Child Safety On Roads – A Cause For Concern in India

1. CHILD SAFETY ON ROADS – A CAUSE FOR CONCERN
By
Dr. B. Mohan Venkatram, Ph.D Prof. M. Madhusudhana Rao, Ph.D
Associate Professor Department of Commerce &
Department of Commerce and Management Studies
Management Studies, Andhra University Andhra University
Visakhapatnam -530 003 Visakhapatnam – 530 003
ABSTRACT
Road traffic accidents continue to be a major health and social problem
world over particularly in less developed countries (LDCs) wherein accident
rates are registered 15 to 20 times higher than developed countries. It is
disheartening to note that nearly three fourth of all fatal accidents occurs in
LDCs costing over US $ 36 billion each year. Further, pedestrians are found to
be more vulnerable among all types of road users who account for about 40 per
cent of the road accident deaths.
Empirical research reveals that the young are more prone to accident
risk as a fifth of pedestrian fatalities in LDCs are none other than children
belonging to below 16 years age group. Thus child safety has become a major
road safety problem in LDCs in general and India in particular.
One of the major prerequisites to ensure traffic safety is adequate traffic
safety knowledge levels among different types of road users. If the children at
that tender age are to be safe on roads, their fresh minds should be equipped
with necessary traffic sense regarding the various traffic rules and regulations
and understand the dangers caused by road traffic.
Against this backdrop, an attempt is made to assess the traffic safety
knowledge of school of children in Greater Visakha, Andhra Pradesh taking a
sample of 300 school children from different schools and convents. This paper
also details the school children’s perspective on traffic safety across different
dimensions. This paper recommends “safe feet” programme to be a permanent
part of the primary school curriculum enabling the rural children develop
observational skills and knowledge and understanding of traffic, thereby gain
comprehension as to how they should behave on roads to keep themselves and
also other road users safe.
1

2. CHILD SAFETY ON ROADS – A CAUSE FOR CONCERN
By
Dr. B. Mohan Venkatram, Ph.D. Prof. M. Madhusudhana Rao, Ph.D.
Associate Professor Department of Commerce &
Department of Commerce and Management Studies
Management Studies, Andhra University Andhra University
Visakhapatnam – 530 003 Visakhapatnam – 530 003
In many Less Developed Countries (LDCs) pedestrians form major part of
vulnerable group of road users. Further more, the young, have been identified
as being especially at higher risk on roads. Most children who have been
injured in road accident need long term medical treatment and care leading to
enormous grief and considerable economic burden on the family concerned.
Empirical research studies reveal that the single major contributing
factor for many such accidents is lack of road safety knowledge leading to
unsafe behaviour by children. If children are to be safe on roads, the
prerequisite is that they must be equipped with knowledge, understanding and
skill to deal with the various traffic situations and the possible dangers of
traffic.
Accidents involving school children belonging to less than 16 years age
group on an average contribute to 20 per cent of pedestrian fatalities in LDCs,
hence child safety has become a cause for concern. Low knowledge level among
the children in LDCs in respect of road safety is a major contributory factor for
many accidents. In view of the importance of this section of pedestrians, an
attempt is made in the present paper to analyse the attitudes and behaviour of
school children across various dimensions of road safety, their safety
awareness levels, involvement in road accidents, perception regarding road
safety education programmes, common problems faced by the children,
suggestions for the improvement of the road safety, etc. The study has been
2

3. conducted in Greater Visakha, which is one of the fastest growing cities in
Asia. In all, 10 major schools in the city spread over all the areas have been
selected with a sample size of 300 school children.
I. Personal Characteristics of the Respondents:
Table-1 presents that majority respondents representing 92 percent
belong to more than 10 years age group and the rest have less than 10 years
age. The range of the age falls between 8–16 years, 261 out of 300 respondents
(87.00 per cent) are pursuing secondary education and the remaining are
pursuing primary education. Several studies have identified that children
below the age of four years cannot recognize roads, traffic and they need to be
escorted. Children between the age of 5 and 7 can stop, look and listen before
crossing road. This section of children know how to get into and alight the bus
and have some knowledge of crossing roads. Children belonging to the age
group of 8 to 12 years can understand speeds of various vehicles flying on the
roads. They also understand visibility, vehicle control etc. Children above the
age of 12 years can understand traffic rules and could minimize the risk of
meeting with road accidents.
With regard to means of transport, a little higher than one-third of the
respondents (34.33 per cent) come to school on foot, followed by bicycle (24.00
per cent), bus (16.00 per cent) and auto rickshaw (14.67 per cent) and 2-
wheelers (parent ride) (7.67 per cent), while the lowest percent (3.00) of child
respondents reach school by other means such as 4-wheeler (motor car).
Thus, majority school going children (175 out of 300 respondents) are
attending schools either on foot or riding bicycle. 46 per cent of the children
travel between 2 to 5 kilometers from their dwelling to reach the school.
3

4. Table -1 : PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS
(SCHOOL GOING CHILDREN)
Item No. of Respondents % to Total
Age :
Less than 10 years 24 8.00
More than 10 years 273 92.00
Total 300 100..00
Education :
Primary 39 13.00
Secondary 261 87.00
Total 300 100.00
Mode of Travel :
Walk 103 34.33
Bi-cycle 72 24.00
2 Wheelers (Parent Ride) 23 7.67
4 Wheelers (Car) Parent driver 9 3.00
Auto Rickshaw 44 14.67
Bus 48 16.00
Others 1 0.33
Total 300.00 100.00
Distance from the House to School :
Less than 2 km 124 41.33
2 – 5 km 138 46.00
6 – 10 km 25 8.33
More than 10 km 13 4.34
Total 300 100.00
Travel time from House to School :
Less than 5 minutes 75 25.00
5 – 10 minutes 98 32.67
10 – 20 minutes 69 23.00
21 – 30 minutes 38 12.67
More than 30 minutes 20 6.66
Total 300 100.00
4

5. II. Perception of School children on Traffic and Road Accidents in the Study
Area:
It is observed from Table-2 that 38.00 per cent of the respondents opined
that traffic is dangerous because of lack of required traffic sense among road
users followed by accident blackspots that are prone to accidents (31.33 per
cent) and over speeding' of vehicles (22.34 per cent). An overwhelming majority
of respondents (84.33 per cent) have witnessed a road accident while about 27
respondents (9.00 per cent) got themselves, involved in road accidents.
Regarding nature of accidents among the 27 respondents involved, 48.45 per
cent of them had rear end-dash collision, followed by head-on-collision (37.03
per cent) and slippery (14.82 per cent).
III. Perception of School Children Walking Habits/Road behaviour in the
Study Area:
Table – 3 presents that nearly three fourths of respondents (221 and out
of 300) are of the opinion that roads are not safe to walk, and 64.00 per cent of
respondents reported that in the absence of Foot paths, they had to walk on
the road itself. It is understood that about four-fifths of the child respondents
(79.33 per cent) cross the road by themselves and rest (20.67 per cent) are
escorted by elders.
An overwhelming proportion of respondents (92.67 per cent) agreed that
getting out of car from left side is safe and significant proportion of respondents
(79.00 per cent) expressed that crossing the road behind a parked car is
dangerous. As many as 296 respondents out of 300 sample expressed that
crossing the road at zebra crossing line is safe. Almost all the respondents (297
out of 300) have learnt riding bicycle in the play ground. A majority
respondents (93.33 per cent) are aware that jumping or alighting from a
moving bus is dangerous.
5

6. Table – 2 : SCHOOL CHILDREN’S PERCEPTIONS ON ROAD ACCIDENTS
Particulars No. of % to Total
Respondents
a) Traffic is Dangerous because :
Lack of Safe environment 25 8.33
Accident proneness (at black spots) 94 31.33
Lack of traffic sense 114 38.00
Over speeding 67 22.34
Total 300 100.00
b) Have you ever seen any Road Accident :
Yes 253 84.33
No 47 15.67
Total 300 100.00
c) Have you ever met with any Road Accident :
Yes 27 9.00
No 273 91.00
Total 300 100.00
d) Nature of Accidents involved:
Rear-end collision 13 48.45
Head-on-collision 10 37.02
Slippery 4 14.82
Total 27 100.00
6

7. IV. Traffic safety awareness among school children:
Table-3 exhibits that as many as 282 child respondents (94.00 per cent)
know that people who walk on the road are called as pedestrians. Majority
respondents (58.67 per cent) expressed that pedestrians should walk on
footpath, while others, ignorantly replied walking at one edge of the road (35.67
per cent) and walking on the middle of the road (5.66 per cent).
Regarding road crossings, nearly half of the respondents (49.67 per cent)
cross the road at signals when the light is shown green. But a significant
proportion of them (44.33 per cent) cross the road even the traffic signal light
glows red (44.33 per cent) and amber (6.00 per cent). The child respondents
prefer yellow colour signal lights (44.00 per cent) as the one that can be seen
clearly in the night time, followed by red (39.00 per cent) and blue (17.00 per
cent). Regarding children while crossing the road in the absence of traffic
control, a majority of them (176) stop on the footpath then look to their right
before crossing the road followed by 'look to the right then left' and cross (35.67
per cent) look at both sides and run fast (5.00 per cent) and look left and cross
(0.66 per cent). Thus, regarding the Kerb drill, the children have to be
educated properly enabling them to cross the roads safely.
Most of the child respondents (90.33 per cent) have knowledge about
traffic police. Four-fifths of the respondents opined that the function of traffic
police is control of traffic, followed by helping children to cross the road (10.33
per cent), inculcate traffic sense especially among children (8.67 per cent) and
impose fines on traffic rules violaters (10.33 per cent).
V. Perceptions of school children on Road safety system:
It is also observed from Table-3 that an overwhelming proportion of
respondents (98.33 per cent) expressed that playing on road is not safe.
Similarly, almost all the respondents (99.00 per cent) expressed that chasing a
kite or baloon on road and also running across the road are not safe. Further a
7

8. 8

9. Table – 3 : TRAFFIC SAFETY AWARENESS AMONG SCHOOL CHILDREN
Particulars No. of % to Total
Respondents
1) Roads are Safe to walk :
Yes 79 26.33
No 221 73.67
Total 300 100.00
2) Walk on the Road if there is no footpath :
True 192 64.00
False 18 36.00
Total 300 100.00
3) How do you Cross the Road :
Self 238 79.33
Escorted by elder 62 20.67
Total 300 100.00
4) Getting out car you must get out on Left Side :
True 278 92.67
False 22 7.33
Total 300 100.00
5) Crossing the Road behind a Parked Car :
Dangerous 237 79.00
Safe 63 21.00
Total 300 100.00
6) Safe to Cross Road at the Zebra Crossings :
True 296 98.67
False 4 1.33
Total 300 100.00
7) Learning to Ride a Bicycle you must :
Ride in the play ground 297 99.00
Ride on the Road 3 1.00
Total 300 100.00
8) Never Jump get out of a Moving Bus :
True 280 93.33
False 20 6.67
9) Wait until the bus had left and cross at the safe 300 100.00
place :
True 292 97.33
False 8 2.67
Total 300 100.00
10) People walk on the road called as :
Pedestrians 282 94.00
Traffic 3 1.00
Public 14 4.67
Don’t know 1 0.33
Total 300 100.00
9

10. 11) Pedestrian is a person who :
Uses the road on foot 297 99.00
Drives a car - -
Travelling bus - -
Rides Motor vehicles 3 1.00
Total 300 100.00
12) Pedestrian should walk :
On the edge of the road 107 35.67
On footpath 176 58.67
Middle of the road 17 5.66
Total 300 100.00
13) Walking on footpath is bad :
Dangerous 11 3.67
Safe 289 96.33
Total 300 100.00
14) When should you cross road at a signal :
Red 133 44.33
Green 149 49.67
Aumber 18 6.00
Total 300 100.00
15) Which colour can be seen clear by in the night time
:
Blue 51 17.00
Yellow 132 44.00
Red 117 39.00
Total 300 100.00
16) Before crossing the road in absence of traffic
control :
Look at the right then left and again to the right cross 107 35.67
Stop on the footpath look to right 176 58.67
Look at both sides and run fast 15 5.00
Look left and cross 2 0.66
Total 300 100.00
17) Whether you are aware of traffic police role :
Yes 271 90.33
No 29 9.67
Total 300 100.00
18) What is the function of traffic police:
To controls traffic 238 79.33
To impose fines 5 1.67
To inculcate traffic sense 26 8.67
To help children to cross road 31 10.33
Total 300 100.00
19) Is it safe to play on road :
Yes 5 1.67
No 295 98.33
Total 300 100.00
10

11. 20) Is it chasing a kite or a ball on road :
Dangerous 297 99.00
Safe 3 1.00
Total 300 100.00
21) Is it safe to run across the road :
Yes 3 1.00
No 297 99.00
Total 300 100.00
22) Is it safe to run at the side of the road :
Safer 60 20.00
Not safer 240 80.00
Total 300 100.00
23) Is it more alert crossing the road in rain :
True 297 99.00
False 3 1.00
Total 300 100.00
24) Do you know what is traffic safety
Yes 278 92.67
No 22 7.33
Total 300 100.00
25) Sources for learning as out traffic safety :
Parents 94 31.33
Teachers 138 46.00
Friends 9 3.00
Police 15 5.00
Voluntary organizations 15 5.00
Others 7 2.33
Total 278 100.00
26) Has any programme been conducted on traffic
safety in your school :
Yes 106 35.33
No 194 64.67
Total 300 100.00
27) Place to conduct road safety awareness programme
some children attended more than one programme :
Schools 46 15.33
On roads/junctions 50 16.67
Police control room 8 2.67
R.T.O. Office 10 3.33
11

12. majority of respondents (240) stated that running at either side of the road is
not safe. 297 respondents (99.00 per cent) felt that they should be more alert
while crossing the road in rain.
VI. Perception of School Children on Road Safety Education Programmes
Table-3 also depicts that large number of respondents (278) have the
knowledge of traffic safety. Of them, 138 child respondents (46.0 per cent)
learnt traffic safety from their teachers, followed by parents (31.33 per cent),
voluntary organizations and police (5.00 per cent each) and friends (3.00 per
cent). About 35.33 per cent of the respondents expressed safety programmes
should be conducted in the school premises whereas a majority 64.67 referred
traffic safety programmes to be conducted outside the school. Further, 16.67
per cent child respondents expressed that to best places to conduct road safety
programmes are important road junctions, followed by schools (15.33 per cent),
R.T.O. Office (3.33 per cent) and police control room (2.67 per cent)
respectively.
VII. Opinions of School children on Reasons for traffic risk in the Study Area:
The reasons for unsafe conditions are many and are presented in
table-4. Rash driving (62.33 per cent), repeated occurrence of accidents at
some road points due to accidents proneness specific to that point, (58.67 per
cent), lack of traffic control (54.67 per cent), alcohol consumption by vehicle
drivers (52.57 per cent), narrow roads (52.33 per cent), high extent of traffic
flow (47.33 per cent), lack of foot paths/zebra crossings (46.33 per cent),
violation of traffic rules (45.33 per cent), lack of traffic sense and absence of
traffic police in the early hours (42.67 per cent each) lack of speed breakers
(39.00 per cent), poor roads /repairs/ pits (38.33 per cent), lack of traffic
signals (35.67 per cent), neglecting traffic signals (31.67 per cent) and
indiscriminate road crossings (25.00 per cent) are reasons specified by the
school children as factors responsible for traffic risk.
12

13. 13

14. Table – 4 : REASONS ATTRIBUTED BY SCHOOL CHILDREN FOR TRAFFIC
UNSAFETY
Reason No. of Respondents % to Total
1. Rash driving 187 62.33
2. Pollution 79 26.33
3. Lack of traffic sense 128 42.67
4. Narrow roads 157 52.33
5. Violating traffic rules 136 45.33
6. Bad road conditions 115 38.33
7. Indiscriminate road crossings 63 21.00
8. Lack of one-ways 29 9.67
9. Lack of speed breakers 17 39.00
10. Lack of footpaths/zebra crossings 139 46.33
11. Driving and drinking 158 52.67
12. Lack of traffic control 164 54.67
13. Not following traffic signals 195 31.67
14. Lack of traffic police presence 128 42.67
VIII. Suggestions given by school children for the Improvement of Road
Safety:
An attempt has also been made to elicit the opinions and suggestions of
school children to improve traffic safety. It is observed from Table-5 that a
majority of respondents suggested that drivers should avoid drinking/rash
driving (67.33 per cent), followed by presence of traffic police at every junction
(56.00 per cent), provision of signal lights at all important junctions (55.00 per
cent), educating children on road safety on a regular basis (53.00 per cent),
elemination of road occupations (45.67 per cent), provision of foot paths/zebra
crossings wherever necessary (43.00 per cent), improve road conditions (39.00
per cent), regulate teenage driving (36.67 per cent), stopping play and run on
roads (31.67 per cent), insisting children to cross road with assistance of the
adults (28.33 per cent), follow traffic rules strictly (27.33 per cent),
slow/cautious driving at schools and placing police at schools during school
opening and closing timings (26.00 per cent each), use NCC/NSS voluntary
agencies to control traffic (25.33 per cent), run more number buses to children
(22.33 per cent), regulating children to walk on foot path and to cross the roads
14

15. at zebra lines (21.00 per cent), earmarking separate lines for cycle/pedestrians
(20.67 per cent) and provision of speed breakers at schools (12.33 per cent).
It is evident from the above analysis that a majority school children are
pedestrians, followed by cycle riders and those who travel by 3-wheeler auto-
rickshaws to reach schools regularly, highlighting their vulnerability on roads.
Moreover, a majority of the children expressed that lots of problems were being
faced due to high density traffic, rash driving, road encroachments, irregular
parking of vehicles, lack of traffic control etc. Apart from this, most of the
educational institutions, schools, colleges are located in the central and core
areas of the city. As a result, the choatic situation is emerging and
significantly affecting safety on roads.
Table - 5 : SUGGESTIONS GIVEN BY RESPONDENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT
OF ROAD SAFETY IN THE STUDY AREA
Item No. of % to
Respondents Total
1) Provision of footpath/zebra crossings wherever 129 43.00
necessary for all roads
2) Avoid playing and running in the/along the roads 95 31.67
3) Improvement road conditions 117 39.00
4) Provide traffic police at every junction 168 56.00
5) Children should walk on footpaths and zebra 63 21.00
crossing only
6) Children cross roads with assistance of the adults 85 28.33
7) Provide signal lights at all important junctions 165 55.00
8) Put speed limit boards at school zones and enforce 21 7.00
9) Require road safety programmes for children 159 53.00
10) Provide speed breakers at schools 37 12.33
11) Traffic police should help children in crossing road 118 39.33
12) Run special buses to children 67 22.33
13) Provide police at schools during school going time 78 26.00
14) Elimination of road footpath encroachments 137 45.67
15) Avoid drunken/rash driving 202 67.33
16) Use voluntary agencies also to control traffic 76 25.33
15

16. In view of the above revelations, the paper recommends ‘safe feet’
programme designed by TRL-DFID for the use of LDCs at School level to be
taught and practiced across four sequential rounds viz., (1) Road Environment;
(2) Pedestrian rules; (3) Traffic rules; and (4) Safe survival.
16