Ensuring pedestrian safety through co-design and behaviour change models
Road crashes claim nearly 11.9 lakh lives globally every year, with two to five crore people suffering non-fatal injuries (as of 2023 data). Among these, vulnerable road users (VRUs)—including pedestrians, motorcyclists, and cyclists—account for over half of all traffic-related deaths. Pedestrians, in particular, face significant risks as they lack protection when sharing the road with vehicles. Crossing the road is especially hazardous, with many incidents occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where inadequate infrastructure exacerbates the danger.
Bangladesh is not immune to these challenges. Roadside environments near schools, factories, and commercial centres generate high volumes of pedestrian crossings, especially along major highways. Without proper infrastructure, crossing the road can be life-threatening; the road traffic fatality rate in the country is alarmingly high, at 102.1 fatalities per 10,000 vehicles—over 10 times the Southeast Asian average. In 2018, massive student protests erupted in Bangladesh after two high school students were killed in a road crash, highlighting the urgency of improving pedestrian safety. Traditionally, highway agencies have implemented at-grade crossings like zebra crossings or built footbridges and underpasses, but pedestrian usage of these facilities remains low.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. 
In developing countries like Bangladesh, the debate over pedestrian safety often revolves around two main points: poor infrastructure design and road user behaviour. While road authorities and professionals often attribute pedestrian injuries and fatalities to the reckless actions of pedestrians and drivers, the users themselves frequently point to inadequate and unsafe facilities. However, ensuring road safety, particularly for vulnerable users such as students and workers commuting across highways, requires shared responsibility and collaboration between authorities and the public.
The Safe System approach emphasises that authorities are primarily responsible for providing safe infrastructure. However, road users' needs and behaviours must also be considered to create effective and lasting solutions. Unfortunately, these user-centred elements (i.e. understanding pedestrian behaviour and promoting positive change) are often overlooked in the design of road interventions in Bangladesh.
A recent study examined the institutional design practices in Bangladesh and explored the benefits of using a participatory design process, known as co-design, alongside a behaviour change framework to enhance pedestrian safety. The study's goal was to identify how these methods could improve the effectiveness of road safety interventions, reduce injuries and fatalities, and promote shared responsibility among stakeholders.
The Safe System approach emphasises that authorities are primarily responsible for providing safe infrastructure. However, road users' needs and behaviours must also be considered to create effective and lasting solutions. Unfortunately, these user-centred elements (i.e. understanding pedestrian behaviour and promoting positive change) are often overlooked in the design of road interventions in Bangladesh.
In Bangladesh, professionals from local road agencies first proposed conventional design interventions at four highway sites known for high pedestrian traffic. Focus group discussions were then held with students and workers—those most at risk while crossing these highways. Following these discussions, four co-design workshops were conducted, allowing road users to collaborate with professionals in creating safety interventions. To further enhance the design process, a behaviour change model, COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation influencing Behaviour), was integrated into some of the workshops. The study's methodology involved comparing interventions created solely by professionals with those developed through co-design, as well as evaluating the added benefits of incorporating the COM-B model. The efficacy of each intervention was assessed through safety evaluations and stakeholder feedback.
The results were striking. Co-designed interventions—created in collaboration with road users—demonstrated significant improvements in usability and safety compared to conventional designs. The participants contributed valuable insights into the practical challenges they face, enabling the creation of more intuitive and effective infrastructure. Incorporating the COM-B model yielded even more positive outcomes, addressing not only design flaws but also encouraging safer crossing behaviour among pedestrians.
Perhaps one of the most critical findings was the shift in perception among stakeholders. Interviews revealed that co-design fostered a sense of shared responsibility, breaking the blame cycle where authorities and road users point fingers at each other. By involving users in the design process, stakeholders gained a better understanding of the challenges faced by pedestrians and began working collaboratively to find solutions.
Bangladesh is not alone in its struggle to protect vulnerable road users. Worldwide, VRUs, especially in LMICs, are disproportionately affected by road crashes. Pedestrians in these regions often rely on outdated or poorly designed infrastructure, while intervention strategies from high-income countries (HICs) primarily focus on vehicle passengers and may not be applicable in LMIC contexts. Designing effective solutions requires an understanding of local injury patterns and the unique challenges faced by pedestrians.
The Safe System approach, widely advocated in HICs, emphasises authorities' responsibility to ensure road safety through proper design and infrastructure. However, in many LMICs, the gap between user behaviour and infrastructure use remains unaddressed. As the study in Bangladesh highlights, interventions that fail to consider user behaviour are unlikely to succeed, no matter how well-designed they may appear on paper. By combining co-design with behaviour change models like COM-B, authorities can create interventions that not only meet safety standards but also encourage proper usage.
The findings of this study underscore the potential of co-design and behaviour change models to transform road safety for vulnerable users. By involving pedestrians in the design process, authorities can ensure that crossing facilities are both safe and intuitive to use. Furthermore, the integration of the COM-B model helps address behavioural factors that influence road safety, leading to more effective and sustainable interventions.
In Bangladesh and other developing nations, where resources for road safety are often limited, these innovative approaches offer a cost-effective solution. Co-design promotes shared responsibility, while behaviour change models help bridge the gap between user behaviour and safe infrastructure use. As Bangladesh moves forward, adopting these strategies could significantly reduce pedestrian injuries and fatalities, creating a safer road environment for all.
Dr Mohammad Shaheen Sarker, superintendent engineer at the Roads and Highways Department (RHD), is additional project director at Bangladesh Road Safety Project, jointly financed by the government and World Bank.
Views expressed in the article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
Comments