不同的行人優先促進方案效果之比較研究

A Comparative Study on the Effects of Different Intervention Programs of Pedestrian Priority Promotion

康翠娟(Tsui-Chuan Kang)

指導教授 ： 白璐

臺北醫學大學/公共衛生暨營養學院/傷害防治學研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6831/TMU.2010.00217

摘要

背景：在國外文獻研究中指出，行人事故傷害占交通事故的2%，死亡卻占了13%8，明顯看出行人在交通上的弱勢。台灣在2002年的資料顯示，行人事故傷害也占交通事故的2%，行人死亡更占了全部交通死亡人數的15%，嚴重性不容忽視。臺北市於2009年9月舉辦聽障奧運，擴大宣導「行車要禮讓行人有保障」，並於聽障奧運場館、比賽地點周邊路口加強對於汽機車於轉彎時不禮讓行人優先通行之交通大執法；有些社區雖然不在政府政策介入的範圍，但也自行擬定了禮讓行人計畫，在社區範圍內執行，這些社區是經過國際認證的安全社區。
目的：本研究旨在比較有無政策介入與是否為安全社區，在汽、機車對行人的禮讓行為上的效果，以找出較有利於未來擴大推廣之介入方式，作為交通傷害防制策略擬訂之參考。
方法：本研究依照有無政府政策介入與是否為安全社區，挑選臺北市4個行政區（內湖、中正、松山及南港區），並選擇4個型態相似之十字路口，以每週三天，每天分上下午時段，計算汽、機車禮讓率，並以SPSS12.0統計套裝軟體進行分析。
結果：整體來說在施行中期，汽車禮讓率從原先58.7%上升至67.1%，機車禮讓率從原先50.2%上升至57.0%，達統計上顯著改變。由於有無政府政策介入與是否為安全社區，在汽、機車禮讓率的改變上有交互作用。因此，以單純主效果檢定：對有政府政策介入的非安全社區而言，其成效僅限於短期，介入結束後，汽、機車禮讓率便大幅下降，無政策介入的非安全社區，汽、機車禮讓率一直偏低。對於安全社區，則無論有無政府政策介入皆有相當程度的汽、機車禮讓率，透過社區持久對行人優先的關注，其效果也延續較久。
結論：車輛禮讓行人是應該持續推動的重要交通措施，且以短期間內之大執法方式其成效亦較為短暫。在通過認證的安全社區，有較正確的安全認知、較正確的安全態度、也有較正確的安全行為，在禮讓行人方面，亦是如此。顯見，透過社區由下而上自發的力量實施的行人優先方案，會比透過政府由上而下的施行方式來的長遠且有效。

關鍵字

行人優先 ； 事故傷害 ； 安全社區

並列摘要

Background：Pedestrians are the vulnerable road users in traffic. In United States, pedestrian injuries account for 2% of total traffic injuries but 13% of traffic injury deaths. Similarly, according to 2002 traffic injury records in Taiwan, pedestrian injuries account for 2% of total traffic injuries but 15% of traffic injury deaths. Pedestrian safety issues can not be ignored.
While the Deaflympic games were held in Taipei City in September 2009, the city government led a pedestrian priority campaign and clamped down on motor vehicle drivers who did not yield to the pedestrians at the intersections within certain districts. For those districts where the strong policy intervention did not apply, some took community initiated actions to reinforce the drivers to allow pedestrians at intersections to go first.
Purpose：The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of the two programs ,
governmental policy intervention and safe community program, on
pedestrian priority promotion.
Method：Based on the conditions of whether there is governmental policy intervention
and whether there is a safe community program, four districts of Taipei City
(neihu, Zhongzheng, Songshan and Nangang) were chosen for this study.
The proportion of motor vehicles yielded to pedestrian at similar
intersection in each of these districts was calculated in the morning and
afternoon for three days a week. SPSS 12.0 was used for data analysis.
Result：In general, the proportions of motor vehicle yield to pedestrian were significantly increased from 58.7% to 67.1% for cars and from 50.2% to 57.0% for motorcycles. Since there was significant interaction between governmental policy intervention and safe community program, simple main effects were tested. The results showed that governmental policy intervention in the district without safe community program had a short term effect on increasing the proportion of yielding to pedestrian behavior, however, once the strong intervention is over, this proportion dropped substantially; in the districts of safe communities, the elevated proportion of yielding to pedestrian kept a long time with or without governmental policy intervention; as to the district without any type of intervention, low proportion of yielding to the pedestrian was found at all data collection time.
Conclusion：The effect of governmental policy intervention using strong clamp down action is a short term effect. Safe community program changed people’s knowledge, attitudes and behaviors and the environment in a slow but sustainable way, and the effect can last longer.

並列關鍵字

pedestrian priorityinjury ； Safe community

參考文獻

48.潘韋靈、林大煜、蔡卓城、謝屈平、劉永弘、邱文達、蔡行瀚、白永嘉：臺灣行人事故傷害之探討。澄清醫護管理雜誌，Vol. 1 No.4,16-23，2005。

49.李德威、吳婕妤：臺北市交通執法成效分析。都市交通季刊，Vol. 20, No. 2, July, PP. 82-91，2005。

58.潘怜燕、張新儀、石曜堂：台灣地區六至十二歲兒童乘坐機車戴安全帽的情形－地區差異及家庭聚集：2001年國民健康訪問調查結果。台灣衛誌2003；22(6)：483-491。

60.蕭淑媺、蘇福智、羅孝賢：臺北市交通安全整體計畫。都市交通半年刊，24(1)：72-87，1999。

74.盧成皆、史麗珠、陳端杰、麥薛提：台灣北部地區三縣市學齡兒童行人傷害之流行病學調查研究，中華公共衛生雜誌，第15卷，第6期，民國85年12月。