1. Information sharing project on road safety strategies Joe Motha Australia

2.  Road safety was recognised as a priority by APEC transport Ministers at the 5th Transportation Ministerial Meeting (TMM5) held in Adelaide in March 2007.  It was agreed at TMM5 that each APEC economy would develop a comprehensive road safety strategy. Introduction Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

3.  At TPT WG29 in Chinese Taipei in July 2007 It was decided that: “A project be initiated for individual APEC economies to share information on their road safety strategies. The project would be led by Australia with support from Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Thailand and Viet Nam.”  This project, initiated by Australia, is the first step in developing formal and structured information sharing in road safety among economies. Introduction Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

4.  Australia developed three matrixes for consideration by the five other economies involved in the project.  The matrixes were intended to be easy to use.  Each matrix was designed to fit on a single page and to contain important summary information for each economy. The matrixes Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

5.  (1) National Road Safety Strategies and Targets in APEC Economies. This matrix summarises information relating to each economy’s national road safety strategy and target.  It includes information on the responsible national agency, the vision or principle on which the target is based, strategy period, monitoring arrangements and current performance against the target. Strategies and targets matrix Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

6.  (2) National Road Safety Strategies in APEC Economies: Status and Information Sources. This matrix provides information on where information on the national strategy can be obtained and contact details of responsible officers.  If an economy does not yet have a national strategy, the matrix provides information on whether or not a strategy is being considered. It also provides for (optional) information on any obstacles that are hindering the development of a national strategy. Status and information matrix Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

7.  (3) Planning Matrix for Implementing a National Road Safety Strategy. This is a basic tool to assist economies which do not have a national strategy.  It is not intended as a reporting matrix (other economies do not need to see it). It is a structured internal planning tool for economies that may wish to use it to progress development of a national road safety strategy and target. Planning matrix Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

8.  This matrix is provided as a guide only and therefore there is no need to require its adoption by any economy.  The matrix can be modified, if required, to suit the individual needs of economies. Planning matrix Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

9.  In November 2007 Australia provided the three draft matrixes to Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Thailand and Viet Nam for comment.  Malaysia indicated that the matrixes were straightforward and easy to use.  Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand did not indicate that any changes were required and provided information for inclusion in the matrixes. Responses from economies involved Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

10.  Need to consider if any changes are required to these matrixes.  Finalise matrixes by incorporating any agreed changes.  Recommend to LEG that matrixes 1 and 2 be adopted by all economies and that economies without a national strategy could consider using matrix 3 or a variant of it. What we need to do Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting

11.  Could we consider whether any changes are required to these matrixes?  Could we recommend to LEG that matrixes 1 and 2 be adopted for information sharing and that matrix 3 be considered for use as a planning tool by economies which do not yet have a strategy? Conclusion Makati City The Philippines 2008 30 th APEC Transportation Working Group Meeting