Eight in 10 motorists believe average speed cameras are more
effective and play a greater role in road safety than traditional
cameras that catch speeding drivers in one location, new research
has found.
Seventy-nine per cent of 2,172 motorists surveyed by the RAC* say
average speed cameras, as commonly used in to monitor the speed
of vehicles in stretches of motorway roadworks, are better at
slowing down vehicles compared to just one in 10 (9%) who felt
single location cameras were more effective.
While 70% of those questioned felt traditional speed cameras were
effective at getting drivers to slow down at their specific
location, 80% said they made little difference beyond where they
are sited.
In contrast average speed cameras, which work over longer
distances between two or more locations, were thought to be far
better at getting drivers to stick to the speed limit with 86%
claiming they were very (38%) or reasonably (48%) effective. Only
12% did not believe them to be very effective.
When asked if they felt one type of camera was fairer on
motorists, nearly half (46%) said that it was not a question of
whether one is fairer than the other, but that they are both
there to improve road safety. However, a quarter (25%) believe
average speed cameras are fairer on drivers while one in five
(18%) maintained there was no difference. Only 7% said fixed, one
location speed cameras were fairer on motorists.
Among those who thought average speed cameras were fairer, 81%
claim they promote a smoother driving style and more consistent
driving speeds, rather than drivers hitting the brakes to conform
to the limit briefly when driving past a single location camera.
Just over half (53%) believe they are fairer to drivers that
accidentally drift above the speed limit very briefly and 17%
think that the signage used to highlight them is better and
easier for drivers to take in.
Motorists’ opinions about the purpose of speed cameras as a whole
is divided, although there is acknowledgement from the majority
that they play a valuable road safety role. A third of those
surveyed (37%) believe they are intended to improve road safety
by slowing down drivers at accident blackspots and places of
danger while another third (36%) say they are there to both
improve road safety and raise revenue from drivers. Just over a
quarter (27%) are more cynical claiming they are primarily about
raising cash from drivers.
RAC road safety spokesman Pete Williams said: “We know that some
drivers can be very cynical about speed cameras, with a
significant minority having told us they believe they are more
about raising revenue than they are about road safety.
Interestingly, these latest findings show there is now a strong
acceptance that they are there to help save lives and prevent
casualties on the road, although more than a third (36%) claim
they are about both road safety and raising revenue.
“Our research suggests the growing use of average speed cameras
in motorway roadworks and increasingly on sections of A-road is
reinforcing the road safety message as they are extremely
effective at slowing down drivers. For instance, on the A9 in
Scotland the number of deaths has halved since average speed
cameras were introduced between Dunblane and Inverness in October
2014. This type of use of average speed cameras, together with
the constant addition of more miles of smart motorways with
strictly enforced variable speed limits, may be contributing to a
shift in perception in favour of regulated speed enforcement over
longer stretches of road.
“Speed is one of the main contributory factors in many road
collisions so measures that effectively reduce speed over greater
distances will mean fewer lives are lost or ruined on our roads.
And even though drivers accept this, many still have issues with
single location cameras as in places other than accident
blackspots, they don’t appear to have lasting effect on
behaviour.”
Ends
Notes to Editors
* Survey carried out with 2,172 members of the RAC Opinion Panel.
