Content Project background Objectives of the Research Methodology of the Research Research results Conclusions and Recommendations

Handicap International Belgium has been implementing a “road safety” campaign from earlier 2008 to earlier The campaign has aimed to reduce the increasing number of traffic accidents mainly caused by motorcyclists and to encourage all riders to wear a helmet. The campaign strategy has consisted of three stages: Stage 1:Raising awareness of the importance of wearing a helmet Stage 2:Subsidized helmet distribution to mainly students. Stage 3:Road traffic law enforcement and helmet law enforcement BACKGROUND

Solidus Asia Co., Ltd was commissioned by Handicap International Belgium (HIB) for an assessment of helmet wearing amongst motorcyclists in Khan 7 Makara, the most business populated area of Phnom Penh. The project scope covers the assessment of both drivers and passengers on:  Rate of helmet wearing  Proportion of correct and incorrect wearing  General perception toward wearing helmet and its enforcement measures BACKGROUND

STUDY OBJECTIVES -Setting baseline information prior to the rollout of awareness campaign and determining the effectiveness of helmet wearing campaign. -Understanding better the behavioral determinants of motorcycle helmet wearing among youth.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Research I: Pre and post assessment: The Traffic Audit Methodology The Quantitative Research Methodology ( face-to-face survey) Research II: For the second part of the study on behavioral determinants of helmet wearing was carried out among 344 adolescents in Phnom Penh city. The helmet questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior was undertaken with young people focusing on the beliefs, attitudes and behavioral intentions on helmet use

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Theory of Planned Behaviour Campaigns Barriers Skills Explaining Human Behaviour Perceived Behavioral Control

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

STUDY I RESEARCH RESULTS (study I)

Driver RESEARCH RESULTS (study I) In overall, the helmet wearing rate both for drivers and passengers have been increased significantly after the launched of the road safety campaign. It is noted that the rate of helmet wearing for the drivers increase on average of 32% while the rate for passengers increase only (5%).

Passenger RESEARCH RESULTS (study I)

Proportion of Driver Correct/Incorrect Wearing – Overall The post audit suggests that for all locations, in overall the correct helmet wearing rate for drivers increase 10% (from 68% to 78%) and the incorrect helmet wearing rate decrease at the same rate (from 32% to 22%).

RESEARCH RESULTS (study I) Passenger’s Proportion of Correct and Incorrect Wearing – Overall The post audit shows that for all locations, in overall the correct helmet wearing rate for the passengers increase 2% (from 84% to 86%) and the incorrect helmet wearing rate decreases at the same level (from 16% to 14%).

Perception towards an ideal helmet 68% of the total sample size claimed that an ideal helmet has to be of Genuine Quality that Offers High Quality Protection. RESEARCH RESULTS (study I)

Reason why wearing a helmet is not necessary? There are still a few respondents, who believe that a helmet is unnecessary if they “carefully drive” and when they travel “short distance”. Other reasons given for not needing to wear a helmet were related to the “inconveniences” encountered when wearing one —making the head feel too warm, it’s hard to look back etc. Please note that these figures are based on a very small sample. RESEARCH RESULTS (study I)

Opinion which is the most important benefit that would make you wear a helmet? Prior to the campaign, the general opinion about wearing a helmet was that one did it to protect the head and reduce risks when involved in traffic accidents. However after the Campaign, the respondents perceived many more benefits. The most significant change is in the perception that it protects one’s life (a rise from 8% before, to 49% after the campaign), it protects the head and reduces the risks related to traffic accidents. RESEARCH RESULTS (study I)

STUDY II RESEARCH RESULTS (study II)

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Behavioural beliefs The sample thinks favourably about using helmets. Helmets protect from serious head injury, from dust/wind and rain and from trouble with the police. Helmets are not unfashionable, uncomfortable, and they do not impede seeing and hearing traffic. Normative beliefs The sample thinks parents, partners and Cambodian society at large support the use of helmets while this is less the case for friends. Control beliefs The sample thinks driving at night, while being dressed up and for only short distances might negatively affect their personal confidence/ability to wear a helmet. The sample also thinks that driving slowly, while hot, while in a hurry and being inside or outside the city will not negatively affect their personal confidence and ability to wear a helmet. RESEARCH RESULTS (study II)

Attitude The sample evaluates helmet usage as safe and responsible and doesn’t find it an unpleasant or embarrassing experience. Subjective norm The sample experiences enough helmet-supportive pressure from important reference groups. Perceived Behavioural Control The sample is quite confident in its ability to resist non- usage in case other drivers do not wear helmets or when there is no police on the street. RESEARCH RESULTS (study II)

Perceived vulnerability The sample is quite convinced that not wearing the helmet while driving implies an increased risk exposure. An interesting observation is that, ‘not wearing a helmet in the city is very risky’ is somewhat less agreed with. Perceived severity The sample clearly recognizes that driving without helmets may cause serious problems in terms of health, finances and quality of life. Response cost The sample indicates that buying and storing helmets is not too costly, The sample agreed openly with the statement that buying a HIGH QUALITY helmet was too expensive! RESEARCH RESULTS (study II)

Cues to action The sample agreed with the idea that more police enforcement, higher fines and more people wearing helmets stimulate the use of helmets. Behavioural intentions The sample expresses favourable intentions to wear the helmet while driving. Behaviour The sample’s self-reported measures for helmet usage suggest that subjects wear helmets most of the time. Interestingly, scores for self-reported helmet usage INSIDE THE CITY were LOWER. RESEARCH RESULTS (study II)

STUDY I & II CONCLUSIONS

The post traffic audit findings suggested that the helmet wearing rate have increased both for drivers (from 24% to 56%) and passengers (from 6% to 11%). However, the study also indicated that the helmet wearing rate amongst passengers remained very low (only 11%). In terms of “correct and incorrect wearing proportion”, the post audit results indicated that the correct wearing has been increased 15% amongst drivers and 2% amongst passengers. The outcome of the traffic audit concluded that, the helmet wearing rate amongst the passengers remained very low. CONCLUSIONS

To some degree, the campaign did change people’s perceptions of the real benefits of wearing helmets. Despite knowing about the campaign, a few still felt that helmets are unnecessary. Many of them believe they are safe drivers, or that they only travel for short distances and therefore accidents are unlikely. Other reasons given were that it is uncomfortable or cumbersome to wear, or that they feel it is not fashionable and that they tend to forget or lose it. CONCLUSIONS

The sample indicated their personal vulnerability for DRIVING IN GENERAL TO BE QUITE HIGH, we strongly believe that they see themselves as much less vulnerable to danger when DRIVING AT NIGHT, WHILE BEING DRESSED UP or FOR SHORT DISTANCES ONLY. In summary, helmet usage is dependent mostly upon the believed probability that one will wear a helmet or not in a certain situation. Helmet usage is determined by the individual’s perceived ability to resist to the tendency of not using the helmet in a situation that is believed to be less dangerous. CONCLUSIONS

An important conclusion that can be drawn from these results, is that the choice to wear helmets (or not) appears to be based on a DECISION rather than being an AUTOMATISM. Wearing a motorcycle helmet is linked with perceived risk and not all situations are considered risky by the road user. CONCLUSIONS

The target population was very much aware of the fact that wearing a helmet protects them from head injuries (i.e. knowledge about the benefits of helmet wearing is good). The actual wearing of a helmet, though, was linked to the perceived risk and not all situations are considered risky by the road user. Therefore, further effort needs to focus on changing the perception on which situations constitute a risk, namely that all situations without a helmet are risky. The aim will be to make helmet wearing a habit at all times through raising public awareness, targeting youth and strengthening helmet law enforcement. RECOMMENDATIONS

To launch the activity to address the risk of being as passenger when travelling by motorcycle without wearing a helmet. Not only to emphasize on the risk aspect but also to register the disobedience of the law too. The follow-up activity can also be coordinated with “suppliers” e.g. selling motorbikes with matching helmets, newer designs using lighter materials that adhere to the minimum safety requirements, or more fashionable designs such as denim prints or the use of blue jeans fabric as exterior cover, etc. RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduce topic of “Road Safety” in school curriculum. They need to know the traffic laws and practice themselves in order to get score passing the examination. The traffic polices should be deployed everywhere, every corner – not just at the check points. Doing this, the traffic police will have more chances to enforce the laws. But this message needs to be communicated clearly with the traffic police. RECOMMENDATIONS

To summarize, if the objective is to stimulate the target sample’s intentions to always wear helmets while driving, policy and practitioners should maximize subjects’ ability to resist certain situational context factors (i.e., driving at night, short distances and while being dressed up). In addition to that, policy makers and program developers should confirm, support and strengthen the positive attitude and personal norm towards helmet usage which are already present in the sample. RECOMMENDATIONS

THANK YOU!