Environmental Technical Assistance Program Newsletter

Many cities are turning to speed limiters for electric scooters to address concerns about rider safety and conflicts with pedestrians, according to new study conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Yet mandating low travel speeds may push more-scoot use onto sidewalks, the group’s research suggested.

[Above photo via IIHS]

“Our results show that restricting scooters to low speeds offers a trade-off,” said Jessica Cicchino, IIHS vice president of research and the study’s lead author, in a statement.

“At slow speeds, riders are more likely to choose the sidewalk over the road,” she added. “That puts them in less danger from cars but could mean more conflicts with people on foot.”

IIHS noted that e-scooter use has blossomed in the United States since the first shared e-scoot program officially launched in 2017. But as ridership has increased, so have injuries and citizen complaints. In response, many towns and cities have required speed limiters for shared e-scooters, with a 15 mph maximum speed the common limit.

To help understand the effect of different maximum speeds, IIHS researchers compared rider behavior in Austin, TX, and Washington, D.C. Austin caps shared e-scooter speeds at 20 mph, while Washington, D.C., makes the maximum speed 10 mph — one of the lowest in the United States. Neither city has an effective way to require speed limiters on privately owned scooters, IIHS noted in its study.

In both cities, e-scooter riders overwhelmingly rode in bike lanes where they were available. Where there were no bike lanes, however, riders in Washington, D.C., were 44 percent more likely than Austin riders to choose to ride on the sidewalk – and were more likely to favor the sidewalk despite lower vehicle traffic volumes when compared to the 16 Austin observation sites.

Overall, however, riders tended to choose the sidewalk when motor vehicle traffic was heavier, as well as on arterials and two-way roads. In contrast, the researchers recorded an increase in e-scooter riders in vehicle travel lanes on weekends, possibly because of lighter traffic.

E-scooter riders are doubtless safer from fatal injuries when they’re not sharing the road with motor vehicles. However, the net impact of sidewalk riding on less serious injuries to e-scooter users and pedestrians is unclear. A previous IIHS study showed that most e-scooter rider injuries in Washington, D.C., happened on the sidewalk but also that injuries that occurred on the road were more severe.

“E-scooter users clearly take risk into account when choosing where to ride,” said IIHS’s Cicchino. “Many are also conscious of the risk of hitting a pedestrian. [But] slowing down the fastest sidewalk riders should help prevent crashes and reduce the severity of injuries when e-scooters hit pedestrians. The clear preference for bike lanes also gives communities another reason to focus on expanding their bicycle networks.”

The researchers also analyzed rider behavior in the central business district of Washington, D.C., where sidewalk riding is prohibited. Despite the ban, IIHS found that two-thirds of e-scooter users rode on the sidewalks at locations without bike lanes that area – noting that riders in the central business district without bike lanes were also 38 percent more likely than riders in Austin to choose the sidewalk over the street.

There’s little evidence sidewalk bans are any more effective elsewhere. Nevertheless, two-thirds of U.S. communities are considering them or have them in place already, according to a 2022 survey by the Behavioral Traffic Safety Cooperative Research Program.

Others are mulling banning e-scooters from all or certain roads. Improvements in e-scooter technology could offer an alternative solution, IIHS noted, with some e-scooter companies now deploying systems that can detect when their e-scooters are on sidewalks.

As this technology matures, it could be used to apply separate speed restrictions for sidewalk riders or prevent sidewalk riding altogether in key locations, IIHS noted.

Researchers at the University of Alabama Birmingham recently unveiled a new smartphone-based application called “StreetBit” that uses Bluetooth beacon technology to prevent pedestrians from becoming distracted while navigating road crossings.

[Above photo by the UAB]

The school said the StreetBit app sends auditory and visual warnings to a distracted pedestrian’s smartphone as they approach a street corner where Bluetooth beacons are installed.

A new study co-written by five UAB researchers shows that the application is not only helpful, but also cost-effective by providing a template of how existing data sources can be leveraged to do cost-benefit analyses for any interventions designed to enhance pedestrian safety.

“We hope the template developed in this study can facilitate large-scale implementation of any intervention designed to prevent pedestrian fatalities and injuries by providing policymakers with information on the net benefits of the intervention,” said Jillur Rahim, first author of the study and statistician II in the UAB School of Public Health, in a statement.

“The findings can lead to significant cost savings for the states and, most importantly, save pedestrian lives by facilitating large-scale adoption of such programs,” Rahim added.

UAB said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has noted that more than 7,000 pedestrians were killed in the United States because of crashes involving motor vehicles in 2020, and that part of this issue can be attributed to excessive smartphone-related distractions.

For its study, UAB researchers analyzed pedestrian injury and death rates, expected costs per injury, and prevalence of distracted walking and estimated that StreetBit, or similar interventions, can potentially save between $18 million and $29 million annually in Alabama alone.

Even under the most conservative scenario, StreetBit could yield an estimated net annual benefit of $11.8 million for the state, the researchers said.

The UAB claimed its analysis – entitled ‘Cost–benefit analysis of a distracted pedestrian intervention’ and published in Injury Prevention – is the first U.S.-based study to demonstrate how existing data can be leveraged to predict the net monetary benefits of distracted pedestrian intervention programs.