Evidence Rating for Outcomes
Crime & Delinquency | Total injury crashes |
Crime & Delinquency | Total property damage only crashes |
Crime & Delinquency | Total red-light running crashes |
Crime & Delinquency | Total crashes |
Date:
Red-light cameras are a traffic enforcement mechanism that permit police to remotely enforce traffic signals, to deter red-light running at signalized intersections. Red-light cameras are a fully automated photo detection system that includes cameras, sensors or triggers, and a computer. The practice is rated Promising for reducing total injury crashes. The practice is rated No Effects for reducing total crashes, total property-damage-only crashes, or total red-light-running crashes.
Practice Goals/Target Sites
Red-light cameras are a traffic enforcement mechanism that permit police to remotely enforce traffic signals, to deter drivers who intentionally run red traffic lights at signalized intersections. Red-light cameras permit police to remotely enforce traffic signals on a continuous basis without human intervention, which allows police to engage in other activities. The red-light cameras provide a physical record of all violations.
Practice Components
Red-light cameras are a fully automated photo detection system that includes three key elements: 1) cameras, 2) sensors or triggers, and 3) a computer. The cameras are located on one arm of an intersection where a red-light-running problem has been identified or are placed on all four corners of an intersection, so that vehicles coming from any direction can be photographed from multiple angles. The cameras are activated if a vehicle moves over two triggers at a predetermined speed. However, if the vehicle has stopped on an induction loop or activates only the first of the two triggers, the computer will not signal the cameras to activate. The cameras take still photos or video images, or both. Modern systems generally use digital cameras, but some older systems may use 35-mm cameras.
Most camera systems take at least two photographs and superimpose the date and time of the red-light violation, the location of the intersection, the speed at which the vehicle was traveling, and the amount of time elapsed between the light turning red and the vehicle entering the intersections (FHA 2004). After the cameras capture images of vehicles as they violate a red traffic signal and the evidence is reviewed, penalty tickets are sent to the address where the violating vehicle is registered.
Public awareness is an essential component of red-light camera programs and is accomplished through public education in media campaigns and posting warning signs in intersections with cameras. Other methods for alerting communities of red-light camera programs include mailing written notices to local residents or implementing a 30-day warning period before beginning the formal enforcement.
Warning signs are designed to increase driver awareness of the automated enforcement and enhance their deterrent effect.
Signs may be posted at or near the intersection with red-light cameras, at major entrance points to the city, or placed at both locations. In some cases, the use and placement of warning signs may be mandated by legislative requirements and can vary by state.
|
Crime & Delinquency | Total injury crashes
Cohn and colleagues (2020) found that, across 16 independent samples from 15 studies, red-light camera interventions had a statistically significant effect on reducing total injury resulting from traffic crashes in intersections with cameras, compared with intersections without cameras. The overall pooled estimate of effect suggests that red-light camera interventions were associated with a 20 percent decrease in total injury resulting from traffic crashes. |
|
Crime & Delinquency | Total property damage only crashes
Cohn and colleagues (2020) found that, across six independent samples from six studies, red-light camera interventions had no statistically significant effect on the total property damage resulting from traffic crashes. |
|
Crime & Delinquency | Total red-light running crashes
Cohn and colleagues (2020) found that, across seven independent samples from six studies, red-light camera interventions had no statistically significant effect on total number of red-light running resulting in traffic crashes. |
|
Crime & Delinquency | Total crashes
Cohn and colleagues (2020) found that, across 23 independent samples from 20 studies, red-light camera interventions had no statistically significant effect on total traffic crashes at intersections. |
Literature Coverage Dates | Number of Studies | Number of Study Participants | |
---|---|---|---|
Meta Analysis | 1970-2015 | 38 | 0 |
Cohn and colleagues (2020) conducted a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of red-light camera interventions on the incidence of red-light camera violations and the incidence and severity of traffic crashes. This analysis updated a previous smaller systematic review by Aeron–Thomas and Hess (2005), which searched studies published 2002 or earlier, by broadening and expanding the literature search and using a more detailed meta-analysis. A four-part search strategy identified literature including (1) searching online electronic bibliographic databases for published and unpublished evaluations of red-light cameras; (2) searching the websites of international institutes and research agencies focusing on transportation issues for reports and other gray literature; (3) searching the reference lists of published studies to identify additional published and unpublished works; and (4) conducting a keyword search using Google and Google Scholar to search for additional gray literature. The review searched for studies up to June 12, 2015.
To be eligible, studies must have assessed the impact of red-light cameras on red-light violations and/or traffic crashes. Studies must have employed a quantitative research design that involved randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental design, a controlled before-after design, or a controlled interrupted time series. Qualitative, observational, or descriptive studies that did not include formal comparisons of treatment and control groups were excluded from this research. Research that included interventions such as speed cameras or enhanced police enforcement were excluded. Studies were eligible regardless of the country in which they were conducted or the date of publication. Comparison groups received normal routine traffic enforcement. Police still could issue citations for traffic violations at control intersections during the study period.
Eligible studies had to measure and report data on at least one of the following outcome measures:
- Red-light violations, based on the number of vehicles passing through a junction after entering on a red light.
- Number, severity, and type of road traffic crashes. This may include the number of total crashes, the number of crashes resulting in injury, the number of property-damage-only crashes, and the number of specific types of crashes (e.g., rear-end crashes; right-angle crashes).
The CrimeSolutions review of this meta-analysis focused on the following outcomes of interest: total number of crashes, total number of crashes resulting in injury, total number of property-damage-only crashes, and total number of red-light-running crashes. Red-light-running crashes were identified as those caused directly by a driver running a red light or failing to yield during a turn on red or any crash in which a red-light violation ticket was issued.
To facilitate comparisons between and among studies, a standardized summary measure based on relative effects was defined for each outcome. Summary measures were based on relative effects, rather than differences in effects, where the outcome after intervention was divided by the outcome before intervention, as an expression of the proportional change in outcome. Summary measures were calculated for all studies when possible. Rate ratios were estimated by dividing the count of the outcome post-intervention and pre-intervention in the intervention area by the corresponding ratio in the control area. Results were pooled in the meta-analysis when at least three studies reported the same outcome; otherwise, the results of individual studies were described.
This analysis examined 38 quasi-experimental studies (including 10 studies from the previous analysis). No randomized controlled trials were found. Most of the 28 newly identified studies were conducted in the United States (20 studies), with studies also from Australia (5 studies), Canada (2 studies), and Singapore (1 study). The newly identified studies were published between 1981 and 2016.
These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:
Cohn, Ellen G., Suman Kakar, Chloe Perkins, Rebecca Steinbach, and Phil Edwards. 2020. "Red-Light Camera Interventions for Reducing Traffic Violations and Traffic Crashes: A Systematic Review." Campbell Systematic Review 16.
These sources were used in the development of the practice profile:
Aeron–Thomas, A., and Hess, S. 2005. “Red-Light Cameras for the Prevention of Road Traffic Crashes (Review).” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2.
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003862.pub2Bochner, B., and T. Walden. 2010. Effectiveness of Red-Light Cameras: A Texas Transportation Institute White Paper (Unpublished paper). Retrieved from
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/10669665/effectiveness-of-red-light-cameras-texas-am-transportation-instituteFederal Highway Administration (FHA). 2004. Using Red-Light Cameras to Reduce Red-Light Running (RLR).
http://library.ite.org/pub/e26c6c49-2354-d714-511a-40d6569511c4FHA. 2005. Red-Light Camera Systems: Operational Guidelines.
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/conventional/signalized/rlr/fhwasa05002/fhwasa05002.pdfSetting (Delivery): Other Community Setting
Practice Type: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design/Design Against Crime, General deterrence, Situational Crime Prevention
Unit of Analysis: Places