Adjusting vehicle secondary safety ratings to account for crash-avoidance technology fitment using real-world crash...

Publicizing safety ratings of vehicles can motivate manufacturers to prioritize safety and help consumers choose safer vehicles, leading to safer fleets. The benefits of primary safety technologies that prevent crash occurrence are not currently incorporated in current ratings in a way that values their safety benefits consistently. We aimed to propose a method for assigning weights for each safety technology to account for established safety benefits using published effectiveness and prevalence from real-life data.

To illustrate this method, we present a worked example calculated using crash and injury data from Australia and New Zealand. The method proposed attenuates the weights for given safety technologies where two or more safety technologies fitted to the same vehicle are effective for the same types of crashes.

In the worked example using Australasian data, large SUVs were estimated to have the largest safety increment from the fitment of all the technologies considered compared to vehicles without these primary safety technologies, with an almost 17% reduction in crash occurrence. Cars with all the technologies fitted had estimated average crash reduction of between 11% and 12%.

Different market groups have different crash patterns, so the safety attributable to safety technology fitment differs at the market group level. This study presents an approach for providing a summary measure of crash avoidance according to the fitment of safety technologies. If this measure is combined with an estimate of secondary safety (whether derived from existing crash and injury data or from new car crash assessment programs), the combined estimate then represents the important elements of safety provided by the vehicle. The methods presented here form a rational basis for assigning safety ratings to represent the benefits of swiftly developing safety technologies.