus experienced drivers. Transportation Research Part
F, 14, 472–483.
Özkan, Türker, Timo, Lajunen, Burak, Dogruyol, Zümrüt, Yildirim, & Ahmet, Coymak
(2012). Motorcycle accidents, rider behavior, and psychological models. Accident
Analysis and Prevention, 49, 124–132.
Pai, Chih-Wei (2011). Motorcycle right-of-way accidents – A literature review. Accident
Analysis and Prevention, 43, 971–982.
38 A. Jimenez et al. / Journal of Safety Research 52 (2015) 29–38
Perez-Fuster, Patricia, Rodrigo, Maria F., Luisa, Ballestar Maria, & Jaime, Sanmartin (2013).
Modeling offenses among motorcyclists involved in crashes in Spain. Accident
Analysis and Prevention, 56, 95–102.
Registro Único Nacional de Tránsito de Colombia (2013). www.runt.com.co/portel/libreria
Salmon, Paul M., Rod, Mcclure, & Stanton, Neville A. (2012). Road transport in drift?
Applying contemporary systems thinking to road safety. Safety Science, 50(2012),
1829–1838.
Schneider, I. V., William, H., Savolainen, Peter T., Dan, Van Boxel, & Rick, Beverley (2012).
Examination of factors determining fault in two-vehicle motorcycle crashes. Accident
Analysis and Prevention, 45, 669–676.
Secretaría Distrital de Movilidad (2010). Police accident records (IPAT) Bogota – 2009.
Sraml, Matjaz, Tomaz, Tollazzi, & Marko, Rencelj (2012). Traffic safety analysis of
powered two-wheelers (PTWs) in Slovenia. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49,
36–43.
Tunnicliff, Deborah J., Watson, Barry C., White, Katherine M., Hyde, Melissa K.,
Schonfeld, Cynthia C., & Wishart, Darren E. (2012). Understanding the factors
influencing safe and unsafe motorcycle rider intentions. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 49, 133–141.
Universidad de los Andes y Corporación Fondo de Prevención Vial – CFPV (2012). Anuario
estadístico de accidentalidad en Colombia, año 2010.
Van Elslande, Pierre (2012). The ITF/OECD working group on powered two-wheelers
safety: Developing guidelines for an integrated safety strategy. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 48, 982–991.
Wilson, Suzanne J., Begg, Dorothy J., & Ari, Samaranayaka (2012). Validity of using linked
hospital and police traffic crash records to analyze motorcycle injury crash character-
istics. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 49, 30–35.
Adriana Jimenez, M.Sc., is a PhD Student in the Universidad Los Andes. Part of the doctoral
research was executed in the French Institute of Science and Technology for Transport,
Development and Networks (IFSTTAR). Her research interests include road safety and
crash analysis with particular interest in the safety of powered two-wheeler users and pe-
destrians. She is a member of the Research Group of Regional Urban Sustainability — SUR
belonging to the Universidad Los Andes. At present, she works as a consultant in GSDplus.
Juan Pablo Bocarejo is an associate professor in the Department of Civil and Environmen-
tal Engineering at Universidad de los Andes. His research areas include transport accessi-
bility, transport policy and road safety. He teaches courses on road safety, sustainable
urban transport, and transportation planning. He is the director of the Research Group
of Regional Urban Sustainability — SUR belonging to the Universidad Los Andes. His
Ph.D is from Université Paris XII Val de Marne.
Roberto Zarama is a titular professor in the Department of Industrial Engineering at
Universidad de los Andes. He is a mathematician. He teaches courses on systems theory,
models for thought, networks, game theory and altruism. His research areas include
Complex Systems and Complexity Management Tools. His Ph.D is from the École des
Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales and his postdoctoral is from the École des Hautes Etudes
en Sciences Sociales and the University of Oxford.
Joël Yerpez is the director of the Laboratory of Accident Mechanism Analysis (LMA) at
IFSTTAR (French Institute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Net-
works). He is professor in the University of Aix-Marseille. His research areas include urban
planning, road safety and crash analysis with particular interest in the safety of pedestrian
and elderly users. His Ph.D is from University of Aix–Marseille.