A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL · PDF filePLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS ... A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ... Jenderal Bina

A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS

Working Towards a Safer National Road Network for all Indonesians

A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS

Working Towards a Safer National Road Network for all Indonesians

CONSULTANT REPORT

Date: August 2013

INDONESIA INFRASTRUCTURE INITIATIVE

This document has been published by the Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative (IndII), an Australian Government funded project designed to promote economic growth in Indonesia by enhancing the relevance, quality and quantum of infrastructure investment.

The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australia Indonesia Partnership or the Australian Government. Please direct any comments or questions to the IndII Director, tel. +62 (21) 7278 0538, fax +62 (21) 7278 0539. Website: www.indii.co.id.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report has been prepared by Eric Howard, Team Leader and Dr. Tri Tjahjono, Senior Advisor of Whiting Moyne P/L, who were engaged under the Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative (IndII), funded by AusAID, as part of the Activity T250.07.

The support and input provided by DGH staff, particularly Herry Vaza and his staff within the Subdit TLKJ of Bintek, is gratefully acknowledged. The report also draws on material prepared for IndII by VicRoads International and Road Safety International in recent years. Any errors of fact or interpretation are solely those of the authors.

Eric Howard

Jakarta, August, 2013

© IndII 2013

All original intellectual property contained within this document is the property of the Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative (IndII). It can be used freely without attribution by consultants and IndII partners in preparing IndII documents, reports designs and plans; it can also be used freely by other agencies or organisations, provided attribution is given.

Every attempt has been made to ensure that referenced documents within this publication have been correctly attributed. However, IndII would value being advised of any corrections required, or advice concerning source documents and/ or updated data.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................ IV

RINGKASAN EKSEKUTIF (BAHASA) ............................................................................ V

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... XVII

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................. 1

CHAPTER 2: DGH PROGRESS TO DATE ....................................................................... 2

2.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ROAD SAFETY ENGINEERING TEAM ......... 2

2.2 PRIORITY TECHNICAL FAMILIARISATION COURSES ........................ 2

2.3 EXPOSURE TO RELEVANT GOOD PRACTICE .................................... 2

2.4 FACT FINDING MISSIONS.............................................................. 4

2.5 IRAP PILOT PROJECT .................................................................... 5

2.6 ROAD SAFETY ENGINEERING MANUALS AND DVDS ....................... 5

2.7 LAIK FUNGSI ................................................................................ 6

2.8 POLICY FRAMEWORK ................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 3: CURRENT CAPABILITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ........................................... 9

3.1 SUB-DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND ROAD SAFETY

AFFAIRS ...................................................................................... 9

3.2 ROLES OF BALAI AND WILAYAH (REGIONAL DIRECTORATES) ....... 13

3.3 PRIVATE SECTOR CONSULTING EXPERTISE .................................. 16

CHAPTER 4: INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ........................................................... 17

4.1 NRSMP POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR DGH ................................... 17

4.2 A FRAMEWORK FOR FUTURE DGH ROAD SAFETY PROGRAM ....... 24

4.3 LAIK FUNGSI EXTENSION ............................................................ 25

4.4 FUTURE ROAD SAFETY KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ............. 26

4.5 FUNDING OF ROAD SAFETY ACTIVITY ......................................... 27

4.6 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING FOR NRSMP DELIVERY ............ 31

4.7 BALAI – A FOCUS FOR STRENGTHENING ...................................... 33

4.8 CENTRAL SUPPORT STRENGTHENING (RSET) ............................... 34

4.9 STAGED IMPLEMENTATION OF ROAD SAFETY AUDIT ................... 35

4.10 IMPLEMENTATION OF BLACKSPOT TREATMENTS ........................ 39

4.11 NEED FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING EXPERTISE .............................. 39

4.12 APPLICATION OF IRAP ................................................................ 40

CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 41

ANNEX 1A: IMMEDIATE ROAD SAFETY STRENGTHENING RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 46

ii

ANNEX 1B: MEDIUM TERM ROAD SAFETY STRENGTHENING RECOMMENDATIONS . 51

ANNEX 2A: IMMEDIATE RESOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES ... 53

ANNEX 2B: MEDIUM TERM RESOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES58

iii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Extract of DGH Responsibilities as detailed in the NRSMP ................................. 8

Table 2. Extract of DGH Responsibilities as Detailed in the NRSMP with Detailed Commentary (in italics) ................................................................................................... 19

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Structure of Subdit TLKJ, Bintek, DGH................................................................ 9

Figure 2. Framework for safety improvement on existing roads ................................... 24

iv

ACRONYMS

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

DGH Directorate General of Highways

IndII Indonesia Infrastructure initiative

Subdit TLKJ Sub Direktorat Teknik Lingkungan dan Keselamatan Jalan

RENSTRA Rencana Strategi (DGH five year performance plan)

RSET Road Safety Engineering Team (within Subdit TLKJ)

RSA Road Safety Audit

Balai Besar Grouping of larger provincial offices of DGH

Balai Grouping of provincial offices of DGH

iRAP International Road Assessment Program

EINRIP Eastern Indonesia National Road Improvement Project

RSACRP Road Safety Audits and Crash Reduction Program

P2JN Project management groups within each Balai

MoT Ministry of Transportation

INP – Traffic Corps Indonesian National Police – Traffic Corps

Bappenas Central Planning Agency of National Government

DAK Dana Alokasi Khusus (Nationally allocated budget funds)

Bintek Technical Services Directorate, DGH

NRSMP National Road Safety Master Plan, 2011-2035

MoHA Ministry of Home Affairs

Kemen LH Ministry of Environment

SLSF Signs, Linemarking, Signals and Furniture

MDBs Multilateral Development Banks

Bipran Program Planning Directorate, DGH

IRE Institute of Road Engineering/Research and Development Centre of Roads and Bridges), Ministry of Public Works, Indonesia

IFIs International Financing Institutions (Multilateral Development Banks, Bilateral Aid Development Agencies)

v

RINGKASAN EKSEKUTIF (BAHASA)

Laporan ini memberikan saran kepada Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga tentang prioritas pendekatan lebih lanjut yang dibutuhkan untuk mengutamakan keselamatan jalan dengan segala aktivitasnya.

Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga sudah memulai perjalanan panjang untuk meningkatkan keselamatan jaringan jalan nasional dengan gerakan memprioritaskan kapasitas keselamatan jalan - sebagaimana tercermin dalam kegiatan-kegiatannya yang meliputi konstruksi, perbaikan dan pemeliharaan jalan serta kegiatan operasional.

Komitmen dan pencapaian Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dalam membangun sebuah landasan kapasitas keselamatan jalan yang dilakukan di tingkat pusat selama 3 tahun terakhir yang menyediakan dukungan kepada sebuah organisasi secara luas telah dilakukan secara mengesankan, dibantu oleh dukungan yang sangat penting melalui IndII - AusAID. Langkah-langkah penting telah dilakukan dengan cara yang telah dipersiapkan untuk mengutamakan keselamatan jalan ke dalam kebijakan-kebijakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga, proses dan pemikiran untuk menjalankannya - tetapi hal ini harus diakui bahwa masih merupakan perjalanan yang panjang.

Tantangan-tantangan yang cukup banyak terbentang ke depan dalam mencapai sebuah organisasi keselamatan jalan yang stabil termasuk budaya keselamatan jalan dalam arti yang luas di dalamnya. Inilah saatnya untuk melakukan perubahan dalam pembinaan jalan dan ditanamkan ke seluruh Balai dan organisasi Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga.

Progres penanganan black spot (Daerah Rawan Kecelakaan) dan Audit Keselamatan Jalan

Pembentukan tim teknis keselamatan jalan (RSET) dalam Subdit TLJK telah menjadi langkah pertama yang penting. Implementasi yang sekarang ini sedang dilakukan adalah penanganan black spot (daerah rawan kecelakaan) untuk memenuhi target-target RENSTRA Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dan berdasarkan dukungan IndII kepada Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dalam identifikasi, analisa dan desain penanganan, yang sedang dilakukan sampai dengan tahun 2014. Hal ini mengandalkan kapasitas yang dikembangkan di dalam RSET selama dua tahun terakhir.

Kapasitas audit keselamatan jalan juga telah diperkenalkan ke dalam RSET dan sebagaimana untuk black spot, tantangan sekarang berubah menjadi pengadopsian praktek-praktek audit yang disetujui dalam praktek-praktek desain arus utama untuk proyek baru dan proyek rekonstruksi di Balai.

Pelatihan para auditor keselamatan jalan di dalam dan di luar Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dan menyusun akreditasi pihak ketiga untuk para auditor terlatih tersebut menjadi suatu keharusan.

vi

Rencana Umum Nasional Keselamatan jalan Nasional

Kunci kebijakan-kebijakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga secara menyeluruh berdasarkan dari rencana strategisnya. Sedangkan Rencana Umum Nasional Keselamatan jalan (RUNK) merupakan sebuah dokumen penting yang menyediakan pedoman keselamatan jalan dan menentukan komitmen-komitmen tindakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga sebagai bagian dari pilar “jalan yang berkeselamatan,” di dokumen RENSTRA, rencana aksi RUNK belum diadopsi secara formal oleh Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Disarankan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga mengadopsi perencanaan tersebut di dalam perencanaan strategisnya saat ini – memahami rencana ini dapat membimbing aktivitas-aktivitas yang berhubungan dengan jalan dan akan sepenuhnya diterima dalam Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Tindakan ini juga akan memberi isyarat dukungan terhadap adopsi pendekatan sistem berkeselamatan kepada keselamatan jalan sebagai sebuah aturan yang kuat terhadap pedoman prinsip-prinsip keselamatan oleh Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk jaringan jalan nasional dalam beberapa dekade ke depan.

Mengkaji standar-standar

Terdapat prioritas untuk meninjau dan melakukan beberapa perubahan substansial untuk standar desain jalan dan jembatan yang terkait dengan keselamatan jalan dan hal ini sudah diperkuat di dalam kegiatan inspeksi-inspeksi keselamatan jalan iRAP yang sudah dijalankan oleh IndII dengan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga melalui proses pengumpulan data otomatis pada bagian-bagian jaringan selama dua tahun terakhir.

Mengutamakan – sistem berkeselamatan berdasarkan pengembangan kebijakan – hasil akhir dan proses

Bekerja untuk mengutamakan keselamatan jalan di dalam aktivitas-aktivitas Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dan untuk merubah jaringan jalan nasional lebih ke arah yang berkeselamatan dengan perencanaan/prinsip-prinsip sistem keselamatan merupakan sebuah tantangan jangka panjang yang akan membutuhkan kesepakatan besar Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga selama lebih dari 30 tahun ke depan. Pembelajaran setahap demi setahap, umpan balik dan pengarahan ulang sesekali diperlukan karena risiko-risiko dan penyelesaian-penyelesaian potensial akan dapat dipahami dengan baik.

Sebagai hasil dari pencarian ‘arus utama’ keselamatan jalan ini akan terdapat berbagai pengembangan kebijakan yang diperlukan oleh Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dalam jangka waktu pendek sampai menengah. Proses untuk diadopsi antara lain:

untuk memfasilitasi pengembangan kebijakan baru,

untuk mendukung konsiderasi keselamatan jalan di dalam seluruh organisasi untuk level senior,

untuk konsultasi yang akan ditindaklanjuti oleh staff operasional,

untuk diberlakukannya menyeluruh kebijakan yang telah disepakati melalui seluruh organisasi,

vii

Akibatnya akan membutuhkan banyak pertimbangan yang mendalam. Untuk ini diperlukan tinjauan komprehensif untuk terjadinya perubahan kebijakan yang selama ini didekati secara tradisional.

Gerakan untuk merefleksikan agenda keselamatan sebagai bagian utama pembangunan dan operasional jalan tidak dapat dianggap masalah sederhana. Gerakan ini merupakan sasaran yang sangat penting bagi Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dalam tahun-tahun ke depan. Direkomendasikan bahwa seminar setengah hari bagi manajemen senior perlu diadakan untuk mempertimbangkan hal ini dan masalah-masalah yang berkaitan dalam tiga hingga empat bulan ke depan.

Analisa risiko tabrakan dan intervensi melalui – manajemen lalu lintas dan infastruktur

Pengadopsian program substansial perbaikan-perbaikan black spot, audit keselamatan jalan, penilaian risiko tabrakan jaringan dan campur tangan program-program pengembangan untuk seluruh jaringan sangatlah direkomendasikan – namun hal ini akan membutuhkan komitmen dari Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Peningkatan rekayasa lalu lintas misalnya, saat ini terabaikan di seluruh Indonesia dan tindakan awal yang diperlukan untuk meningkatkan pengetahuan dan penerapannya.

Peran RSET dan prioritas-prioritas pembangunan

Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga memerlukan RSET di dalam Subdit TLJK untuk bertindak sebagai pusat keahlian dalam mendukung peluncuran dari setiap program-program keselamatan di seluruh Balai dan, sesuai dengan tupoksi Direktorat Jendral Bina Marga.

Organisasi pelatihan yang ekstensif di tingkat Balai akan diperlukan dan para ahli akan dibutuhkan di pusat dalam jangka waktu pendek untuk mendukung kegiatan ini. Singkatnya, alih pengetahuan secara substansi kepada Balai di beberapa wilayah akan diperlukan.

Fungsi-fungsi RSET yang direkomendasikan meliputi:

ketentuan usulan strategis kepada Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk perbaikan hasil akhir keselamatan jalan dan penyampaian tindakan-tindakan RUNK

dukungan untuk Balai, termasuk kursus pelatihan, secara setahap demi setahap meningkatkan pemahaman dan aplikasi pendekatan sistem keselamatan, audit keselamatan jalan, analisa rekayasa lalu lintas dan analisis dan penanganan daerah rawan kecelakaan

perbaikan pedoman dan standar pengembangan, pedoman dan alat penilaian risiko kecelakaan, termasuk pembaharuan manual audit keselamatan jalan raya Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga

ketentuan bantuan dan dukungan untuk provinsi, kota, kabupaten dan otoritas jalan tol sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam Undang-undang Jalan No. 38 dan sebagaimana dinyatakan dalam Rencana Aksi (Renaksi) RUNK

viii

membimbing pengembangan kebijakan-kebijakan keselamatan jalan lebih lanjut berdasarkan pengalaman di, dan timbal balik dari, Balai, untuk pengadopsian oleh manajemen senior

mendukung Balai dalam membangun dan mengawasi akses data tabrakan Polisi; mendukung analisa Balai akan data tersebut untuk menentukan lokasi-lokasi dan ruas jalan yang berisiko kecelakaan lebih tinggi dan mengimplementasikan program-program identifikasi dan penanganan black spot.

pengenalan dukungan progresif akan audit keselamatan jalan;

membuat pengaturan-pengaturan untuk menetapkan tata cara akreditasi – dengan organisasi profesional seperti Lembaga Pengembangan Jasa Konstruksi, (LPJK) – dan menetapkan persyaratan-persyaratan kursus pelatihan dengan IRE sesuai dengan kebijakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga yang diadopsi untuk RSA

mendapatkan pendanaan dan sumber daya untuk program-program pelatihan kepada Balai;

memonitor pengetasan kegiatan iRAP di Balai IV dan bekerja dengan seluruh Balai untuk merekomendasikan kebijakan-kebijakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk penggunaan iRAP (di seluruh Balai); dan

melaporkan melalui Direktorat Bintek secara teratur kepada manajemen senior mengenai perkembangan kewajiban-kewajiban ini.

Tim ahli rekayasa keselamatan jalan (RSET) oleh karena itu perlu diperkuat dan disusun untuk memenuhi tuntutan-tuntutan yang significan ini dan untuk menjamin operasional mereka tetap berkesinambungan di masa mendatang setelah kegiatan-kegiatan IndII di Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga berakhir.

Terdapat indikasi-indikasi bahwa peraturan-peraturan manajemen yang berbeda beroperasi untuk para konsultan nasional (didanai oleh IndII) dan untuk pegawai Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Hal ini menyebabkan kesulitan-kesulitan. Dua komponen RSET saat ini perlu dikelola sebagai unit terpadu oleh Kepala tim, yang perlu memiliki kewenangan untuk memobilisasi para konsultan nasional. IndII memohon kegiatan spesifik oleh para konsultan nasional harus disampaikan melalui Kepala RSET.

Prioritas pengembangan di seluruh Balai

Balai membutuhkan sumber daya di dua tingkatan. Tim Rekayasa Keselamatan Jalan diperlukan di setiap Balai pada awal tahun 2013 (2 sampai 3 insinyur dan 2 pegawai administrasi) dan sumberdaya RSE juga diperlukan di setiap kelompok P2JN.

Sumber-sumber daya ini akan memungkinkan aktivitas pengembangan program black spot yang diperluas secara substansial untuk dimulai di tahun 2013 (setidaknya untuk dua Balai) untuk membangun pengetahuan/keahlian. Hal ini menanggapi permintaan-permintaan dari Balai untuk tindakan awal pada skala pemahaman pengetahuan (sekitar program-program black spot) untuk dikembangkan.

ix

Untuk proposal-proposal jalan baru (dan rekonstruksi utama), desain jalan-jalan yang lebih aman/sistem keselamatan harus mulai diterapkan pada tahap konsep proyek dan Audit Keselamatan Jalan (RSA) harus diperkenalkan sebagai sebuah prioritas pada desain dan tahap-tahap pra penyelesaian.

RSA harus diperkenalkan dalam cara yang disepakati di semua Balai selama transisi beberapa tahun ke depan ke pelaksanaan yang lebih luas. Sebuah audit Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga yang ditingkatkan adalah diperlukan.

Penyampaian pelatihan black spot dan RSA yang intensif akan diperlukan di setiap Balai selama dua tahun ke depan (2013 dan 2014) melalui ahli internasional dan pegawai Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Dua program yang terpisah harus diberikan kepada pegawai yang secara aktif terlibat di Balai:

(1) analisa black spot dan program-program pengembangan penanganan dan rekayasa lalu lintas

(2) program-program audit keselamatan jalan/ jalan-jalan yang berkeselamatan dengan pendekatan-pendekatan desain/sistem keselamatan.

Pelatihan satu hari penuh setiap bulan di setiap Balai diusulkan secara terpisah untuk setiap berkas.

Fokus kepada pengembangan di tingkat korporasi – iRAP, sistem yang aman dan pendekatan-pendekatan laik fungsi

Terdapat program yang penting yang akan mendukung pengembangan literatur yang aman dan perbaikan lebih lanjut untuk Balai di waktu yang akan datang.

iRAP

Sebuah program kunci akan menjadi penilaian risiko kecelakaaan iRAP dan alat pengembangan penanganan - yang mana sebuah proyek percontohan saat ini sedang direncanakan (untuk membangun kegiatan percontohan kecil yang dilakukan pada tahun 2011). iRAP akan menjadi bagian penting masa depan keselamatan jalan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga sebagai alat kunci – hal ini akan memungkinkan bagian-bagian berisiko tinggi dari jaringan akan mudah diidentifikasi dengan menggunakan teknologi dan tanggapan yang relevan akan mudah dihasilkan untuk memungkinkan pemilihan lokasi dari lokasi-lokasi yang paling tepat untuk penanganan dengan biaya yang paling efektif. Namun, hal ini bukan sebuah pengganti untuk wawasan dan pengalaman dan akan membutuhkan keterampilan dan pengetahuan untuk memahami dan menggunakannya.

Kebijakan untuk penggunaan iRAP berdasarkan penanganan-penanganan yang akan dikembangkan di pilot program IRAP Balai IV yang akan dilaksanakan selama tahun 2012 dan 2013. Kelompok Balai IV akan memerlukan keikutsertaan dari RSET untuk membangun kebijakan yang kuat untuk penerapan iRAP yang sesuai dengan pendekatan ke seluruh Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga selama 10 sampai 20 tahun yang akan datang - pengalihan secara substansial pengetahuan dan tugas pelatihan.

x

Sistem keselamatan

Untuk mendukung gerakan mencapai sistem keselamatan pada jaringan (dalam hal kebijakan-kebijakan keselamatan dan pedoman-pedoman untuk proyek-proyek baru), disarankan agar proyek berfokus pada diskusi peer group diperkenalkan secara progresif di Balai untuk proyek-proyek (selama dua tahun ke depan) di tahap konseptual atau desain pendahuluan, (sebelum kegiatan audit dimulai pada tahap desain yang terperinci) untuk mempertimbangkan prinsip-prinsip sistem keselamatan yang berlaku untuk sebuah proyek dan desain dan operasionalnya – sebelum tahap desain yang terperinci dimulai.

Laik Fungsi

Program laik fungsi yang saat ini sedang dilaksanakan akan menjadi blok bangunan penting tentang keselamatan. Kekurangan-kekurangan keselamatan yang ada di luar bagian potongan melintang perkerasan jalan tetapi berdampak pada operasi yang aman dari panjang jalan akan dapat diidentifikasi dan program pekerjaan dapat dikembangkan relatif cepat setelah selesainya pemeriksaan-pemeriksaan untuk memperbaiki panjang jalan tersebut menjadi level yang meningkat dalam hal risiko kecelakaan tabrakan.

Dalam jangka pendek, berdasarkan manfaat penanganan-penanganan tertentu, sebuah program, (misalnya perkerasan bahu jalan), dapat diterapkan untuk ruas jalan yang telah menerima penilaian laik fungsi dan tentunya di mana lebar rumija memungkinkan bahu jalan diaspal dan lebar lajur tambahan dapat dibangun saat ini. Program tersebut akan, jika diterapkan di semua ruas yang sudah dinilai, memiliki dampak terukur pada tingkat kematian yang terjadi pada ruas-ruas jalan tersebut.

Kelompok kerja, yang direkomendasikan dibawah ini, dapat dibentuk untuk mengawasi pengembangan ini.

iRAP mendukung penguatan hasil-hasil laik fungsi

Dalam jangka panjang iRAP akan menyediakan sebuah alat yang sangat berharga untuk mendukung pembangunan pengembangan keselamatan sebagai pondasi laik fungsi. Perjanjian seputar upgrade keselamatan laik fungsi jangka panjang pada ruas-ruas jalan yang telah dinilai akan dipandu oleh hasil akhir penilaian risiko kecelakaan iRAP dan pilihan-pilihan perawatan yang teridentifikasi. Proses yang akan ditindaklanjuti akan membutuhkan diskusi dan perjanjian substansial perusahaan.

Penggunaan hasil dari IRAP adalah untuk mengidentifikasi peningkatan keselamatan yang potensial selanjutnya untuk laik fungsi secara individual yang menilai bagian-bagian yang akan menjadi lanjutan kesempatan utama yang akan digali oleh pilot program Balai IV.

xi

Pengembangan Staff

Pengembangan profesional kepegawaian akan menjadi penting untuk melanjutkan membangun kapasitas. Kegiatan-kegiatan seperti jangka pendek (durasi dua sampai empat minggu) pertukaran pegawai dengan para pembina jalan internasional dan seminar-seminar untuk pegawai Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga oleh staff ahli Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dan para ahli internasional dan memperoleh masukan mengenai hal-hal yang berkaitan dengan kebijakan keselamatan jalan harus dikejar. Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga akan mendapatkan keuntungan dari diterimanya ide-ide baru dan mendorong perubahan secara terus-menerus dan peningkatan budaya kerja.

fokus kepada kinerja di Tingkat Korporasi

Pengadopsian keselamatan jalan terpilih KPI yang sesuai pada level perusahaan adalah penting untuk mendorong kinerja. Tidak ada satu pun di tempat saat ini. Dua korporasi keselamatan jalan KPI yang direkomendasikan:

pengurangan kecelakaan jalan yang menyebabkan kematian tahunan sebesar 15% pada tahun 2016 (dibandingkan dengan tingkat kecelakaan tahun 2012/2013) pada "laik fungsi" yang dinilai dengan pengerasan bahu jalan,penanganan black spot dan melakukan manajemen kecepatan di jaringan jalan pada bagian jalan yang berlaik fungsi.

zero tolerance accident atau nir kecelakaan lalu lintas di zona pekerjaan jalan menuju masalah-masalah kesehatan kerja dan keselamatan lingkungan (Health,Safety and Environment/HSE).

Indikator Kinerja Utama (KPI) yang lebih rinci yang diusulkan untuk Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk pilar jalan berkeselamatan dalam RUNK harus ditinjau ulang dan disetujui pengadopsian KPI, termasuk rincian seperti bagaimana kegiatan program keselamatan akan diukur, dilaporkan dan seberapa sering dilakukannya.

Sumber daya dan kebutuhan pendanaan

Kebutuhan pendanaan untuk mencapai pelaksaan perencanaan dalam laporan ini menjadi masalah substansial untuk diperhatikan.

Susunan kepegawaian

Akan terdapat biaya-biaya kepegawaian substansial karena Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga akan meningkatkan penetapan di setiap Balai dan mengisi posisi-posisi ini, serta memperkuat penetapan RSET secara terpusat. Hal ini penting untuk mengembangkan otoritas keselamatan jalan yang terfokus.

Saran

Saran teknis dari para ahli internasional untuk mendukung ketetapan pelatihan dalam sistem keselamatan, RSA, black spot dan rekayasa lalu lintas untuk Balai melalui RSET –

xii

selama periode dua tahun – akan membutuhkan pendanaan. Perkiraan indikatif sudah disiapkan.

Program-program tahunan

Anggaran-anggaran indikatif untuk perkenalan program komprehensif black spot tahunan dan nanti (setelah 2014) untuk sebuah program berdasarkan iRAP substansial tahunan juga sudah diperkirakan.

Spesifik “alokasi” (mata anggaran) pendanaan keselamatan jalan

Keengganan untuk memberikan kategori pendanaan untuk kegiatan keselamatan yang spesifik yang akan dilaksanakan pertama kalinya, seperti black spot, adalah sebuah tanggapan yang dapat dipahami kebutuhan jumlah kategori pekerjaan sebagai efisiensi administrasi. Bagaimanapun akan memberikan dampak pencegahan dari pengukuran yang ada dalam tren pengeluaran (oleh Balai dan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga secara keseluruhan) dalam hal investasi keselamatan yang spesifik seperti penanganan black spot, dan hal ini harus dikajiulang.

Dampak-dampak RSA

Bagi proyek-proyek jalan baru dan proyek-proyek rehabilitasi dibutuhkan tambahan pendanaan untuk menangani potensi penambahan biaya proyek untuk beberapa pekerjaan yang diperlukan yang teridentifikasi dalam audit keselamatan jalan pada tahap pra-penyelesaian.

Penanggung jawab penyediaan rambu-rambu, garis marka, alat pemberi isyarat lalu lintas (APILL) dan Fasilitas perlengkapan jalan atau SLSF

Saat ini patut dipahami bahwa kebijakan-kebijakan terkini adalah Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga hanya memasang marka jalan pada jalan baru, dimana terdapat beberapa dukungan di dalam Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk memulai diskusi tentang pendanaan SLSF (signs, line marking, signals and roadside furniture) dan organisasi yang bertanggungjawab untuk pemasangan di seluruh jalan nasional, sebagai bagian dari penanganan black spot . Koordinasi pemasangan SLSF berkualitas tinggi dengan komponen-komponen penanganan black spot adalah sangat penting untuk keselamatan umum, sebagaimana upaya pemeliharaan yang sudah berjalan, khususnya untuk rambu lalulintas, yang cenderung terabaikan saat ini. Disarankan bahwa diskusi-diskusi diselenggarakan oleh secepat mungkin dengan Bappenas (sebagai fasilitator), Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat, Kementerian Dalam Negeri (jika relevan untuk keterkaitan dengan pemerintah daerah) dan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga, untuk mempertegas pemahaman dan persetujuan bersama terhadap masalah SLSF. Keterlibatan yang kooperatif dan berbagi informasi dengan Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat - dan instansi vertikalnya pada pemerintahan daerah tentunya - tentang penilaian risiko kecelakaan dan program penanganan black spot Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga akan membantu pengembangan Indonesia yang lebih baik pada konteks ini, mendukung promosi manfaat peningkatan pemasangan SLSF dan membantu pemerintahan kabupaten/kota dan provinsi dalam

xiii

mengembangkan kapasitas/kemampuan untuk mengatasi kebutuhan substansial pada jaringan-jaringan mereka sendiri. Akan menjadi menguntungkan juga untuk melibatkan Polisi Lalu Lintas dalam diskusi dan briefing spesifik yang terkait dengan SLSF.

Pelatihan tentang keselamatan kerja lapangan

Prioritas utama untuk Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga yang saat ini diluncurkan ke seluruh Balai mengenai pelatihan tentang keselamatan kerja lapangan dengan menggunakan buku panduan dan baru baru ini IndII meluncurkan panduan dalam bentuk DVD.

Kelompok-kelompok kerja menyusun rekomendasi-rekomendasi kebijakan yang mudah untuk dilaksanakan

Untuk mendukung tugas penyusunan kebijakan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga di masa depan dalam menyusun prioritas-prioritas keselamatan jalan, direkomendasikan pembentukan kelompok-kelompok kerja untuk meneliti tantangan kebijakan jangka menengah dan menyusun rekomendasi-rekomendasi kebijakan yang lengkap dan mudah untuk dilaksanakan untuk manajemen senior. Masing-masing kelompok harus:

menunjuk seorang pemimpin

mempunyai kerangka acuan yang jelas

akses kepada hukum dan ahli lainnya

konsultasi dengan beberapa lembaga jika diperlukan

jangka waktu yang dipantau untuk pelaporan akhir mengenai rekomendasi kepada manajemen senior

Kerangka kerja manajemen senior dimana kelompok-kelompok ini akan melaporkan, kemungkinan akan diselenggarakan oleh Senior Road Safety Planning Group (Kelompok Perencana Keselamatan Jalan Senior) secara rutin. Rekomendasi-rekomendasi jangka menengah ini termasuk pelaksanaan dari pengembangan kebijakan dan pengaturan pengambilan keputusan termasuk di dalam laporan..

Diusulkan bahwa Senior Road Safety Planning Group (Kelompok Perencana Keselamatan Jalan Senior) - ditetapkan oleh manajemen senior - akan mengawasi kelompok-kelompok kerja di bawahnya menuju kegiatan-kegiatan berikut ini (antara lain):

Pengembangan dan penerapan kebijakan manajemen kecepatan bekerjasama dengan Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat, POLRI - Korps Lalu Lintas dan pemerintah daerah. Hal ini akan membutuhkan Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk meninjau dan bila perlu mengidentifikasi keselamatan yang disesuaikan (untuk standar keselamatan infrastruktur) batas atas kecepatan perjalanan (batas-batas kecepatan). Akan perlu bekerja sama dengan polisi setempat dan Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat ditingkat provinsi dan tingkat daerah untuk menyetujui batas kecepatan maksimum. Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Darat juga harus terlibat dalam proses ini. Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga harus

xiv

memberikan dukungan kepada polisi dalam upaya mereka membangun keterampilan dan kapasitas penegakan mereka dan menjelaskan kepada sistem peradilan manfaat dari kecepatan perjalanan aman melalui batas-batas yang sesuai dan penegakan batas-batas tersebut oleh polisi - dalam rangka untuk mengurangi risiko-risiko kecelakaan terkait dengan kendaraan yang berjalan pada kecepatan yang tidak aman untuk infrastruktur yang ada.

Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga juga harus mempertimbangkan untuk memperkenalkan rambu batas kecepatan yang disarankan pada jaringan jalan nasional.

Keselamatan dan fasilitas-fasilitas pejalan kaki. Standar-standar yang diperkuat untuk gerakan aman pejalan kaki di sepanjang dan di seluruh jalan nasional perlu dikembangkan. Kebijakan-kebijakan perlu dirancang dan diadopsi untuk penanganan potensial di lokasi berisiko tinggi dan pendanaan dicari untuk pelaksanaannya. Akan perlu untuk memasukkan pemerintah-pemerintah daerah dan Polisi serta Dinas Perhubungan di tingkat provinsi dalam diskusi-diskusi mengenai lokasi-lokasi berisiko tinggi dan penanganan-penanganan potensial, terutama yang menyangkut pembangunan jalur pejalan kaki, ketentuan tentang jembatan, penanganan penyeberangan pejalan kaki, penggunaan kontrol sinyal penyeberangan dan adopsi dari langkah-langkah infrastruktur untuk mengurangi kecepatan di daerah aktivitas pejalan kaki yang tinggi. Inklusi penilaian-penilaian 'cocok untuk tujuan' jalur pejalan kaki dalam aplikasi laik fungsi di masa depan harus dipertimbangkan dalam proses peninjauan kebijakan keselamatan pejalan kaki dan pengembangan manual Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga.

Tinjauan kegiatan-kegiatan pemeliharaan jalan/praktek-praktek untuk mengidentifikasi cara-cara di mana keamanan dapat ditingkatkan dengan biaya rendah dalam kegiatan-kegiatan pemeliharaan.

Masalah ketentuan pemberian saran pada standar-standar teknis dan pedoman, termasuk sistem keselamatan, ke propinsi, pengelola jalan kota dan kabupaten dan kebutuhan untuk alat penilaian yang sederhana untuk dikembangkan agar memungkinkan para pihak pembina jalan untuk menilai risiko kecelakaan pada jaringan-jaringan jalan mereka - sebagai kegiatan prioritas untuk Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga. Peningkatan kapasitas untuk propinsi-propinsi dan kabupaten guna mendukung upaya mereka untuk meningkatkan keamanan jaringan-jaringan jalan mereka sangat didukung oleh staf Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga - sebagai tanggung jawab inti dari organisasi. Dukungan untuk memencarkan ke bawah komponen-komponen jalan yang lebih aman dari Rencana Induk Keselamatan Jalan Nasional (RUNK) untuk tingkat propinsi, kabupaten dan kota juga harus menjadi prioritas bagi Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga.

Perluasan laik fungsi dan pengembangan standar keselamatan. Mempertimbangkan perluasan proses sertifikasi dari waktu ke waktu termasuk identifikasi bagian jalan yang mana yang akan ditambahkan untuk memenuhi syarat keselamatan jalan dengan perencanaan/prinsip-prinsip sistem keselamatan.

xv

Menyusun prinsip-prinsip organisasi keselamatan jalan dan standar-standar dari waktu ke waktu terhadap jaringan yang kemudian diukur dalam penambahan untuk memperluas masalah-masalah laik fungsi. IRAP akan membantu dalam pengidentifikasian risiko kecelakaan yang tidak tercatat sepanjang jaringan yang tersedia.

Pengukuran yang tepat untuk mengatasi risiko yang dapat dilaksanakan dengan mengikuti penilaian/pemeriksaan laik fungsi.

Terdapat kebutuhan prioritas tinggi untuk mengatasi isu-isu pemerintahan di sekitar sisi jalan yang lebih berkeselamatan (di mana kesepakatan dengan pemerintah-pemerintah daerah setempat mengenai pembatasan-pembatasan pembangunan rumija jalan yang tidak terpenuhi dalam persetujuan-persetujuan pembangunan pemerintah daerah). Penyesuaian legislatif dan sanksi yang lebih kuat mungkin diperlukan untuk mencapai kepatuhan penuh pemerintah daerah. Disarankan agar kelompok kerja dibentuk dengan perwakilan dari pemerintah daerah dan instansi-instansi keselamatan jalan lainnya, yang berpotensi diketuai oleh Bappenas.

Selanjutnya, pengaturan kegiatan-kegiatan pinggir jalan yang ilegal seperti kios dan warung-warung yang membuka usahanya di ruang milik jalan-jalan nasional baru (bypasses) harus diperkuat, termasuk sanksi yang lebih tegas. Hal ini diakui berpotensi menjadi isu penting bagi mata pencaharian banyak orang Indonesia. Namun, keselamatan masyarakat harus mendapatkan prioritas yang lebih tinggi daripada membiarkan pedagang-pedagang baru untuk menempati kedua sisi jalan nasional baru secara liar tanpa ijin ataupun dengan ijin.

Mengembangkan strategi-strategi dan tindakan-tindakan yang efektif untuk mengurangi praktek-praktek pinggir jalan yang tidak aman ini akan memerlukan upaya-upaya mulai dari yang terus menerus, kooperatif dan luas oleh kelompok kerja secara multi lembaga. Hal ini dianggap bahwa kemungkinan tiga tahun atau lebih akan dibutuhkan oleh para pemangku kepentingan untuk merumuskan, menegosiasi dan memulai untuk melaksanakan perubahan yang efektif. Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga perlu menjadi kekuatan pendorong untuk upaya ini.

Pembentukan mekanisme-mekanisme seperti yang direkomendasikan di atas untuk mengatasi masalah-masalah kompleks dan menantang dalam jangka panjang dan akan menjadi bagian penting dari sarana Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga dalam memberikan peningkatan keselamatan yang bertahan lama pada jalan-jalan di Indonesia.

Ringkasan

Proyek-proyek percontohan yang cocok di luar kota dan perkotaan akan membantu pelaksanaan praktek yang baik dan percontohan yang harus didorong. Baik proyek manajemen jeselamatan jalan di jalan antar kota maupun perkotaan direkomendasikan agar terdapat wujud nyata dari keberjasilan praktek relevan yang baik dan mengidentifikasi hambatan-hambatan yang timbul dalam upaya implementasi.

xvi

Ada banyak hal yang harus dilakukan dan menjadi prioritas penting. Beragam piranti-piranti dan teknik-teknik yang tersedia dapat membantu Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga untuk secara cepat meningkatkan tingkat keselamatan jaringan jalan dan memulai proses pengurangan kematian akibat kecelakaan pada jaringan jalan nasional.

Kesempatan untuk keselamatan jalan harus diutamakan dalam kegiatan-kegiatan Direktorat Jenderal Binamarga, dan sekarang sudah tersedia dan dengan komitmen yang cukup, yang dapat diproses dalam sebuah tindakan yang efektif dan terencana.

xvii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides advice to Directorate General of Highways (DGH) on further priority approaches needed in order to mainstream road safety within its activities. The aim of the document is to recommend actions that will embed road safety within the road construction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and operations activities of the DGH.

At present, Indonesia has limited resources and capabilities for the improvement of road safety. There are currently few practitioners in the country with good road safety knowledge; this is combined with limited available funding for targeted road safety activity and a lack of sustained investment in capacity building and implementation. By entrenching road safety within its core activities, DGH can lead the way in improving road safety in Indonesia.

This report endeavours to build upon existing DGH policy and regulatory requirements including the National Road Safety Master Plan (NRSMP). The recommendations seek to advance the effectiveness of DGH road safety activities in order to meet policy and NRSMP objectives.

By implementing a Strategic Road Safety Action Plan, DGH is working towards developing and operating a national road network that is inherently safe and complies with safe system requirements.

Considerable challenges lie ahead in achieving a stable organisation-wide road safety inclusive culture. It is now time for this change to be fostered and ultimately embedded in the Balai and across the organisation.

Current Capabilities and Activities

To date, the DGH has been undertaking capacity building through the establishment of the Road Safety Engineering Team (RSET) in 2010. This team seeks to develop Road Safety Audit (RSA) capacity, assist with the identification, analysis and treatment of blackspot locations, and develop suitable and relevant manuals to provide consistent application of the best road safety practices.

Staff within the DGH have also been exposed to relevant good practice, further increasing their road safety awareness. This includes exposure to RSA techniques and procedures, and blackspot identification and crash data analysis. Furthermore, at least 780 DGH staff in numerous locations across Indonesia have attended courses led by an international consultant resulting in the dissemination of road safety engineering knowledge to the RSET and staff in the Balai.

Key RSET personnel, other head office DGH staff, DGH Balai staff and staff from other road safety agencies (MoT, INP – Traffic Corps, Bappenas) have also participated in three road safety Fact Finding Missions (FFMs) to road safety agencies in Victoria, Australia. These were aimed at improving knowledge and facilitating closer road safety related cooperation.

xviii

At present, there are two key pieces of relevant legislation for DGH activity in relation to network safety; these are the Road Act no. 38/2004 and the Road Traffic and Transportation Act no. 22/2009. At the same time, the requirement for Safer National Roads is specifically recognised at policy level in the DGH 2010-2014 Renstra (see Working Paper 3). These three documents (the two Acts and the Renstra) represent the current formal guidance for DGH activity. The Road Traffic and Transportation Act refers to the Laik Funghsi requirements. There is opportunity to extend the Laik Funghsi process to include assessment of other road safety parameters allowing for safety problem identification and improvement recommendations.

DGH has other institutional capacity development challenges in mainstreaming road safety which go beyond those needed to achieve the NRSMP safe roads objectives. However, delivery of the NRSMP will require a considerable proportion of road safety development issues to be addressed.

Key Issues

RSET Structure

The RSET is located within the Road Safety Section of Subdit TLKJ. There are four national consultant positions (three engineers and one technical assistant/draftsman) that are funded by IndII and provide support and capability to Subdit TLKJ. Members of the RSET do not have shared office space, with staff and national consultants sited in separate locations. The RSET needs to operate as one entity with DGH staff and the national consultants working alongside each other.

DGH Corporate Policy Framework

The current DGH strategic plan and operating practices have a number of characteristics that are constraints to improved road safety effectiveness. These need to be addressed and include:

Lack of NRSMP formal adoption and inclusion in overall DGH Strategic Plan

Lack of safe system inclusion in overall Strategic Plan

Absence of safety related indicators in organisational KPIs

Lack of a funding category for specific safety investments (blackspots)

Need for revision of road safety related design standards (IndII supported RSA work to date has identified the need to update the DGH road (and bridge) design standards as well as a requirement to incorporate RSAs into the new road design process)

Need for access to supplementary project funding for dealing with additional costs for items identified during the RSA process

xix

Safer Roads by Design/Safe System

“Safer roads by design” is a concept that needs to be progressively pursued and adopted by road stakeholders in Indonesia. The adoption of the safety by design / safe system concept by DGH should result in all national roads providing an increased chance of survival when crashes arise from human error.

The safe system basis for the Decade of Action and for the NRSMP require a shift in thinking and approach. Understanding and incorporating the safe system approach into DGH activities such as road maintenance, construction and operation is an important part of the NRSMP implementation.

Safety Key Performance Indicators and Budget Allocations

There is no specific Key Performance Indicator (KPI) in the DGH Strategic Plan and as such, no KPIs are applied by DGH for improved road safety achievement. One of the consequences of the lack of a road safety KPI is the absence of an identifiable separate budget allocation for specific road safety programs.

Capacity within Balai

At present there is no formalised road safety engineering unit within the staffing establishment of any Balai. Road Safety Audit knowledge and skill levels are rudimentary in the Balai and current road safety resources are not adequate for making road safety a mainstream priority and implementing changed outputs.

Private Sector Consulting Expertise

It is understood that a small number of national (local) consultants in the road safety engineering field exist but their capacities are limited. In order for the industry to be in a position to meet expected longer-term requirements, extensive training to interested private sector professionals is required. This is a key weakness with road safety engineering in Indonesia and needs addressing as a priority.

Key Recommendations

National Road Safety Master Plan

Whilst the NRSMP is an important document providing road safety guidance and specifying DGH commitments as part of the ‘safer road’ pillar, the NRSMP has not been formally adopted by DGH. It is recommended that DGH adopt the plan.

Reviewing Standards

There is a priority need for substantial review and change to many road safety related road and bridge design standards.

xx

Mainstreaming – Safe System Policy Development

Working to mainstream road safety within DGH road activities and to move the national road network more towards being based on safety by design/safe system principles is a long term challenge that will require a great deal of DGH over the next 30 years.

It is a very important goal for DGH in the years ahead. It is recommended that a half day workshop of senior management be convened to consider this and related issues within the next three to four months.

It is recommended that a project-focused peer group discussion process be progressively introduced in the Balai for projects at the concept or preliminary design stage. These should consider safe system principles applicable to each project.

Crash Risk Analysis and Interventions – Infrastructure and Traffic Management

Adoption of a substantial ongoing program of black spot improvements, RSA, network crash risk assessment and intervention development programs for the full length of the network is strongly recommended.

Road Safety Engineering Team Role and Development

The RSET needs to be strengthened and structured to meet the significant future demands and to ensure their operation remains sustainable after the end of IndII activities in DGH.

The two current components of the RSET need to be managed as an integrated unit by the Head of the team, who needs to have the delegated authority to mobilise the national consultants. IndII requests for specific activity by the national consultants should be submitted through the Head of the RSET.

Balai Development Priorities

The Balai require resourcing in two areas. A Road Safety Engineering Team is required in each Balai in early 2014 (a recommended two or three engineers and two administrative staff) and a road safety engineering resource is required in each P2JN group. In addition, the following should occur:

A substantially expanded blackspot program should commence in 2013 (for at least two Balai) to build knowledge / expertise.

For new road (and major reconstruction) proposals, safer roads by design / safe system thinking should begin to be applied at project concept stage.

RSAs should be introduced as a priority at the design and pre-completion stages.

Delivery of intensive blackspot and RSA training will be required in each Balai over the next two years (2013 and 2014) through expert International and DGH staff. A full day of training each month in each Balai is proposed separately for each stream.

xxi

Laik Fungsi

Laik Fungsi can be used to identify safety deficiencies existing outside the road pavement cross section but impacting on safe operation of the road length. A program of works could then be developed relatively quickly after completion of assessments to bring those lengths up to an improved level in terms of crash risk.

iRAP

iRAP will enable high risk sections of the network to be readily identified using technology and relevant responses to be readily generated to enable selection of the most appropriate locations for the most cost effective treatment.

Policy for the application of iRAP based treatments is to be developed in the Balai IV iRAP pilot program due for completion in 2013. The Balai IV group will require involvement of the RSET to develop robust policies for application of a preferred iRAP approach across DGH over the next 10 to 20 years.

In the longer term, iRAP will provide a very valuable tool to support safety development building on the foundation of Laik Fungsi. Agreement around longer term safety upgrades of Laik Fungsi assessed sections will be guided by the outcomes of the iRAP crash risk assessment and treatment options identified.

Staff Development

Professional development of staff will be critical to continue to capacity building. Activities such as short-term (two to four weeks duration) staff exchanges with international road authorities and seminars for DGH staff by DGH expert staff and international experts should be pursued.

Performance Monitoring

Adoption of the following road safety KPIs at corporate level is essential to drive performance:

Specific annual allocations for a readily identifiable program of treatments for safer roads (blackspot treatments) as part of the safer roads pillar of NRSMP

The length of sealed shoulder construction on existing roads each year

Reduction of annual road crash fatalities by 15% by 2016 on the Laik Fungsi assessed sections of the network

Zero tolerance of traffic crashes at road work zones to address health and safety environment (HSE) issues

More detailed KPIs suggested for DGH for the ‘safe roads’ pillar in the NRSMP should be reviewed and adopted.

xxii

Signs, Linemarking, Signals and Furniture responsibilities

High quality coordination of SLSF installation with the other blackspot treatment components is essential for public safety, as is their adequate ongoing maintenance, especially for signals, which tend to be neglected currently. It is suggested that discussions are arranged by DGH as soon as possible between Bappenas (as facilitator), DGLT, Ministry of Home Affairs (where relevant) and DGH, to confirm a shared understanding and agreement on SLSF.

Working Groups to Develop Implementable Policy Recommendations

To support the substantial policy development task that lies ahead for DGH, the establishment of working groups to examine challenging medium term policy issues and develop detailed and implementable policy recommendations for senior management is recommended. Each group would have:

A designated lead officer

Clear terms of reference

Access to legal and other expertise

Consultation with other agencies as necessary

A monitored timeframe for reporting final recommendations to senior management

The senior management framework to which these groups would report could possibly be convened as a Senior Road Safety Planning Group on a regular basis.

The following working groups are recommended:

Control of roadside activities and land use developments abutting national roads. There is a high priority need to address the governance issues surrounding safer road sides. Legislative adjustment and stronger sanctions may be required to achieve full local government compliance. It is recommended a working group be established with representation from local government and other road safety agencies, potentially chaired by Bappenas.

Laik Fungsi extension and safety standards development. Consider extending the certification process over time to include identifying to what extent the section of road meets safer roads by design / safe system principles.

Commence with a workshop of senior staff to discuss the issue. Look to include further qualifications in the Laik Fungsi certification process in the near future. Build organisational road safety principles and standards over time against which the network is then measured in addition to existing Laik Fungsi matters. iRAP will assist identification of much of this unseen crash risk on lengths of the network when it is available.

xxiii

Pedestrian safety and facilities. Consider safety issues and develop proposed standards for safe movement of pedestrians along and across national roads. Policies need to be devised and adopted for potential treatments at higher risk locations and funding sought for implementation. Extend Laik Fungsi assessments in due course to assess whether footpaths are provided where needed and are fit for purpose. Prepare a pedestrian safety manual for use by DGH and liaise with MoT and local governments in its production to obtain their input.

Review of road maintenance activities/practice. Identify ways in which safety can be improved at low cost though changes in practices to obtain organisational agreement and then to guide implementation.

Speed management. Effective speed management enforcement will require DGH to review and where necessary identify adjusted safe (for the safety standard of infrastructure) upper speed limits. DGH should also consider implementing advisory speed signage at curves on the network.

Funding for road safety measures. Review and strengthen allocations for road safety funding within the DGH budget to respond to the demands that exist and will increasingly emerge as demand to implement iRAP and blackspot treatment options increase. Funding for safety projects will require linkage to new safety related corporate KPIs.

Provision of guidance and support to the provincial and local governments. Under the Road Act No. 38, DGH has responsibilities for national roads, provincial roads, kabupaten and Kota roads. The RSET will need to be able to rely in large on the Balai to deliver on this responsibility as it relates to road safety advice and capacity development.

Corporate policy guidance will be needed to assist the DGH with meeting these obligations. Simple tools to improve capacity at provincial, kabupaten and kota levels will be needed as will adequate funding.

Summary

Suitable demonstration projects in rural and urban areas would assist implementation of good practice and are encouraged. Both rural road projects and urban safety management projects are recommended in order to offer evidence of relevant good practice and identify barriers to ready implementation.

There is much to be done and prioritisation will be essential. There are many tools and techniques available to assist DGH to rapidly improve network safety levels and begin the process of fatality reduction on the national road network.

The opportunity to mainstream road safety within DGH activities is now available and with sufficient commitment, it can proceed in a planned and effective manner.

STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This Strategic Road Safety Plan has been developed to recommend actions that will embed road safety within the road construction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and operations activities of the Directorate General of Highways (DGH).

The plan endeavours to build upon existing DGH policy and regulatory requirements including the National Road Safety Master Plan (NRSMP). The recommendations seek to advance the effectiveness of DGH road safety activities in order to meet policy and NRSMP objectives.

1.1 BACKGROUND

Improving road safety in Indonesia represents a major challenge for governments, businesses, NGOs and the community. More than 32,000 Indonesians are killed on the country’s roads each year. Based on Indonesian National Police (INP) – Traffic Corps preliminary crash data from Central Java (2012), more than 50% of fatalities involve motorcyclists and approximately 25% of all road crash fatalities in the Province are 16 to 18 year old motorcyclists.

At present, Indonesia has limited resources and capability for the improvement of road safety. There are currently few practitioners in the country with good road safety knowledge; this is combined with limited available funding for targeted road safety activity and a lack of sustained investment in capacity building and implementation. By entrenching road safety within its core activities, DGH can lead the way in improving road safety in Indonesia.

By implementing a Strategic Road Safety Action Plan, DGH is working towards developing and operating a national road network that is inherently safe and complies with safe system requirements.

2 STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR

THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS

CHAPTER 2: DGH PROGRESS TO DATE

2.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ROAD SAFETY ENGINEERING TEAM

A scoping study conducted by IndII in mid-2009 recommended the creation of a Road Safety Engineering Unit within DGH. In 2010, the Road Safety Engineering Team (RSET) was established within the Sub-directorate of Environmental and Road Safety Affairs (Subdit TLKJ).

Early priorities for the RSET were:

Road Safety Audit (RSA) capacity building

Identification, analysis and treatment of blackspot locations (in support of blackspot targets set out in the DGH 2010-2014 Rencana Strategi (RENSTRA))

The development of suitable and relevant manuals to provide consistent application of the best road safety practices

2.2 PRIORITY TECHNICAL FAMILIARISATION COURSES

A capacity development program of approximately 20 courses in RSA, blackspot investigation, worksite safety and other road safety engineering topics has been undertaken during the period 2009 to 2012. More than 780 DGH staff in numerous locations across Indonesia have attended these coursess led by an international consultant resulting in the dissemination of road safety engineering knowledge to the RSET and staff in the Balai.

2.3 EXPOSURE TO RELEVANT GOOD PRACTICE

Road Safety Audits

Between 2010 and 2011, IndII commissioned international consultants to undertake a Road Safety Audits and Crash Reduction Program (RSACRP). This project included the completion of RSAs for the Eastern Indonesia National Road Improvement Project (EINRIP) and the development of a crash reduction (blackspot) program. This element of the project focused on assisting DGH to identify blackspots and develop preferred options for treatment, with an emphasis on finalising the scope of works and necessary budgets to underpin a significant program of implementation in 2013 and 2014.

The RSACRP (Activity 194) comprised the following elements:

i. The completion of design stage RSAs for 16 AusAID funded EINRIP road improvement projects


3


ii. Development of a crash reduction program for the short and medium term (at least 30 crash reduction sites reviewed and engineering improvements drafted for 20 sites)

iii. Provision of training to RSET, other DGH staff and selected local consultants

The RSAs were completed late in the design / implementation cycle of the EINRIP projects between October 2010 and April 2011. When the RSAs were commissioned, detailed design for all the projects had been completed and most had already been tendered for construction. A number had actually advanced to the initial stages of construction. Consequently, it has been costly or impractical to implement necessary measures required to improve road safety to an acceptable level on many of the projects (see WP 2).

A series of Project Handover (PHO) reports were produced in September 2012 based on the findings of the RSAs completed on the EINRIP projects. These reports outline a number of process deficiencies identified during the roll out of the EINRIP program as well as useful insights (see WP 4) into the key types of infrastructure safety deficiencies that exist on the Indonesian national road network. These reports should be promoted within DGH (including the Balai) as a valuable resource and for guidance.

DGH is understood to be using a basic version of the AustROADS Road Safety Audit Guide to provide guidance to their staff. This basic version of the AustROADS document should be reviewed to determine its suitability for the anticipated increase in RSAs.

Blackspot Identification and Crash Data Analysis

The blackspot investigation element of the RSACRP project included the production of two types of assessment:

i. Crash Reduction (CR) reports – the analysis of crash data and recommendation of safety improvements at blackspot locations

ii. Crash Reduction Implementation (CRI) reports – the specification of the proposed works, a bill of quantities and drawings for either a blackspot location or for a route with several blackspot locations

These reports were completed by June 2011 and assessed the East Corridor in Sumatera (Bakauheni to Banda Aceh via Palembang) and Pantura, the North Coast Road in Java, between Jakarta and Surabaya. Crash data for these corridors had previously been gathered (manually) from local police stations and collated. Five CR reports were produced with recommendations for 31 sites whilst 20 CRI reports were produced with documentation and drawings for 19 blackspot locations and one route (comprising 14 blackspot locations).

An extension to the initial IndII support for blackspot identification and analysis is now being provided by the current VicRoads International contract (Activity 250-05/2) that commenced in August 2012. The objectives of this activity are to:



i. Assist DGH with the completion of 100 blackspot improvement schemes by the end of 2014 (with 50 blackspot improvements installed by the end of 2013)

ii. Build the capacity and skills of DGH personnel and other road safety professionals

iii. Assist DGH to develop and maintain a coordinated approach to road safety initiatives through RSET

The DGH 2010-2014 RENSTRA (Rencana Strategis) also includes targets for the Technical Services Directorate of Bina Marga (Bintek) to investigate and make recommendations for countermeasures at 250 blackspot locations and for the Balai to implement countermeasures at 150 locations.

To date, more than 140 blackspot reports have been prepared and currently VicRoads International is assisting with the finalisation of the scope of works and determining necessary associated budgets to enable implementation.

Apart from the locations investigated under the RSACRP project, most of the blackspot locations have been identified qualitatively, based on discussions with the Balai, Police and other local sources. Until such time as there is sufficient crash data available and accessible, this process will need to continue. Whilst this process has its limitations, it is not considered to be a major problem because the road safety benefits achieved from treating known problem sites are likely to be significant. However, in the absence of crash data, an objective measurement of the benefits achieved from the blackspot program will not be possible.

The INP – Traffic Corps are leading a major World Bank funded crash data collection and recording project, including mapped crash locations – known as IRSMS. The project has progressed to the point at which trial data (including mapped locations) for 2011 is now available for all of Central Java Province.

The availability of crash data for the Indonesian national road network will be a transformational shift that will make the analysis of crash risk and objective identification possible. It will also enable the evaluation of the success of crash reduction countermeasures.

2.4 FACT FINDING MISSIONS

Three road safety Fact Finding Missions (FFM) to road safety agencies in Victoria, Australia have been supported and arranged by IndII since 2009 for key RSET personnel, other head office DGH staff, DGH Balai staff and staff from other road safety agencies (MoT, INP – Traffic Corps, Bappenas).

These FFMs have improved knowledge and facilitated closer road safety related cooperation between the involved agencies, exemplified by the cross-agency preparation of the NRSMP, published in 2011, for which IndII provided further facilitation assistance.


5


2.5 IRAP PILOT PROJECT

iRAP is a recognised international crash risk assessment and intervention development tool, developed and promoted by a not for profit NGO based in the UK, with a focus on saving lives lost on the worlds roads. Road Assessment Programmes (RAP) are now active in more than 50 countries throughout Europe, Asia Pacific, North, Central and South America and Africa and in recent years in ASEAN countries.

iRAP is financially supported by the FIA Foundation for the Automobile and Society. Projects receive support from the World Bank Global Road Safety Facility, automobile associations, regional development banks and donors.

National governments, automobile clubs and associations, charities, the motor industry and institutions such as the European Commission also support RAPs in the developed world and encourage the transfer of research and technology to iRAP. In addition, many individuals donate their time and expertise to support iRAP.

It is a model that assesses physical conditions such as geometry and roadside infrastructure, and rates the safety (crash risk) level at regular intervals along the road. Its application can be extended to assess the effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce the road safety (crash) risk, thereby supporting the development of a road safety program to target higher risk locations (see Working Paper 1, Annex 2). There is potential to use iRAP to identify blackspot locations in the absence of crash data, but more importantly to identify relative crash risk for existing sections of road and for proposed road upgrades.

In 2011, IndII commissioned an iRAP pilot project for approximately 600 km of north coast national road (Pantura) in Java. Further surveys are proposed under IndII Activity 250-05 (component 2) and will result in 2,500 km of national road being surveyed during the first twelve months of the assignment.

2.6 ROAD SAFETY ENGINEERING MANUALS AND DVDS

To provide guidance and promote best practice, IndII commissioned production of three road safety engineering related manuals and associated DVDs on the topics of Road safety engineering for Indonesian roads, Roadside hazard management, and Safety at roadwork sites.

Substantial effort will be necessary by DGH if these manuals and DVDs are to achieve their intended purpose of widespread knowledge transfer.



2.7 LAIK FUNGSI

Laik Fungsi (functional worthiness) inspections and assessment are a key deliverable for DGH to government; it is described in detail in Annex 3 of WP 1. The RSET is establishing a database to record details of the network inspections carried out each year to meet its Laik Fungsi requirements. The Balai are arranging for collection of this data on behalf of the Wilayah. The database is yet to be fully established.

The potential extension of road related factors which could be assessed under Laik Fungsi in the future should be considered in designing the database. The potential for linkage of the Laik Fungsi database with potential future iRAP assessments also needs to be considered as it offers considerable potential benefits.

2.8 POLICY FRAMEWORK

There are two key pieces of relevant legislation for DGH activity in relation to network safety; these are the Road Act no. 38/2004 and the Road Traffic and Transportation Act no. 22/2009.

The requirement for Safer National Roads is specifically recognised at policy level in the DGH 2010-2014 RENSTRA (see Working Paper 3) which requires DGH to:

Develop associated recommendations arising from the inspection and certification of roads

Ensure connection of all major economic and social activity areas across Indonesia with good road conditions

Manage sustainable road development

Provide efficient mobility and safety

These three documents (the two Acts and the RESNTRA) represent the current formal guidance for DGH activity. The Road Act specifies the requirements for Laik Funghsi certification and the development of recommendations arising from this process (see Working Paper 1). The Laik Funghsi inspection and certification process is underway in the Balai.

The Road Traffic and Transportation Act also refers to the Laik Funghsi requirements. There is opportunity to extend the Laik Funghsi process to include assessment of other road safety parameters allowing for safety problem identification and improvement recommendations.

The NRSMP is also a key road safety document for DGH. The Vice President of Indonesia officially launched it on 20 June 2011 as a response by Indonesia to the United Nations call for a “Decade of Action for Road Safety”. It was developed by a group of officers from all key Indonesian road safety related agencies and was facilitated by Bappenas with some technical support provided by IndII.


7


“The NRSMP as a planning document has a strategic position in supporting the implementation of Law no. 22 Year 2009 on Traffic and Road Transportation. Therefore this NRSMP can be a reference and guidance in establishing policies and programmes that are undertaken within the framework of implementing national road safety both presently and for the future”. Extract from the NRSMP (RUNK JALAN) 2011 - 2035

The NRSMP has set a target for Indonesia to be the best performing country in road safety in ASEAN by 2030 through a 50 percent reduction of annual road crash fatalities by 2020 and 80 percent by 2030 from the base line of 31,234 road deaths in 2010. It sets specific actions under each of five safe system based pillars. For the ‘safer roads’ pillar (Pillar 2), DGH has committed to a series of actions and goals to be implemented for every five year period from 2010 to 2035. These are set out later in this report in Table 1. Despite this, the NRSMP is not referred to specifically in the Indonesian Road Development Strategic Plan 2010-2014.

“The formulation of NRSMP aims to give guidelines to policy makers in order that they can plan and implement road safety management in a coordinated and harmonised manner. This NRSMP also serves as a guideline for Regional Governments to elaborate steps of road safety management in their respective territories. This NRSMP has a long-term perspective, namely 25 years”. Extract from the NRSMP (RUNK JALAN) 2011 – 2035

For the Pillar 2 actions within the plan, Kemen PU (DGH) has a key responsibility as the lead agency. The identified supporting sectors are the provincial and local governments, Kemen Hub, Kemen Dagri and Kemen LH.

The road authorities in the provincial and local levels of government, and the Ministries referred to, will rely on DGH to provide standards, guidelines and crash risk assessment tools to assist them to meet their safer roads obligations under the NRSMP. This vertical and horizontal outreach requirement of DGH is important and will require planning and resourcing in order to meet it.

DGH through its Wilayah has a responsibility to provide engineering and technical support for provincial, regency, and municipality roads and village roads in their area of jurisdiction of each Wilayah. There is also a responsibility to provide support for regulating road function and utilisation. These are substantial obligations and include road safety support and advice.

DGH will have other institutional capacity development challenges in mainstreaming road safety which go beyond those needed to achieve the NRSMP safe roads objectives. However, delivery of the NRSMP will require a considerable proportion of road safety development issues to be addressed.



Table 1. Extract of DGH Responsibilities as detailed in the NRSMP

Pillar

1. Safer road lane

1a. Provide road improvement management that pertains to safety appropriateness

1b. Implement closure of potholes

1c. Carry out repairs pertaining to puddles

1d. Implement the handling of slippery roads

1e. Carry out road shoulder repairs

2. Planning and execution on safer roads at road works (including road furniture)

2a. Provide management of the planning of safe road

2b. Provide management on the implementation of safe road works

2c. Implement safer road planning, from the planning stage through detailed design

2d. Implement safer roads principle at road works

2e. Implement road safety inspections

2f. Implement inventory and investigation of accident prone locations

2g. Implement improvements of accident prone locations

2h. Undertake speed management, including traffic calming

2i. Support acts of emergencies as caused by traffic accidents and disasters

3. Implement improvement in the worthiness of operational standards of roads

3a. Provide operational worthiness of safer roads

3b. Provide management guidelines for the implementation of safer roads

3c. Apply operational management of safer roads

4. Safer road environment

4a. Provide governance on control and arrangement of road environment in relation to safety

4b. Control roadside space function

4c. Control activities at roadsides

4d. Provide pedestrian facilities, including protection for pedestrian with fencing


9

CHAPTER 3: CURRENT CAPABILITIES AND CONSTRAINTS


Over the last three years, through support from IndII, the DGH has developed its road safety engineering expertise. It represents a significant resource and a substantial achievement since 2009, when there was virtually no application of road safety engineering beyond the use of long established road design standards. DGH now has a viable foundation for future road safety capacity development.

3.1 SUB-DIRECTORATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND ROAD SAFETY AFFAIRS

The current structure of Subdit TLKJ, which is located within Bintek is as follows:

Figure 1. Structure of Subdit TLKJ, Bintek, DGH

The RSET is located within the Road Safety Section of Subdit TLKJ and has two components as indicated above.

There are four national consultant positions (three engineers and one technical assistant/draftsman) that are funded by IndII and provide support and capability to Subdit TLKJ. These positions support DGH road safety engineering staff in conducting road safety activity within Head Office and provide guidance to the Balai.

Members of the RSET do not have shared office space, with staff and national consultants sited in separate locations. This increases the challenges involved in



delivering integrated management of the RSET. A peer review carried out within Subdit TLKJ during May 2011 identified that senior management are confident of the consolidation of the unit with the support of IndII.

For DGH to meet its responsibility for Indonesian standards, guidelines and assessment tools, strengthened resource capability will be essential. The establishment of the RSET is a genuine milestone that will allow increased knowledge transfer within DGH and especially to the Balai, but it will need increased staff resources if it is to deliver on the increasing demands it will face in the short and medium term.

A component part of the IndII international consulting team’s project was to develop local capability in DGH staff. As a result, RSET staff were involved in road safety audit and blackspot activities in order to ‘learn by doing’. There is a view among the international consult staff involved that the desired ‘learning by doing’ approach was not fully effective. Capability was improved but to a somewhat limited extent, reflecting the competing commitments for staff; other demands meant that staff did not have sufficient time for more effective learning.

More is required to build sufficient confidence and skills within local staff. Further focused training and overseeing of actual practice in the Balai will be required for the next few years in order to assist the RSET in becoming suitably, sustainably, and professionally skilled.

The RSET needs to operate as one entity with DGH staff and the national consultants working alongside each other. These two groups should be combined whilst giving thought to the following:

The functions of the DGH staff and national consultants need to be more clearly defined

An agreed structure for the combined group needs to be established to reflect the agreed functions and priorities

Integrated day-to-day management of the complete group is required

The recommended functions for the RSET are discussed later in Section 4.9 and are included in the report recommendations. However, three streams of road safety development within DGH are envisaged in the immediate future:

Substantial rollout of RSA, crash reduction (blackspot) treatment expertise, safe system thinking and traffic engineering to the Balai along with ongoing capacity strengthening

Pilot program to develop iRAP and its application

Build upon the Laik Fungsi process to extend identification, reporting and consideration of other road related safety factors in the next few years.

The RSET will need to underpin support for the development of this capacity and its delivery to the Balai. Local private road safety design consultants and government


11


engineers (plus Institute of Road Engineering (IRE) staff) should be included in these training programs.

DGH Corporate Policy Framework

The current DGH strategic plan and operating practices have a number of characteristics that are constraints to improved road safety effectiveness. These need to be addressed and include:

Lack of NRSMP formal adoption and inclusion in overall DGH Strategic Plan

Lack of safe system inclusion in overall Strategic Plan

Absence of safety related indicators in organisational KPIs

Lack of a funding category for specific safety investments (blackspots)

Need for revision of road safety related design standards (IndII supported RSA work to date has identified the need to update the DGH road (and bridge) design standards as well as a requirement to incorporate RSAs into the new road design process)

Need for access to supplementary project funding for dealing with additional costs for items identified during the RSA process

Safer Roads by Design / Safe System

“Safer roads by design” is a concept that needs to be progressively pursued and adopted by road stakeholders in Indonesia. The adoption of the safety by design / safe system concept by DGH should result in all national roads providing an increased chance of survival when crashes arise from human error.

The Austroads’ Guide to Road Safety Part 6: Road Safety Audit also addresses the safe system approach to road safety:

“A safe system acknowledges that human error within the transport system is inevitable, and that when it does occur the system makes allowance for these errors so as to minimise the risk of serious injury or death. In a safe system, therefore, roads (and vehicles) should be designed to reduce the incidence and severity of crashes when they inevitably occur.

The safe system approach requires, in part (Australian Transport Council, 2006):

designing, constructing and maintaining a road system (roads, vehicles and operating requirements) so that forces on the human body generated in crashes are generally less than those resulting in fatal or debilitating injury

improving roads and roadsides to reduce the risk of crashes and minimise harm: measures for higher speed roads including dividing traffic, designing ‘forgiving’ roadsides, and providing clear driver guidance. In areas with large numbers of vulnerable road users or substantial collision risk, speed management



supplemented by road and roadside treatments is a key strategy for limiting crashes

managing speeds, taking into account the risks on different parts of the road system.

Safer road user behaviour, safer speeds, safer roads and safer vehicles are the four key elements that make up a safe system.

Chances of surviving a crash decrease markedly above certain speeds, depending on the type of crash i.e.

— pedestrian struck by vehicle - 20 to 30 km/h

— motorcyclist struck by vehicle (or falling off) - 20 to 30 km/h

— side-impact vehicle striking a pole or tree - 30 to 40 km/h

— side-impact vehicle to vehicle crash - 50 km/h

— head-on vehicle to vehicle (equal mass) crash - 70 km/h”

The safe system basis for the Decade of Action and for the NRSMP require a shift in thinking and approach. Understanding and incorporating the safe system approach into DGH activities such as road maintenance, construction and operation is an important part of the NRSMP implementation.

However, this will take many years to reach comprehensive implementation and require extensive development of knowledge, policies and guidelines. Substantial dialogue will be required across the organisation to gain convergence and agreement regarding the approaches to be pursued.

There will be immediate (short-term) priority tasks required to develop the necessary knowledge and skills across the organisation. Other issues which are of high importance in the medium to longer term but require more time for discussion and development of policy should also commence but with a recognition that their progress is likely to be more gradual.

There will be benefit in adopting regular and ongoing corporate dialogue at the most senior levels within DGH. This will focus senior minds collectively on the safe system / safety by design concepts and its impact upon how the road system is constructed and maintained.

Safety Key Performance Indicators and Budget Allocations

There is no specific Key Performance Indicator (KPI) in the DGH Strategic Plan and as such, no KPIs are applied by DGH for improved road safety achievement. The Balai and Wilayah strongly made this point, highlighting that they focus on the existing KPIs that they are measured on which do not include road safety. They consider this has to change if safety is to assume a more appropriate profile.


13


One of the consequences of the lack of a road safety KPI is the absence of an identifiable separate budget allocation for specific road safety programs. Road safety is included in overall budget allocations for all stages of road development, i.e. planning and design; construction of new roads and capacity extension; road preservation, and maintenance programs.

In the 2012 fiscal year, the DGH annual budget allocation for national roads was an amount of IDR 30 trillion and this was expected to increase by IDR 4 trillion for the 2013 fiscal year.

Current funding allocation categories utilised by DGH include routine maintenance, periodic maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction. Where a project has road safety related elements, funding is incorporated into the overall budget under there categories. Whilst this is understandable, this is not considered helpful in the case of specific targeted road safety activity (such as blackspot treatments). It is suggested that this be reviewed. One of the benefits of a separate allocation for blackspot treatments would be the ability to measure overall expenditure on this category of works from year to year. This would make ongoing monitoring of KPIs easier and more effective.

3.2 ROLES OF BALAI AND WILAYAH (REGIONAL DIRECTORATES)

The Balai (groups of regions) and the Wilayah (Regional Directorates) have different roles and responsibilities, which are specified in Ministry of Public Works Regulations.

The Balai are involved with detailed activities - in planning, designing and delivering improvements and maintenance to the national road network. The role of three Wilayah which are based at DGH head office, is focused on coordinating and monitoring / controlling activities within a specific group of Balai.

Balai Besar or Balai

The role of Balai Besar (Type A or equivalent to 2nd echelon) and Balai (Type B or equivalent to 3rd echelon) Pelaksanaan Jalan Nasional is governed by Ministry Regulation, No. 21/PRT/M/2010.

The roles of Balai Besar / Balai are to implement planning, design and procurement of roads and bridges construction, capacity extension and preservation of national roads; implement a quality management system and quality control of roads and bridges works and construction; and to supply material and equipment for roads and bridges.

The Balai’s detailed functions include:

Preparing data and information for road network development programs

Preparing planning programs, feasibility studies and detailed engineering design of roads and bridges including engineering justification



Preparing tender documents for procurement

Carrying out procurement processes and determining the successful tenderer - through the procurement services unit (Unit Layanan Pengadaan)

Controlling and supervising construction work for roads and bridges

Carrying out environmental impact assessments

Carrying out RSA

Monitoring and evaluating road minimum service standards

Controlling and the unit rate analysis of roads and bridges construction

Controlling the function and utilisation of national roads

Wilayah (Regional Directorates)

The role of Regional Directorates is governed by the Ministry Regulation no. 08/PRT/M/2010.

There are three Wilayah and each provides support services to Balai in the following geographic areas:

1. Wilayah 1: support to three Balai in Sumatera and surrounding islands:

Balai Besar 1: Nangroe Aceh Darussalam and North Sumatera Provinces

Balai Besar 2: West Sumatera, Riau, Riau Archipelago and Jambi Provinces

Balai Besar 3: Bengkulu, South Sumatera, Lampung, and the island Bangka and Belitung Provinces

2. Wilayah 2: support to four Balai in Java, Bali, Nusa Tenggara and Kalimantan:

Balai Besar 4: Banten, Jakarta and West Java provinces

Balai Besar 5: Central Java, Yogyakarta and East Java provinces

Balai 6: Bali, West Nusa Tenggara and East Nusa Tenggara provinces

Balai Besar 7: West Kalimantan, Central Kalimantan, South Kalimantan and East Kalimantan Provinces

3. Wilayah 3: support to four Balai in Sulawesi, Maluku Islands and Papua:

Balai Besar 8: South Sulawesi, West Sulawesi, South East Sulawesi and Central Sulawesi

Balai 11: North Sulawesi and Gorontalo provinces

Balai 9: Maluku and North Maluku provinces

Balai 10: West Papua and Papua provinces


15


The main functions of the Wilayah are to oversee the execution of implementation programs for national roads and to provide engineering and technical support for provincial, regency and municipality roads and village roads in their area of jurisdiction.

The specific Wilayah functions include:

Preparation of planning activities of national roads and provision of engineering and technical support for provincial, regency and municipality roads and village roads in their jurisdiction area

Managing the National Roads land acquisition program

Preparation of Laik Fungsi recommendations

Overseeing road disaster management

Overseeing works construction implementation, and material and heavy equipment utilisation

Assessing national road programs proposed by the Balai Besar

Assessing road programs proposed to be carried out by provincial, regency, municipality and village governments under Central government funding e.g. funding provided through a special allocation budget (Dana Alokasi Khusus or DAK) and other arrangements

Supporting contract management including facilities for alteration of budget documents

Implementing technical support for implementation of national roads works including freeways

Implementing facilities support for provincial, regency, municipality and village roads including regulating road function and utilisation

Carrying out the Directorate administration activities

Activities also include coordination of accountability performance reporting for all the directorate activities.

Capacity within Balai

The 11 DGH Balai are responsible for program formulation and project design, often through local consultants. Design activity now carried out in Bintek is largely focused on larger loan projects; it is currently seeking to redevelop and extend guidelines, policies and standards to encompass contemporary safety principles and thinking.

Given these responsibilities, the Balai wish to develop their road safety capacity promptly. Basic road safety engineering capacity is in place but substantial development of this will be necessary. At present there is no formalised road safety engineering unit within the staffing establishment of any Balai. Road Safety Audit knowledge and skill levels are rudimentary in the Balai and current road safety



resources are not adequate for making road safety a mainstream priority and implementing changed outputs.

As such, there was widespread recognition of the need to enhance road safety engineering capacity in the regions and for the rapid development of specific Balai skills in RSA and crash analysis / blackspot treatment. This should be achieved by ongoing “learning by doing” activities, supported by regular training programs.A number of the Balai offices are keen to train staff to develop capacity to carry out further RSA and blackspot improvement activities following the positive results achieved from the 2010/2011 RSA and crash reduction programs. This requires relevant capacity to be introduced and there was broad agreement (supported by Subdit TLKJ) that road safety engineering teams reflecting the central RSET should be established in each Balai and that this should be a priority for DGH. This will probably require at least three engineering positions and two administrative positions to build an effective core of expertise. In addition, each Balai project management group (P2JN) should have some road safety resource. It is expected that one or two positions will be required for each of the P2JN, depending on the workload faced by each Balai. More resource may well be required in the Balai with greater workloads.

These recommended additional positions will require a major commitment from DGH and from government to agree to their establishment. While the resourcing could be phased in over a twelve month period for example, the resource requirement and financial implication will be substantial.

3.3 PRIVATE SECTOR CONSULTING EXPERTISE

It is understood that a small number of national (local) consultants in the road safety engineering field exist but their capacities are limited. In order for the industry to be in a position to meet expected longer-term requirements, extensive training to interested private sector professionals is required. This is a key weakness with road safety engineering in Indonesia and needs addressing as a priority.


17

CHAPTER 4: INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT


4.1 NRSMP POLICIES AND ACTIONS FOR DGH

In Working Paper 3, Figure 2, Extract from Policies Table, RUNK JALAN, the timelines DGH has placed on the steps it plans to take to develop and implement policies to improve the safety of the national road network over the next 25 years are presented and discussed. These timeframes are considered to represent a realistic approach to the long term nature of building safety into the overall network.

Information on timing of policy directions: Extract from Policies Table, RUNK JALAN, Working Paper 3, is as follows:

The first five years: Reducing the risk of severe injuries on the victim and accident cases caused by road infrastructures

The second five years: Applying road infrastructures that meet self-explaining & self-enforcing aspects

The third five years: Applying road infrastructures that meet the principles of forgiving roads

The fourth five years: Improving infrastructure standards that lead to safe road network

The fifth five years: Firmly establishing infrastructure standards on safe road network

This framework is a reminder that while there are many immediate actions DGH can take to implement parts of the NRSMP, there are also medium and long term challenges. However, a priority program should be developed that recognises that some solutions will take years to be fully realised. In order to agree how safety by design and the safe system should be implemented, corporate thinking and congruence across the organisation, particularly across its leadership, will require processes for dialogue and decision making which reflect organisational consensus.

Moving towards a safety by design / safe system focused network is a long term task that will require progressive learning, feedback and occasional redirection as risks and potential solutions are better understood. The importance of introducing suitable processes for this development of shared knowledge at a high level suggests that a workshop of senior executive staff should be held within the next three to four months.

This overall guidance / context for the more detailed development of capacity to deliver the NRSMP actions is critically important. The specific NRSMP actions and responsibilities that have been allocated to and adopted by DGH are provided in Table 2 along with detailed commentary (in italics).



Adoption of NRSMP within DGH Strategic Plan

The NRSMP has not been formally incorporated into the DGH Strategic plan; this is something that should be done as a matter of urgency.


19


Table 2. Extract of DGH Responsibilities as Detailed in the NRSMP with Detailed Commentary (in italics)

Pillar NRSMP Indicator (underlined) plus Detailed Report Comment (in italics)

1. Safer road lane

1a. Provide road improvement management that pertains to safety appropriateness

Maintenance targets which are to be met to adequately maintain the safety of the existing pavements

There is a need for maintenance guidelines to be reviewed to ensure that as far as possible safe system thinking becomes embedded progressively in these activities.

1b. Implement closure of potholes

1c. Carry out repairs pertaining to puddles

1d. Implement the handling of slippery roads

1e. Carry out road shoulder repairs

2. Planning and execution on safer roads at road works (including road furniture)

2a. Provide management of the planning of safe road

Availability of planning guidelines

Moving towards a safety by design / safe system focused network is a long term task. It will require progressive learning, feedback and occasional redirection as risks and potential solutions are better known. RSA, potential future use of iRAP tools and developing processes to ensure right of way access remains controlled in accordance with agreements reached between DGH and local governments will be important mechanisms.




2b. Provide management on the implementation of safe road works

Safer conditions at road works sites

A manual and DVD have been recently produced by IndII to address this issue. A comprehensive classroom and on site monitoring program is required across the Balai over the next few years on a continuing basis to establish changed practice and support evolution to an acceptable good practice level.

2d. Implement safer roads principle at road works

2i. Support acts of emergencies as caused by traffic accidents and disasters

Implementation of support for emergencies

Emergency management protocols to be established in each Balai, working with Police and DGLT / Provinsi or Local Dinas.

2c. Implement safer road planning, from the planning stage through detailed design

Implementation of road planning

Reviewing the inherent safety of proposed road construction early in the planning stages and through later design stages. Safer roads by design / Safe system thinking and RSA are to be applied to the proposals at concept and design stages. While audit seeks to identify specific safety defects in the proposals, a safe system review asks more fundamental questions about safe operation. It considers the effects of mixed traffic use, the likely outcomes of collisions between vehicles given known operating speeds across the full day and night and the contribution of vehicles and behaviours to crash outcomes. International expert support will be required to support necessary RSA / safer roads by design / safe system training in each Balai over at least the next two years to augment operating experience.

2e. Implement road safety inspections Implementation of inspections

Reviewing the inherent safety of operation of existing sections of the road network and developing potential safety improvement solutions. This activity should usefully be prioritised around known existing blackspot locations and augmented in the near future with an iRAP type of risk analysis. iRAP, when further developed for use in Indonesia by DGH and IRE, will be a very useful tool that can identify higher crash risk sections of the network in an objective manner and provide recommendations on types of treatment that should be integrated into the design. IndII is supporting this work through expert technical assistance.


21



2f. Implement inventory and investigation of accident prone locations

Implementation of investigations

Requires skills to be developed in identifying and developing treatments for blackspot locations.

This requires staff to obtain crash data, analyse crash types at locations, develop designs for a series of treatment options and select the most cost effective option. This will require formal agreement to be negotiated with the Traffic Police for access to their crash data base (including mapped crash locations) which is currently being progressively developed and data collected in a substantial World Bank funded project, IRSMS2.

The development of capacity to utilise iRAP tools is likely to occur over the next three to five years, with potentially one or two Balai pioneering the approach and achieving an agreed basis for application which can be utilised across the organisation. iRAP will enable higher potential crash risk lengths of road especially outside urban areas to be identified and a range of cost effective treatment options produced. IndII is supporting this work through expert technical assistance. Support for the international expert component of the proposed monthly one day program of blackspot training in each Balai over the next two years to augment operating experience will be needed

2g. Implement improvements of accident prone locations

Implementation of improvements (from blackspot analysis)

Effective treatments will be built upon improved analysis, choice of design options, management of construction of blackspot treatments and in due course from iRAP assessments. Project funding, prioritisation and management skills will be required. Development of a small number of innovative demonstration treatments to improve safety at intersections were suggested by DGH staff as offering high potential benefits to the Balai.

2h. Undertake speed management, including traffic calming

Implementation of speed management

Achieving changed behaviour (in this instance - speed limit compliance) requires the environment to be changed – by infrastructure measures or by enforcement – or both. This will require training in development and implementation of urban speed management treatments, which will require considerable skill in liaising with key local stakeholders (local governments, police, local communities and more) and in devising acceptable treatments which are effective at reducing crash risk.

Development of effective enforcement will require DGH to support police in their efforts as they build their enforcement skills in coming years and in obtaining support from the justice system for their work. As a key road safety partner, it will be important that DGH supports enforcement of speed by police to reduce the crash risks associated with vehicles travelling at




speeds which are not safe for the existing infrastructure.

3. Implement improvement in the worthiness of operational standards of roads

3a. Provide operational worthiness of safer roads

Availability of standards

Refers to the implementation of Laik Funghsi which requires assessment of the fit for purpose nature of the existing cross section and the pavement condition from table drain to table drain. However, the safety of operation of a section of road depends on many factors which affect safety on the carriageway but exist outside the edge of pavement.

It is suggested that DGH actively consider and discuss the extension of the Laik Funghsi inspection process to consideration of crash risk due not only from cross section related infrastructure features, but also right of way standards, abutting land use and access issues and traffic mix issues. An early effective crash reduction measure to boost the quality of Laik Funghsi assessed sections would be the provision of sealed hard shoulders for those assessed Laik Funghsi sections of the network, where it is physically possible to do so. In due course, iRAP tools will provide support in for more extensive insightful assessment. This would provide a suitable basis for identifying further priority infrastructure actions to further improve levels of safety on these Laik Funghsi assessed lengths.

3b. Provide management guidelines for the implementation of safer roads

Availability of guidelines

Providing management guidelines for the implementation of safer roads will be an outcome of part of the process outlined for 3a.

3c. Apply operational management of safer roads

Execution of operational management of the road

Guidelines for the safe operational management of roads will also be an outcome of part of the process outlined for 3a.

4. Safer road environment

4a. Provide governance on control and arrangement of road environment in relation to safety

Availability of Roadsides guidelines for hazard protection or removal

Operating guidelines for the control and arrangement of the roadside environment in relation to safety.


23



4b. Control roadside space function Implementation of control over the function of roadside space (Roadsides guidelines).

Governance issues and operating guidelines for control of use and development of land abutting the road reservation in relation to safety

4c. Control activities at roadsides Implementation of control over roadside activities (Roadsides guidelines)

Governance issues and operating guidelines for the control and arrangement of activities on the roadside in relation to safety

4d. Provide pedestrian facilities, including protection for pedestrian with fencing

Availability of pedestrian facilities

Guidelines need to be devised and adopted for potential treatments at higher risk locations and funding allocated for implementation



4.2 A FRAMEWORK FOR FUTURE DGH ROAD SAFETY PROGRAM

Figure 2 shows the suggested framework for the DGH road safety improvement program for existing roads. A crucial step is to establish the KPIs for road safety components on the basis of a safe road system. The Balai function is crucial to the achievement of the NRSMP and they need to be adequately supported and their capacity substantially strengthened. Their function, in accordance with the DGH strategic plan, is to provide coordinating support, development and supervision of the implementation of the road safety program.

For the existing network, the following framework attempts to set out what is required to achieve a new performance based approach. The important recommended influences of safe road system thinking, adoption of road safety KPIs, progressive use of IRSMS data and iRAP assessments, and improved access control measures can all be used to support further focused safety improvements.

Figure 2. Framework for safety improvement on existing roads

Road Act Traffic and Road

No. 38/2004 Transportation Act

No. 22/2009

Laik Fungsi Rencana Umum Nasional Rencana Strategis Direktorat

(Fit for Purpose) Keselamatan (RUNK) Jenderal Bina Marga

Program (National Road Safety DGH Strategic Plan 2011-2014

Strategy)

Laik Fungsi Bina Marga Establishing Key Performance

Recommendation RUNK Progran for Indicators for Road Safety in

and Certification Safer Road the DGH Strategic Plan

Adopt Safe System Approach

Road Crash Reduction Implementation

Program on Certified in Balai' s package programs

Laik Fungsi Section

IRSMS Data Black spot Counter Access Control Support by Local Regulation

Traffic Police Measures on National Roads (Perda) and active role by

Balai and local governments

iRAP Program Implementation of

Safer Road by Design

Road Safety Assurance

NB. There are likely to be blackspots on the network outside the Laik Fungsi assessed areas that will require treatment

New road developments are progressively to be subjected to the RSA process. This is addressed in detail in Working Paper 4. The Balai need to be supported to deliver this change to commence production of inherently safer new roads as they are constructed.


25


4.3 LAIK FUNGSI EXTENSION

The Laik Fungsi activity can be considered to be an important base for later extension of the safety program. Having received comments prepared by the Laik Fungsi assessment / evaluation teams (consisting of DGH, DGLT and Traffic Police), the Balai can develop road safety programs immediately to address observed and recorded safety shortcomings. These programs are likely to grow in scope but from the outset will need to cover programming, planning, training, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation.

From discussions with Balai 1 in Medan, the target requirement of Laik Fungsi annual assessment is an average annual coverage across all Balai of 40% of national road length. The Head of Balai 1 suggested that after the Laik Fungsi survey was carried out, the safety defects and blackspots noted in the assessment could subsequently be comprehensively addressed in one package of treatments which could be approved by DGH to be implemented in the following year, rather than piecemeal treatment of these identified unsafe locations over a longer unspecified period.

This approach is supported in principle. However, the scale of the required “packages” are likely to be substantial and the costs very high. It is critical that DGH avoids the false perception that the treatment of road safety deficiencies is usually low cost in nature.

Research has indicated crash reduction benefits from the following:

providing hard shoulders on major roads

achieving appropriate speed limits for the infrastructure and environment

implementing effective policing to achieve compliance

A study by Umar (2006) revealed that the sealed hard shoulder program carried out on rural Malaysian highways was able to reduce the risk of motorcycle fatalities by 35%.

Another study carried out by Tjahjono (2009) based on the EINRIP rural roads monitoring and evaluation study suggests that reducing road width (including hard shoulder) from 7.0m to 6.0m, 5.0m, and 4.5m, respectively will increase the risk of fatalities per km by 30%; 110% and 130 % respectively.

Therefore, sealed hard shoulder provision is an important component in achieving safer roads and providing a relatively “quick win” for reduction of road crash fatalities. If combined with appropriate speed limit setting and signage (by DGH and DGLT) and effective enforcement (by INP- Traffic Corps), the benefits, especially for reductions in motorcyclist and pedestrian fatalities, are likely to be of the order of 20% to 25% of all fatalities on the relevant lengths of national road.

It is recommended that a program of sealed hard shoulder construction be initiated for all Laik Fungsi assessed sections. Where it is possible to construct a widened shoulder within the right of way, and where adequate lane widths of 3.5m (3.0m minimum) can



be preserved. Further, it is recommended that appropriate speed limits be agreed with DGLT and the Police and adequate signage installed. DGH should support INP – Traffic Corps to implement speed enforcement especially on the treated and signed national road lengths. This approach could be implemented as soon as funding could be made available.

There is also a good opportunity for national highway multi-sectoral demonstration projects to be planned and implemented. For example in Java, to meet two different objectives (economic development and tourism corridors), two suggested locations could be selected. A section of the Northern Java Corridor (Pantura) and the Borobudur to Jogjakarta highway are suggested. If supported, the Balai could be asked to develop a report about the crashes and crash risk for each length, including iRAP assessment, and what could be done to improve road safety. Expert international support providing some technical advice for these demonstration projects would be advisable.

Intersection crashes are likely to be a major issue on the national network and relevant safety improvement treatments in demonstration projects in urban and rural areas could provide useful templates for broader adoption. There is a need to upgrade the standards for intersection design so that inherently unsafe intersections (e.g. Y-junctions) are no longer constructed. It is understood that Laik Fungsi does not currently identify intersections that are not fit for purpose and this could be a useful enhancement to the process.

Blackspot treatments of intersections should continue but the major focus for these should be on the assessed Laik Fungsi sections to improve their safety performance and support subsequent reductions in fatal crashes along these lengths, in conjunction with the shoulder and speed measures outlined above.

It is understood that DGH are interested in implementing advisory speed signage at curves on the network. This is a non-regulatory measure which is supported, but it should be discussed with DGLT and INP – Traffic Corps (and local governments) prior to implementation in order to respect the road safety partnership approach underpinning the NRSMP and to ensure that all key road safety stakeholders are aware of its purpose.

4.4 FUTURE ROAD SAFETY KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Performance indicators will need to be developed to measure progress with the implementation of the NRSMP actions. The nature of these indicators is included in the action plan and a working group across DGH should be established to review and recommend effective KPIs and how they will be measured and reported and at what frequency.

As outlined in Section 3.1, some higher level KPIs relating to road safety activity should be devised and added to the existing suite of organisational KPIs currently in place. In


27


Section 4.3 the opportunity to build upon Laik Fungsi assessments through hard shoulder construction, achievement of safer travel speeds and treatment of known blackspots along the relevant lengths to achieve targeted fatality reductions is strongly supported.

Once successfully adopted by a Balai and established as a reliable corporate wide safety assessment tool, iRAP will provide invaluable support for progressively improving the safety of the Laik Fungsi assessed sections. This potential for continuous safety improvement building on the Laik Fungsi process offers considerable benefits to DGH as its network moves towards safe system operation over the decades ahead.

At present, there is strong interest by some International Funding Institutions (IFI) to only support new road projects that provide a three star iRAP standard of safety in construction and operation (speed management). In following the advice given above, DGH would be moving towards an approach utilising a set of tools that correctly applied in the right circumstances, have international support and offer the potential for a systematic improvement in safety outcomes.

Interim KPIs recommended for adoption (based on the material discussed in Section 4.3) by DGH for national highways could include the following:

Specific annual allocations for a readily identifiable program of treatments for safer roads (blackspot treatments) as part of the safer roads pillar of NRSMP

The length of sealed shoulder construction on existing roads each year

Reduction of annual road crash fatalities by 15 percent by 2016 on the Laik Fungsi assessed sections of the network

Zero tolerance of traffic crashes at road work zones to address health and safety environment (HSE) issues

As road crashes are due to a number of factors, the targets indicated above will benefit from implementation of a safe system approach for travel on Indonesian roads. This will require the other four safe system pillars (safe vehicles, road safety management, safe road users, and post crash care) to be implemented over the years ahead (as envisaged by the NRSMP) to support the safer roads and safer speed limit measures which are to be implemented progressively by DGH.

4.5 FUNDING OF ROAD SAFETY ACTIVITY

Current Situation

The Program Planning Directorate of DGH Bipran advise that currently no separate allocations are made to the Balai for blackspot treatment. Bipran have indicated that the current implementation of blackspot treatments at some 140 locations now and during 2013 and 2014 will be funded from the maintenance funds ‘bucket’.



However, it is understood that options are being explored within DGH (SubDit TLKJ and Bipran) to vary this approach. One option seeks a specific “add on” category of funding for blackspot treatments - additional to routine maintenance (and perhaps categories additional to periodic maintenance and additional to rehabilitation works) - for the budget for 2013 for each Balai.

Funding for RSAs, whist not specifically in place, is likely to be drawn from project budgets.

Directorate General of Land Transport (DGLT) has responsibility for the regulations for signs, linemarking, [traffic] signals and [roadside] furniture (SLSF) to be installed on Indonesian roads. It also has responsibility for funding and installation of these elements in many circumstances, often delegating this function to Dinas Provinsi or to Local Dinas within local government. DGLT also distributes national funds to provincial and local government annually to supplement local budgets for SLSF.

There are many coordination issues that would arise from any separation of funding and installation responsibility for infrastructure works on one hand and SLSF installation on the other. Effective coordination of the availability of funding of both components of projects is required. Effective coordination of the timing of installation of both components of projects is also called for in these circumstances. Any separation of responsibilities of these two components, including for smaller scale blackspot projects, would require high quality and demanding coordination efforts from both DGLT (or its delegate) and the relevant road authority.

For national roads the following circumstances are understood to apply. DGH has a current policy of installing linemarking on all new road works or rehabilitation works it carries out. In the case of new construction of national roads, the overall SLSF function is understood to be delegated to DGH. For routine maintenance DGH replaces deteriorated existing signs and linemarking, but does not install new signs and linemarking where these did not previously exist. For periodic maintenance activity DGH replaces and installs new SLSF.

If these arrangements are accepted by both parties (DGLT and DGH) and SLSF components of blackspot treatment are handled in the same way as periodic maintenance, it would appear to be a sensible outcome, providing clear accountability.

Maintenance of traffic signals (particularly in regional areas) appears to be virtually non-existent. International experts experienced in road safety evaluation across Indonesia contend that many traffic signal installations are not operational or not efficient due to a lack of maintenance. Maintaining infrastructure in good operating order is of course as much a road safety issue as is their original provision. While DGH staff need training in traffic engineering – for example in the provision of medians, channelisation at intersections and other treatments at intersections and pedestrian crossing treatments – the regulatory environment is the responsibility of Ministry of Transport (MoT). The provincial or local Dinas Perhubungan in accordance with MoT requirements usually carries out the maintenance of signals. However, funding for maintenance of signals is understood to be very limited.


29


The way forward

Road Safety Audit

A major intention of the RSA at design stage will be to detect shortcomings and address them rather than discovering deficiencies at the pre-completion stage. However, until contractors are firmly held to account by DGH project managers to deliver to specification there will continue to be efforts on the part of many of them to take short cuts, some of which would otherwise affect safety of users of the completed road works.

The pre-completion RSA is therefore necessary to require the contractor to rectify gaps in delivery of the specified level of safety of the product and to identify any major unforeseen safety shortcomings in the design. Therefore, a contingency amount allocated within the project budget will be advisable to enable any major concerns about design safety deficiencies at the pre-completion stage to be addressed. This contingency could only be drawn upon with the agreement of the project manager and of the head of the relevant Balai. Eventually, the need for such a contingency should be substantially reduced (ideally eliminated) once the audit regime is bedded in and becomes an accepted element of the design and implementation of projects.

It is suggested that the need for contingency drawdowns for projects following pre-completion RSAs would be reported on a six monthly basis at a meeting of Balai heads. This would enable trends to be identified over time in the effectiveness of RSA in reducing unintended safety shortcomings in project designs which are only identified at the pre-completion stage.

Blackspot Treatments

Blackspot funding should be drawn from a specifically identified budget allocation. Without the capacity to identify this expenditure in aggregate, trends from year to year cannot be identified as a measure of commitment to treating higher crash rate locations. This is an issue for DGH to resolve.

Targeted Road Safety Program Budgets for Three-Year Budget Cycle

Short term funding demands will be substantial if implementation is to be tackled in substance.

Selected targeted budgets for the Road Safety Program which are recommended to be included in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (3 Year Budget Cycle) have been identified in ANNEXES 4A and 4B. Recommended estimated (indicative) allocations have been identified for the external component of international technical assistance, for the major blackspot program rollout (additional to the current RENSTRA requirement) and for the iRAP pilot into 2014 and rollouts beyond that time. In addition resource requirements within DGH for the Balai and RSET have been estimated.



The suggested level of blackspot funding when the program is fully established is based upon experience at VicRoads when they introduced a substantially upgraded blackspot program in 2000. The preceding level of expenditure was some 1.5% of total expenditure annually and from 2000, this was increased to approximately 5% of total annual expenditure for blackspot programs. The current estimated cost for the DGH blackspot program needed to meet the RENSTRA target is 10,000,000,000 (10 bn.) IDR. This is approximately 0.03% of total annual expenditure. It is suggested that DGH move to allocate 1.5% of total expenditure for program development and implementation by 2014 for blackspots increasing to 5% of by 2016. Decisions need to be taken about what scale up of activity is desired and what is feasible, in terms of capacity and ramp up.

DGH staffing and the scope of training course requirements to be funded by DGH have been outlined but detailed cost estimates have not been prepared. Potential international support activities have been identified and estimated costs prepared (see Annex 4A and 4B).

Cross Government Responsibilities for Budgets and Implementation of Signs and Markings

For national roads, DGH are developing proposals for installation of SLSF recommended as a result of black spot improvement schemes; this is to avoid delays in the complete installation of the SLSF. It is understood DGLT have agreed that DGH can install SLSF (in accordance with MoT regulations and standards) for new road construction works, including rehabilitation works. DGH are informally replacing SLSF and installing new SLSF during periodic maintenance on national roads. Replacement of existing SLSF under routine maintenance on national roads is also informally being carried out. However, new SLSF installation is not carried out by DGH under routine maintenance which currently remains the responsibility of DGLT.

As indicated earlier, there are two major issues in relation to SLSF associated with blackspot construction projects. The first is the responsibility for funding, and the second is the responsibility for actual works implementation.

Again, as stated earlier, it does not appear to be sensible to split responsibility for funding and installation of the SLSF component of these relatively small projects from the funding and installation of the road pavement, drainage and associated works. In such a situation the coordination challenges for timely funding and installation are highly likely to overwhelm the actual project design and construction / installation management.

However, if agreement cannot be reached in these matters then a major coordination effort will be required by both DGH and DGLT, certainly at provincial level, to ensure prior agreement and subsequent delivery of funding and of implementation of SLSF is achieved. It will need to be effective in leading to timely installation of the SLSF i.e. any coordination will need to avoid the physical works component being completed well in advance of the actual SLSF component installation.


31


Two other related matters warrant consideration by DGH, DGLT and provincial and kota / kabupaten governments. DAK (national) funding is provided to local governments (provinces and kota / kabupaten) for provision of signs and linemarking. While it is understood that allocations for SLSF by the local governments from their own funding sources are very low, there is a potential issue as to the priorities of the local governments for installation of SLSF using this funding. It may be appropriate given the typically higher traffic volumes occurring on national roads, that some of this DAK funding to the local governments is directed by the local governments to national roads, for signage replacement and augmentation.

In addition the funding from central government and from local governments for maintenance of traffic signals, especially on national roads, is inadequate. This is a serious safety issue. A discussion between Bappenas, DGLT, DGH and the Department of Home Affairs is probably the most appropriate course of action to be followed to further consider these issues and develop a partnership approach to information sharing and training between organisations.

4.6 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING FOR NRSMP DELIVERY

Actions within the NRSMP document which are the prime responsibility of DGH have been examined. Indicative institutional strengthening to enable delivery of the detailed actions within the NRSMP are summarised in the Table 2. Some of the key issues commented upon in the table include the following:

Worksite safety: Various manuals and DVDs have been recently produced by IndII including material around worksite safety. A comprehensive classroom and on site monitoring program is required across the Balai over the next few years to establish changed practice

Safer new road planning: Implementation of safer new road planning is a critical issue for DGH. Application of safer roads by design/ safe system thinking and RSA to new road (and major reconstruction) proposals at concept and design stages is required.

Improving safety of existing roads (blackspots, iRAP and Laik Fungsi): Implementation of safer road inspections for existing roads is also critical to improve the inherent safety of operation of existing sections of the road network through potential safety improvement solutions. Measures should be prioritised around known blackspot locations and augmented in the near future with an iRAP type of risk analysis. Training of the Balai staff is needed now.

Identifying and developing treatments for blackspot locations is a key priority for DGH. In addition, once iRAP has been further developed for use in Indonesia by DGH and IRE, it will be a very useful tool that can identify higher crash risk sections of the network in an objective manner and provide recommendations on types of safety related treatment that should be integrated into the design. IndII is supporting this work through expert technical assistance. These approaches can build on the opportunity



which the Laik Fungsi assessment process provides to identify cost effective safety improvement treatments which would reduce crash risk and outcome severity.

It is suggested that DGH discuss the extension of the Laik Fungsi process to consideration of road safety crash risk, due to infrastructure features, right of way standards, abutting land use and access issues and traffic mix issues. The iRAP tools will provide support in due course for this assessment. In the interim, a program of provision of sealed hard shoulders and blackspot treatments on assessed lengths would serve to improve the safety standard of those assessed sections. The issue could usefully be the subject of a workshop of senior staff in 2013.

Speed management: Speed management measures will be highly challenging but will provide substantial benefits, especially in areas with high proportions of vulnerable road users i.e. pedestrians and motorcyclists, which are most likely to be urban areas. Clear establishment and signage of appropriately safe speed limits is a key early action for DGH. The setting of limits will need to be coordinated with Dinas Perhubungan at provincial level and with local police. The national Dinas Perhubungan should also be included in these discussions. A working group should be established to which international expert technical support should be provided. This group should include representation from the police, Dinas Perhubungan at provincial / local government level and a DGLT representative. It is critical that adopted speed limits reflect safe system operation of the section of road and the inherent crash risk of the section, as determined objectively by iRAP.

Safer roadsides – a governance issue: A safer road environment relies substantially on improved control of the roadside environment in relation to safety, activity in the right of way and development abutting the right of way. These are all major issues for Indonesia and pose substantial challenges to the improvement of safety on the road network. For example, agreements between DGH and individual local governments are executed but are often not complied with by local governments pressure builds to permit economic development on a national highway.

Developed countries ensure that the safety needs of the highway network receive strong consideration in the land use planning process, with community interest receiving priority over individual economic interest. Stringent conditions are placed on the developer for access to the national highway network, often requiring construction of distributor roads on the developer’s land, linking to limited access points to the highway; or developer contributed major intersection treatments to control traffic movements more safely. Roadside development and use guidelines agreed by DGH and local governments and ratified by central and local governments are needed as a priority. This will be a substantial undertaking requiring political leadership. DGH should initiate a working group, possibly coordinated by Bappenas with local government and other agency representation (e.g. Police, DGLT). Agreed outcomes could be included in the Road Act.

Roadside activities (traders’ stalls, warungs, etc. on the road reserve) should also be regulated by strengthening legislation if necessary and with effective sanctions to deter unauthorised use and illegal approval of such use by local governments. A joint


33


DGH / LG monitoring and enforcement group should operate in each province / kabupaten / kota. The working group referred to above should also develop protocols for improved control of these activities.

A draft working paper should be developed by DGH as an early task to assist the case for formation of the working group. Support for technical assistance to the working group for this substantial task will be necessary.

Pedestrian safety: Pedestrian safety along and across roads in Indonesia is poor with more than 20% of fatalities made up of pedestrians (based on 2011 Central Java Police data, unofficial). Policies need to be strengthened and adopted for potential effective treatments at higher risk locations and funding allocated for implementation. It will be necessary to include local governments, the police and Dinas Perhubungan at provincial level in discussions about higher risk locations and their potential treatment. The Laik Fungsi assessments could usefully be extended in time to assess whether footpaths are provided where needed and are fit for purpose.

It is recommended that a pedestrian safety manual be prepared as has been done for road worksite safety.

4.7 BALAI – A FOCUS FOR STRENGTHENING

No specific allocation for road safety programs have traditionally been set in DGH, including the current low cost blackspot improvement program. Blackspot improvement programs are not necessarily large cost projects compared to, for example road realignment or by-pass programs, but their potential impact will be very substantial in supporting achievement of the target to reduce fatalities by 50% by 2020, as specified in the NRSMP.

The Balai are in the front line of this activity and there is a need to encourage a greater safety component in their packages of work if crash reductions to meet the NRSMP objectives and targets are to be achieved. Road safety engineering teams need to be established at the Balai level under the Seksi Perencanaan dan Lingkungan (Planning and Environment Section) as a matter of priority. In addition it is considered that it will be necessary to resource each P2JN within each province with one or two road safety engineering staff. This proposed action was suggested and supported by officers at various levels in the organisation.

Without a major boost to this resource the very major shift in focus required by the NRSMP will not be delivered. Provision of safety resources will also be a large catalyst for change to a more safety focused organisation. The teams to be trained in road safety in order to give effect to the NRSMP should also involve Dinas level staff for sub-national roads, engineers from private consultants, and local contractors.

Under the Road Act No. 38, DGH has responsibilities for national roads, provincial roads, kabupaten and Kota roads. The RSET will need to be able to rely in large on the



Balai to deliver on this responsibility as it relates to road safety advice and capacity development. The scale of the resourcing required for the Road Safety Engineering Team in each Balai will vary but should be in the order of three to four engineers and two technical assistants.

4.8 CENTRAL SUPPORT STRENGTHENING (RSET)

To meet these demands at the national level, the RSET therefore needs to be strengthened to:

meet the very substantial growth in road safety activity which is imminent in the Balai, including advice and training oversight they will be required to provide to the Balai and the organisation

provide the facilitation needed to take experience from the Balai and see it adopted as organisational policy or guidance

ensure their operation remains sustainable in the future after the end of IndII activities in DGH

Functions of the RSET

To support identification and agreement around the augmentation resources needed in the RSET, it is necessary to specify and agree the required functions of the team.

The recommended functions of the RSET can be summed-up as follows:

Provide strategic advice to DGH on directions to be pursued to improve road safety outcomes on the national roads network and deliver NRSMP actions

Support the Balai in progressively increasing understanding of the safe system approach, its underpinning of the NRSMP and its application in Indonesia

Provide standards, guidelines, assessment tools and capacity building advice, assistance and support for the provincial, kota, kabupaten and toll road authorities as specified in Road Act 38 and as implied in the NRSMP

Guide further development of DGH road safety policies based on experience and feedback from the Balai (with support as required by design groups within Bintek)

Support the Balai in accessing crash data from police, analysing that data to determine higher risk lengths and locations, implementing expanded blackspot identification and treatment, and crash risk analysis and treatment, including increased funding allocations

Support the Balai in progressively introducing RSA over the next few years. This should include:

i. information

ii. project funding arrangements (for conducting RSA and addressing outcomes)


35


iii. guidance and assistance

iv. establish accreditation procedures with a professional organisation such as the National Construction Services Development Board (LPJK)

v. establishing training course requirements with IRE in accordance with DGH adopted policy.

With assistance from Design Department, support the Balai in progressively introducing traffic engineering competence over the next few years

Obtain funding and resource and guide training programs for the Balai in the above and related areas

Monitor Balai incubation of iRAP and work over time to recommend policies and guidelines for use of iRAP to DGH corporate directors

Report on progress with these initiatives to DGH corporate directors through Bintek regularly

4.9 STAGED IMPLEMENTATION OF ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Working Paper 4 provides a detailed discussion of RSA and recommendations for future priorities in implementation.

The way forward

The knowledge and resources needed to implement the RSA process are substantial in scale for a national road authority such as DGH Indonesia. It will be important to monitor the process of independent [of the designer] review, and to record and monitor project manager decisions to not adopt some audit recommendations

Issues to be considered in examining options for introduction include:

The number of audit stages to be introduced (initially) for projects

What formal technical guidelines for the RSA should be adopted

What criteria should be used to identify projects that should initially be subjected to the audit process

How the audit task be resourced

How auditors will be approved to conduct road safety audit work

How audit findings and non-adoption by the project managers will be recorded

Who will oversee the process and its introduction from a corporate level

Approaches proposed for each of these issues are set out below:



Recommended [initial] Audit Stages

The Austroads’ Guide to Road Safety Part 6: Road Safety Audit indicates that there are typically four opportunities or stages within the design and development process for a road or traffic project when a road safety audit can be conducted, regardless of the size or nature of the project. These are at the feasibility stage, the preliminary design stage, the detailed design stage, and at the pre-opening stage (or soon after completion).

It is recommended that initially audits are carried out at the detailed design stage and the pre-opening (pre completion) stage in the initial two years of implementation at least.

In order to bring a focus on what moving towards a safe system on the network requires for new projects, it is also recommended that a project focused peer group discussion be progressively introduced (over the next two years) at the preliminary design stage. This should be done before the detailed design stage and should consider safe system principles applicable to the project and its design and operation.

Guidelines for Road Safety Audit

The Austroads’ Road Safety Audit Guide, which provides relevant and comprehensive guidance could usefully be adopted, with a translated version adopted initially. It is understood that these guidelines are being utilised by DGH and with appropriate adjustment for Indonesian conditions over time, this approach is supported. Provision for updating the audit guide as a priority should be made in budgets over the next two years.

Selection Criteria for Identifying Projects for Audit

For years 2013 and 2014, the following priority projects for RSA are suggested:

All new construction projects (above a value of 2,500,000,000 IDR) across Indonesia

For reconstruction and rehabilitation projects (involving capacity expansion initially) above a value of 1,000,000,000 IDR in each Balai, prioritise projects by traffic volume on the project route length and the value of the project. Consideration could also be given to lower volume but high economic value or high tourism significance corridors

The prioritisation process should be reviewed annually. The overall monitoring of the policy and guidelines for application of RSA should be conducted by the RSET within the Subdit TLKJ. The RSET would work with the Balai to provide information, guidance and assistance (including arranging for establishing accreditation procedures and establishing training course requirements with IRE).

The Subdit TLKJ through Bintek should report regularly to the corporate directors of DGH on progress.


37


Resourcing the Audit Task

The RSA process is an activity that relies for its value and effectiveness upon being conducted by road engineering personnel independent of the design team for a project. As such, the audit role is likely to require resource (and expertise) that is additional to that allocated to the current design workload.

This workload needs to be estimated by each Balai with appropriately skilled resource then allocated.

Approving Auditors to Carry Out this Work

The audit function should be progressively developed and be capable of being carried out by a range of officers both within the Balai and in the private sector. Training and development should seek to develop that broad group in the first two years with a training and accreditation process to be put in place which becomes fully operational during that period.

A RSA education program in each Balai for a two-year period is included in the recommendations of this report. However, in the short term, a one-week intensive course for prospective auditors, probably in Jakarta, who are at least degree level civil engineering graduates is recommended in order to provide a pool of basically trained individuals within the Balai who are able to commence the audit process.

An ongoing auditor approval / accreditation process of this nature (subject to review of content and duration) needs to be established and IRE would be a logical group to operate such an accreditation process with support from a suitable international partner, such as ARRB.

The separate reviews of practice and further education envisaged in the recommended two monthly one-day RSA training in each Balai will strengthen the skills of the accredited auditors and of others who wish to learn about the RSA process and perhaps will then be motivated to undertake the RSA accreditation course.

Recording Audit Findings and Actions Taken

Austroads recommends that the findings of an audit should be recorded in a written report that is tendered to the client, (usually the project manager or the (Head of the Balai) road authority).

“Those findings, together with any recommendations that may have been made, should be carefully considered by the client. Each decision reached on a finding should be recorded in writing.

It is not anticipated that every finding or recommendation of an audit should immediately be accepted by the client. When they are accepted by the client, a follow-up order should be made, specifying the means of correction and the source of funding for such corrections, if necessary.



If a particular audit or review finding does require attention, consider assigning to the work a priority classification such as immediate, within the current budget period or as and when funds permit.”

When audit findings or recommendations are not adopted, Austroads recommends that “the client record both the decision not to accept it and the reasons that led the client to reject it, modify it or not immediately implement the recommended course of action.”

This (or an alternative agreed process) should be documented by DGH and promulgated as a policy for the organisation in dealing with RSA findings. A database of findings and decisions to implement or to not implement, with reasons and any associated recommendations, needs to be established and maintained with appropriate monitoring and oversight of the organisations adherence to the process of dealing with RSA findings.

In addition to the above provisions in the guide, it is recommended that:

when documenting decisions taken on responding to audit recommendations, the responsible client project manager should submit them to a superior for review and for recording in an organisation or Balai wide database which should be established

when implementing the decisions and amending the design, ensure the project cost estimate is also adjusted and necessary additional funding is requested.

Summary of RSA Recommendations

The IndII (VicRoads) PHO report on RSA findings for the EINRIP projects is a valuable resource document for guidance about technical and process issues and challenges to be addressed by DGH as RSA is introduced. It should be utilised for guidance.

Road safety audits should be carried out at the detailed design stage and the pre-completion stage for the first two years of implementation. Extension to another two stages should be considered from that time.

The recommended selection criteria for projects for audit for the next two years are:

i. All new construction projects (above a value of 2,500,000,000 Rupiah) across Indonesia

ii. For reconstruction and rehabilitation projects above a value of 1,000,000,000 Rupiah in each Balai; prioritise projects by traffic volume and corridor significance and the value of the project. Consideration could also be given to lower volume but high economic value or high tourism significance corridors.

Each Balai should estimate the workload associated with the conduct of RSAs, with appropriately skilled resource then allocated. In time, when sufficient skilled practitioners exist, some of this expertise can be contracted in from the private sector.


39


A peer review process should be introduced within each Balai to consider safe system compliance for larger new and rehabilitation projects at the preliminary design stage.

The AustRoads’ RSA guidelines should be utilised for the first year period with appropriate adjustment for Indonesian requirements and upgraded by 2014 to reflect good practice for Indonesia.

RSA training and accreditation for practitioners is an urgent, immediate requirement. A one-week intensive course for prospective auditors, probably in Jakarta, who are at least degree level civil engineering graduates is recommended in order to provide a pool of basically trained individuals within the Balai who are able to commence the audit process. An ongoing auditor approval / accreditation process of this nature (subject to review of content and duration) needs to be established and IRE would be a logical group to operate such an accreditation process with support from a suitable international partner, such as ARRB.

The actions taken (or deliberately not taken) on RSA recommendations provided to the project manager should be recorded in a written report that is tendered to the Head of the Balai, including reasons for not adopting any of the RSA recommendations.

4.10 IMPLEMENTATION OF BLACKSPOT TREATMENTS

The current VicRoads support over two years for implementation of the RENSTRA blackspot target by 2014 is the most appropriate means for DGH to establish policies and guidelines for blackspot treatment.

4.11 NEED FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING EXPERTISE

While DGLT has the responsibility to define and promulgate the regulations and standards in Indonesia, for SLSF there is a lack of trained engineers to develop traffic engineering treatment designs at DGH. These treatments are virtually nonexistent on the Indonesian network.

Suitable safety improvement treatments should be designed to apply SLSF standards that are supplemented with infrastructure treatments such as channelisation and median treatments and other minor works to address traffic flow and traffic safety issues at key locations on the network. Much training and development is needed here. Cooperation with DGLT in training and application of knowledge is advised. Training in each Balai each quarter over a two year period is recommended.



4.12 APPLICATION OF IRAP

Further to the completed activities and current development situation with iRAP implementation as set out in Section 2.5, the importance of iRAP assessments to DGH and other road authorities in due course in Indonesia cannot be over emphasised. The data collection and analysis process needs to be incubated and agreed approaches established in a Balai. This will enable crash risk on a section of road for various crash types (i.e. head-on, run-off road, intersection, including side friction, and pedestrian and motorcycle risk) to be determined separately or in aggregate.

IRE are the logical entity to provide a base of support and guidance to the Balai. While larger Balai such as Balai 4 have the enthusiasm and resources to incubate iRAP themselves with some external support, for other smaller Balai, support from an expert group, such as a trained IRE unit, would be highly desirable.

Within the current IndII consultants contract for support to DGH, there is to be further development of iRAP assessment capability in 2012/13 with approximately 2,500 km of key corridors to be identified and surveyed.

As noted earlier, iRAP approaches offer the potential in due course for cost effective extension of Laik Fungsi assessments to road safety factors beyond the pavement, which will further strengthen the safety credentials of the Laik Fungsi outcomes.

Further network surveys of safety related parameters are proposed to be carried out in 2013 under the oversight of VicRoads as the consultant for IndII Activity 250-05 (component 2). Surveys of a further 2,500 km of national road are to be conducted over the first twelve months of the assignment. It is likely that Balai 4 with guidance from IRE (and VicRoads and iRAP) will utilise their existing mobile data collection equipment to obtain this data, to carry out the crash risk assessments and to develop potential treatments with cost estimates.

The data will then be coded into iRAP to establish the level of road safety risk.

This planned iRAP activity will start the expansion of learning in DGH about what constitutes crash risk on roads and roadsides, how it can be quantified and how it can be cost effectively treated.


41

CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS


So much of the institutional development within DGH required to implement the NRSMP actions mirrors the overall road safety institutional development needs of the organisation.

Recommended actions for institutional strengthening for the immediate and the medium term are set out below. These actions with their associated timeframes are also set out in ANNEX 1.

Recommended Immediate Strengthening Actions for DGH

Conduct a series of [half-day] workshops for senior executive staff to develop corporate positions on:

o safety by design and safe systems

o the processes for dialogue and decision making in order to achieve organisational consensus around potential road safety policies

o how and when change processes will be progressively implemented

Incorporate the NRSMP into the DGH Strategic Plan as a high priority.

Agree a series of high-level road safety KPIs for inclusion in the DGH corporate indicators and adopt these as an early priority.

Examine the proposed detailed KPIs in the NRSMP, recommend KPIs to be adopted and detail how they will be measured and reported and at what frequency.

Review budgeting processes within Bipran to determine how budget allocations will be made for blackspot improvements and to address the additional costs associated with implementing RSA recommendations. Whilst it is understood that DGH does not currently support such an approach to funding for various reasons, experience elsewhere suggests it is a critical to mainstreaming road safety. The goal of embedding road safety principles within DGH is that all projects will exhibit good road safety practices. However, defining an annual budget for each Balai for blackspot implementation will enable a simple measure of performance to be established. It will support new thinking about safety treatments where the road sections are inherently and obviously unsafe.

Negotiations between DGH and DGLT should continue until agreement is reached about organisational responsibilities, including those for funding and implementation for the provision of SLSF associated with blackspot treatment delivery. Involve Bappenas as facilitator and the Ministry of Home Affairs for local government SLSF activity.

Agree that the functions of the RSET include the matters specified in Section 4.8 of this Report and require early additional resourcing to deliver on these responsibilities. Demands on the HR and Design areas as road safety is further mainstreamed also need to be recognised and addressed. Increase the resourcing



of the central RSET within the Subdit TLKJ to guide the above processes, (supported by Design department) and to deliver outcomes arising from the other functions of (and demands upon) the RSET.

Manage the national consultants group and the DGH staff in the RSET as one overall entity, reporting to the Head of the RSET. Imminent planned co-location will assist the achievement of integrated resource planning and management. Planning for funding is necessary to anticipate a response to the conclusion of operating support by IndII for the national consultants.

Establish a Road Safety Engineering Team in each Balai by the end of 2013 (2 to 3 engineers and 2 administrative staff) and also establish a RSE resource in each P2JN group.

Deliver the current required RENSTRA target of 150 implemented blackspots by 2014.

Commence a substantially expanded blackspot program development activity in 2013 for at least two Balai to build knowledge / expertise.

For new road (and major reconstruction) proposals apply safer roads by design / safe system thinking at project concept stage and apply RSA at design and pre-completion stages.

Implement the RSA processes in an agreed way in all Balai over the next few years of transition to broaden implementation and upgrade the Road Safety Audit Guide (currently a version of the AustRoads guide) as a priority.

Plan and deliver blackspot and RSA training in each Balai over the next two years (2013 and 2014) through expert International and DGH staff. Two separate programs should be provided to staff actively involved in the Balai: (1) blackspot analysis and treatment development programs and traffic engineering; and (2) RSA programs / safer roads by design / safe system approaches. A full day of training each month is proposed separately for each stream.

The recommended one day (each month) RSA training in each Balai will review actual practice being followed and provide further instruction to strengthen the skills of the accredited auditors and of others who wish to learn about the RSA process. Local government and local consultant’s staff should be included in this training.

Strengthen traffic engineering capacity in each Balai in 2013. Suitable safety improvement treatments should be designed to apply SLSF standards. These should be supplemented with infrastructure treatments such as channelisation, median treatments and other minor works / pedestrian safety facilities to address traffic safety issues at key locations on the network. Cooperation with MoT (DGLT) in training and application of knowledge / sharing of information is advised. Plan and deliver traffic engineering training in each Balai every quarter over the next two years (2013 and 2014) through expert International and DGH staff.

Deliver training in roadwork site safety utilising the recently published IndII supported manual and DVD to all Balai, supported by international expertise during


43


2013. It will be crucial for the Balai to establish monitoring arrangements for their work sites to ensure continuous improvement occurs over time.

Build upon Laik Fungsi assessed lengths to improve their safety by constructing sealed hard shoulders and address blackspots as soon as funding is available.

Actively pursue development of capacity to utilise iRAP tools to identify higher crash risk sections on the network over the next three to five years, with one or two Balai incubating and piloting the approach.

Expertise in blackspot treatment is considered a required skill for effective use of iRAP type programs. This initiative should be trailed in one or two Balai and it will be very important that the RSET monitors this incubation activity. After successful adoption of the process within the pilot Balai, iRAP should be applied across all Balai.

To support moving towards a safe system on the network (in terms of safety policies and guidelines for new projects), it is recommended that a project focused peer group discussion process be progressively introduced in the Balai for projects (over the next two years) at the concept or preliminary design stage, (before audit activity is commenced at the detailed design stage) to consider safe system principles applicable to a project and its design and operation – before the detailed design stage commences.

Adopt the following as corporate road safety KPIs:

o specific annual allocations for a readily identifiable program of treatments for safer roads (blackspot treatments) as part of the safer roads pillar of NRSMP

o the length of sealed shoulder construction on existing roads each year

o reduction of annual road crash fatalities by 15% by 2016 on the Laik Fungsi assessed sections of the network

o zero tolerance of traffic crashes at road work zones to address health and safety environment (HSE) issues

Formalise an agreement with INP – Traffic Corps about the mechanism to be used by DGH to access IRSMS data in the future.

Short term funding demands will be substantial. Recommended allocation estimates for external international technical assistance, for the major blackspot rollout (additional to the current RENSTRA requirement), for the iRAP pilot in 2014, and rollouts beyond that time are shown in ANNEXES 2A and 2B.

National funding through MoT or local governments for maintenance of traffic signals should be increased. DGH could usefully initiate discussion about this deficiency with Bappenas and MoT.

Recommended Medium Term Strengthening Actions for DGH

There are a number of key issues that are likely to require some years of effort to develop policies and have them discussed and adopted by the organisation. An appropriate internal process is required to be established for these activities.



Mechanisms such as short term (two to four weeks duration) staff exchanges with international road authorities and seminars for DGH staff by DGH expert staff and international experts to inform and obtain input about road safety policy related matters should also be pursued. DGH will benefit from opening up to fresh ideas and encouraging a continuous change and improvement culture.

It is recommended that a series of working groups be established with membership from the Subdit TLKJ and other central DGH sections with road safety responsibilities plus Balai (and possibly Wilayah) representatives. International expertise would be advisable to guide and support the work of these groups. These working groups should report on a regular basis to a corporate forum (regular meetings of Directors and DG [a corporate management group] or other corporate decision making mechanism used currently) or a special newly established Senior Road Safety Planning Group.The suggested working groups should have defined Terms of Reference with a nominated DGH staff member as chair who would be accountable for progress and outcomes. The group should have access to expertise including legal advice, consultation arrangements with other relevant agencies, a defined timeframe for completing their activity, and would be expected to report to a high level corporate committee on a regular basis. As outlined above, this committee could be an existing corporate committee or a specifically designated and newly established entity such as a Senior Road Safety Planning Group within DGH. This could consist of the DG, Wilayah Heads, Head of Bintek, Head of Bipran, Head of one Balai, Head of the Subdit TLKJ and an international expert representative.

It is recommended working groups are established to focus on the following topics (recognising that other safety issues may emerge over time):

Control of roadside activities and land use developments abutting national roads. DGH should initiate the working group, perhaps coordinated by Bappenas with local government and other agency representation (e.g. Police, DGLT, and Ministry of Home Affairs). Consideration should be given to including the agreed outcomes in the Road Act legislation. A joint DGH / LG monitoring and enforcement group should be established in each province / kabupaten / kota.

Laik Fungsi extension and safety standards development. Consider extending the certification process over time to include identifying to what extent the section of road meets safer roads by design / safe system principles.

Commence with a workshop of senior staff to discuss the issue. Look to include further qualifications in the Laik Fungsi certification process in the near future. Build organisational road safety principles and standards over time against which the network is then measured in addition to existing Laik Fungsi matters. iRAP will assist identification of much of this unseen crash risk on lengths of the network when it is available.

Appropriate measures to address this risk could then be implemented following Laik Fungsi inspection / assessment.


45


Pedestrian safety and facilities. Consider safety issues and develop proposed standards for safe movement of pedestrians along and across national roads. Policies need to be devised and adopted for potential treatments at higher risk locations and funding sought for implementation. It will be necessary to include local governments and the police and Dinas Perhubungan at provincial level in discussions about higher risk locations and potential treatments. Develop pedestrian safety treatment policies and guidelines with local government and MoT involvement. Extend Laik Fungsi assessments in due course to assess whether footpaths are provided where needed and are fit for purpose. Prepare a pedestrian safety manual for use by DGH and liaise with MoT and local governments in its production to obtain their input.

Review of road maintenance activities / practice. Identify ways in which safety can be improved at low cost though changes in practices to obtain organisational agreement and then to guide implementation.

Speed management. Effective speed management enforcement will require DGH to review and where necessary identify adjusted safe (for the safety standard of infrastructure) upper speed limits. It will need to work with local police and Dinas Perhubungan at provincial and local levels to agree and install necessary signage. DGLT should also be involved in this process.

DGH should give support to police in their efforts to build their enforcement skills and capacity, and to explain to the judicial system the benefits of safer travel speeds through appropriate limits and enforcement of those limits by police. DGLT involvement in this activity is also recommended.

It is understood that DGH are interested in implementing advisory speed signage at curves on the network. This is a non-regulatory measure which is supported, but it should be discussed with DGLT and INP – Traffic Corps (and local governments) prior to implementation in order to respect the road safety partnership approach underpinning the NRSMP and to ensure that all key road safety stakeholders are aware of its purpose.

Funding for road safety measures. Review and strengthen allocations for road safety funding within the DGH budget to respond to the demands that exist and will increasingly emerge as demand to implement iRAP and blackspot treatment options increase. Funding for safety projects will require linkage to new safety related corporate KPIs.

Provision of guidance and support to the provincial and local governments. Under the Road Act No. 38, DGH has responsibilities for national roads, provincial roads, kabupaten and Kota roads. The RSET will need to be able to rely in large on the Balai to deliver on this responsibility as it relates to road safety advice and capacity development.

Corporate policy guidance will be needed to assist the DGH with meeting these obligations. Simple tools to improve capacity at provincial, kabupaten and kota levels will be needed as will adequate funding.



ANNEX 1A: IMMEDIATE ROAD SAFETY STRENGTHENING RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDED ACTION LEAD

RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

1 Blackspots Implementation (RENSTRA) and learning, with VicRoads Int’l support

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai

2 iRAP Pilot implementation and learning, with VicRoads Int’l support.

Develop capacity to utilise iRAP tools within Balai 4 to identify higher crash risk sections on network.

Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Senior mgmt, IndII (VicRoads)

3 DGH Workshop on development of corporate road safety priorities

Bintek (Subdit TLKJ, RSET), Senior Mgmt

4 Program development for additional blackspot projects in each Balai

Bipran, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Wilayah

5 Establish a new RSE Team in each Balai and appoint staff Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), HR, Bipran

6 Establish an RSE Officer in each P2JN group in each Balai and appoint staff

Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran


47

ANNEXES


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


7 Agree RSET function (Sec 6.9) and strengthen RSET establishment within Subdit TLKJ

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran

8 Plan Blackspot training session content/timing for each Balai – one day per month

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Consultants

9 Deliver Blackspot training sessions in each Balai – one day per month for 2 years


10 Agree corporate guidelines for selection of projects to be audited in first two years.

Upgrade RSA guide/ manual from current documentation by 2014.

Senior Mgmt, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai

11 Engage IRE to provide intensive initial two week road safety audit training for Balai to provide a start up RSA resource in the Balai

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, IRE, Consultants

12 Commence road safety audit in each Balai – larger projects on major national road corridors, with high volumes. Audit at two stages: design and pre completion

Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET)

13 For new road (and major reconstruction) proposals apply Safer roads by design/ Safe system thinking at project concept stage




RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


14 Develop and offer two week duration accreditation courses in RSA for DGH central, Balai, local government and local consultant staff. Suggest 6 courses per year

National Construction Services Dev’lopment Board

15 Plan Road safety audit training session content/timing in each Balai–1 day per mth


16 Deliver RSA training sessions in each Balai – one day per month for 2 years


17 Deliver Training in road works site safety to Balai Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Consultant

18 Consider developing and implementing two demonstration projects (possibly in Central Java) applying iRAP with VicRoads Intl. and iRAP support

Relevant Balai, Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Bipran

19 Extend RAP to all Balai Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai IV, Design, Bipran, Snr management

20 Incorporate the NRSMP (RUNK) into the DGH Strategic Plan Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Senior mgmt.

21 Agree high level road safety DGH corporate KPI’s Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Senior mgmt.


49

ANNEXES


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


22 Review detailed KPI’s in the NRSMP (RUNK), recommend KPI’s to be adopted, detail how they will be measured and reported and at what frequency.

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Senior mgmt.

23 Review budgeting processes with Bipran to determine how budget allocations will be made for blackspot improvements

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran, Senior mgmt.

24 Negotiations by DGH with DGLT for agreement for organizational responsibilities for funding/implementation for blackspot related SLSF, on national roads.

Bappenas, DGH, DGLT, Ministry of Home Affairs.

25 Manage national consultants and DGH staff in RSET as one entity

Subdit TLKJ, IndII, Bintek

26 Plan Traffic engineering training session content/timing in each Balai – 1 day / quarter


27 Deliver Traffic engineering training sessions in each Balai – 1 day/month for 2 years


28 Build on laik fungsi assessed lengths to improve safety by constructing sealed hard shoulders and addressing blackspots

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Sen. Managm’t., Bipran




RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


29 A project focused peer group discussion process be progressively introduced for projects (over the next two years) at the preliminary design stage, (before audit activity is commenced at the detailed design stage) to consider safe system principles applicable to a project and its design and operation

Balai, Wilayah, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), to advise

30 Implement short term (two to four weeks duration) staff exchanges with international road authorities. Provide series of seminars for staff by DGH and international experts to inform/obtain input re road safety policy related matters

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Wilayah,

31 Formalise an agreement with INP – Traffic Corps about DGH access to IRSMS data

Bintek, [Subdit TLKJ (RSET)], Balai, Wilayah,


51

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1B: MEDIUM TERM ROAD SAFETY STRENGTHENING RECOMMENDATIONS


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


32 Develop Policies/ legislation for robust control of unsafe and unapproved road side activities

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Senior Mgmt., Min. Home Affairs, Bappenas

33 Plan to utilize (and implement) iRAP assessments to guide treatment selection to further strengthen safety of previously assessed laik fungsi sections of national road network.

Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Other Balai, Sen. Managm’t., Bipran

34 Review and strengthen pedestrian safety and facilities policies including production of a pedestrian safety manual

Bintek (Subdit TLKJ (RSET), and Design), Senior Mgmt.

35 Review and adopt road maintenance practices for low cost safety improvement opportunities

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Wilayah, Bipran, Sen. Mgmt

36 Introduce, work with DGLT, local governments and Police and monitor speed management program to reduce crash risk

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, DGLT, Design, INP – Traffic Corps




RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


38 Review and strengthen road safety funding within DGH budget Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran, Sen Mgmt, Wilayah

39 Provision of guidance and support to the provincial and local governments road construction activities (including road safety guidance and the NRSMP directions)

Sen Mgmt, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai


53

ANNEXES

ANNEX 2A: IMMEDIATE RESOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


1 Blackspots Implementation (RENSTRA) and learning, with VicRoads Int’l support

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai

Existing allocations

2 iRAP Pilot implementation and learning, with IndII support.

Develop capacity to utilise iRAP tools within Balai 4 to identify higher crash risk sections on network.

Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Senior mgmt, IndII

Existing allocation

Funding required for Pilot extension to meet treatment implementation. Estimate for useful pilot implementation is AUD 2m.

3 DGH Workshop on development of corporate road safety priorities

Bintek (Subdit TLKJ, RSET), Senior Mgmt. Intnl support

Allow AUD 10,000 for int’l expertise input

4 Program development for additional blackspot projects in each Balai

Bipran, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Wilayah

Implemnt’n funding required. Up to 1.5% of DGH budget by 2014 and up to 5% by 2016

5 Establish a new RSE Team in each Balai and appoint staff Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), HR, Bipran

Staff costs: some 50 positions

6 Establish an RSE Officer in each P2JN group in each Balai and appoint staff

Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran


7 Agree RSET function (Sec 6.9) and strengthen RSET establishment within Subdit TLKJ

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran


Review needs




RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


8 Plan Blackspot training session content/timing for each Balai – one day per month


Allow AUD 50,000 for int’l expertise

9 Deliver Blackspot training sessions in each Balai – one day per month for 2 years


DGH staff + International expertise: (Int’l costs AUD 0.5m pa for two years)

10 Agree corporate guidelines for selection of projects to be audited in first two years.

Upgrade RSA guide/ manual from current documentation by 2014.

Senior Mgmt, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai

Allow AUD 200,000 for internl expertise for upgrade of RSA guide/ manual

11 Engage IRE to provide intensive initial two week road safety audit training for Balai to provide a start up RSA resource in the Balai

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, IRE, Consultants

12 Commence road safety audit in each Balai – larger projects on major national road corridors, with high volumes. Audit at two stages: design and pre completion

Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET)

Consultants

AUD 50,000 for advice

13 For new road (and major reconstruction) proposals apply Safer roads by design/ Safe system thinking at project concept stage

14 Develop and offer two week duration accreditation courses in RSA for DGH central, Balai, local government and local consultant staff. Suggest 6 courses per year

National Construction Services Dev’lopment Board


55

ANNEXES


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


15 Plan Road safety audit training session content/timing in each Balai–1 day per mth


Allow AUD 50,000

for int’l expertise input

16 Deliver RSA training sessions in each Balai – one day per month for 2 years


DGH staff + International expertise: (Int’l costs AUD 0.5m pa for two years)

17 Deliver Training in road works site safety to Balai Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Consultant

Lead by DGH RSET

18 Consider developing and implementing two demonstration projects (possibly in Central Java) applying iRAP with IndII contract and iRAP support

Relevant Balai, Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Bipran, Consultants

Costs to be determined. AUD 2m each recommended scope. Internl. support for iRAP AUD 200k

19 Extend RAP to all Balai Balai, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai IV, Design, Bipran, Snr management, Consultants

Implementation will require substantial program ongoing. Perhaps 20% of DGH funding. Intnatl. iRAP support AUD 200K

20 Incorporate the NRSMP (RUNK) into the DGH Strategic Plan Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Senior mgmt.

21 Agree high level road safety DGH corporate KPI’s Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Senior mgmt.




RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


22 Review detailed KPI’s in the NRSMP (RUNK), recommend KPI’s to be adopted, detail how they will be measured and reported and at what frequency.

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Senior mgmt.

23 Review budgeting processes with Bipran to determine how budget allocations will be made for blackspot improvements

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran, Senior mgmt.

24 Negotiations by DGH with DGLT for agreement for organizational responsibilities for funding/implementation for blackspot related SLSF, on national roads.

Bappenas, DGH, DGLT, Ministry of Home Affairs.

25 Manage national consultants and DGH staff in RSET as one entity

Subdit TLKJ, IndII, Bintek

26 Plan Traffic engineering training session content/timing in each Balai – 1 day / mth


Allow AUD 50,000 for int’l expertise input

27 Deliver Traffic engineering training sessions in each Balai – 1 day/quarter for 2 years


DGH staff + International expertise: (Int’l costs AUD 0.3 m pa for two years)

28 Build on laik fungsi assessed lengths to improve safety by constructing sealed hard shoulders and addressing blackspots

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Sen. Managm’t., Bipran

Substantial allocations required.


57

ANNEXES


RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


29 A project focused peer group discussion process be progressively introduced for projects (over the next two years) at the preliminary design stage, (before audit activity is commenced at the detailed design stage) to consider safe system principles applicable to a project and its design and operation

Balai, Wilayah, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), to advise

30 Implement short term (two to four weeks duration) staff exchanges with international road authorities. Provide series of seminars for staff by DGH and international experts to inform/obtain input re road safety policy related matters

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Wilayah, Internatnl. support

Allow AUD 100,000 pa for int’l support/ expertise input for 5 years

31 Formalise an agreement with INP – Traffic Corps about DGH access to IRSMS data

Bintek, [Subdit TLKJ (RSET)], Balai, Wilayah,



ANNEX 2B: MEDIUM TERM RESOURCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES

RECOMMENDED ACTION LEAD RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


32 Develop Policies/ legislation for robust control of unsafe and unapproved road side activities

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bintek, Balai, Senior Mgmt., Min. Home Affairs, Bappenas. Internatnl support

Internatnl support AUD 50 k pa for two years

33 Plan to utilize (and implement) iRAP assessments to guide treatment selection to further strengthen safety of previously assessed laik fungsi sections of national road network.

Balai IV, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Design, Other Balai, Sen. Managm’t., Bipran

Build upon allocations recommended in Nos. 4, 19 and 28 above

34 Review and strengthen pedestrian safety and facilities policies and prepare pedestrian safety manual.

Bintek (Subdit TLKJ (RSET), and Design), Senior Mgmt. Intnl support for pedestrian safety manual

Internatnl support AUD 300 k for preparation of pedestrian safety manual

35 Review and adopt road maintenance practices for low cost safety improvement opportunities

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, Wilayah, Bipran, Sen. Mgmt

Internatl support AUD 100 k pa for three years


59

ANNEXES

RECOMMENDED ACTION LEAD RESPONSIBILITY

2013 2014


36 Introduce, work with DGLT, local governments and Police and monitor speed management program to reduce crash risk

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai, DGLT, Design, INP – Traffic Corps, Internal support

Internatl support AUD 100 k pa for three years

38 Review and strengthen road safety funding within DGH budget

Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Bipran, Sen Mgmt, Wilayah

Internatl support AUD 100 k

39 Provision of guidance and support to the provincial and local governments road construction activities (including road safety guidance and the NRSMP directions)

Sen Mgmt, Subdit TLKJ (RSET), Balai



A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL · PDF filePLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HIGHWAYS ... A STRATEGIC ROAD SAFETY PLAN FOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ... Jenderal Bina

Documents