The Analysis of Safe Riding Campaign in Surabaya, Indonesia

Abstract

The implementation of safety riding in Surabaya in 2006 featuring some activities including canalization, daytime headlamp rule, safety belt rule and the standardized helmet are viewed by some road users is not suitable with the existing situation. Most of features included during the safe riding campaign trigger some controversies among road users. Those are regarding the impact of the canalization to the road performance, accident occurrences, legal aspect, reducing both battery life and headlamp bulb life. This paper will discuss about the all issues about the implementation of safe riding campaign in Surabaya based on the responses of road users, engineering aspect, safety matter and legal point of view. The results show that from the engineering/tecnical aspect, it is found that the implementation of canalization does not affect both road and signalised juntion performances. Meanwhile, from the operational and proper equipment availability aspect, the implementation of canalization need to be supported by proper and standard sign and equipments. Additionally, from the legal/policy aspect, the safe riding campaign is not fully supported by the existing regulation. Moreover, from the responses of road users, the safe riding campaign, especially daytime headlamp rule do reduce both the battery life and headlamp bulb life. Additionally, there are actually two sides of public opinion which are agree or disagree with their own reasons