Road Safety
- Publication no: AP-R755-26
- ISBN: 978-1-923617-28-5
- Published: 12 March 2026
- PDF (free) Download
This research explores the variations in safety outcomes for different pedestrian groups in Australia and New Zealand.
The methodology included literature review, analysis of road safety data sets and consultation with experts in both countries.
Safety outcomes for different pedestrian groups vary substantially. Older people, males, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and Māori are particularly over-represented in deaths and to a lesser extent serious injury. Remote areas of Australia and areas with high levels of socio-economic disadvantage also have higher rates of fatality for people walking. The study was not able to quantify the expected over-representation of people with disability, culturally diverse or immigrant communities.
The report sets out a variety of implications for practice and recommendations to Austroads and member organisations.
About the project:
Austroads' Keeping People Safe When Walking project envisions a road and street network that places pedestrian safety at its core—regardless of age, race, gender, socioeconomic background, or physical ability. The project supports both national and local efforts to achieve Vision Zero targets: a 50% reduction in pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries by 2030, and their complete elimination by 2050.
To realise this vision, the project draws on data-driven insights to better understand pedestrian trauma and inform impactful interventions across the Safe System.
This report is part of the Stream 2 of the project. Other outputs published as part of this project include:
- Keeping People Safe when Walking – Stream 1: Pedestrian Safety Problem and Project Methodology
- Keeping People Safe when Walking – Stream 1: Literature Review
- Keeping People Safe when Walking – Stream 1: Pedestrian Data Improvement Recommendations
- Keeping People Safe when Walking – Stream 1: Recommended Pedestrian Safety Interventions
- Keeping People Safe When Walking – Stream 2: Economic Assessment of Safer Speeds
- Keeping People Safe When Walking – Stream 2: Understanding Inequity in Pedestrian Safety Outcomes [this report]
- Keeping People Safe When Walking – Stream 2: Strengthening Key Practitioner Guidance and Methodologies
Webinar:
Watch a recording of the webinar to learn more about this report.
- 1. Introduction
- 1.1 Purpose
- 1.2 Scope
- 1.3 Methodology
- 1.3.1 Literature review
- 1.3.2 Data analysis
- 1.3.3 Expert engagement
- 1.3.4 Future trends
- 2. Conceptualising Inequity in Pedestrian Safety
- 2.1 Why does equity in pedestrian safety matter?
- 2.2 Key concepts
- 2.3 Defining road safety equity for pedestrians
- 3. Literature Review
- 3.1 Children and young people
- 3.2 Older people
- 3.3 Gender
- 3.4 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
- 3.5 Māori
- 3.6 People with disability
- 3.6.1 People who are blind or have low vision
- 3.6.2 Other people with disability
- 3.7 Socio-economic and geographic factors
- 3.7.1 International research
- 3.7.2 Australian and New Zealand research
- 3.8 Falls in the street
- 3.9 Broader issues for a Safe System
- 3.9.1 Achieving equitable road safety for pedestrians
- 3.9.2 Shared responsibility?
- 3.9.3 Safe vehicles and safe road users
- 3.9.4 Linguistic issues
- 3.9.5 Measuring road safety
- 4. Data Analysis
- 4.1 Australian road safety data
- 4.1.1 Overview of pedestrian deaths and hospitalisations
- 4.1.2 Age
- 4.1.3 Gender
- 4.1.4 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
- 4.1.5 Geographic factors
- 4.1.6 Socio-economic factors
- 4.1.7 Road environment – speed limit
- 4.2 New Zealand road safety data
- 4.2.1 Overview of pedestrian deaths and serious injuries
- 4.2.2 Age
- 4.2.3 Gender
- 4.2.4 Region
- 4.2.5 Road environment
- 4.3 Analysis of Queensland crash data
- 4.3.1 Roadway features at crash location
- 4.3.2 Roadway controls at crash location
- 4.3.3 Descriptions for Road User Movements
- 4.3.4 Pedestrian intended action
- 4.3.5 Summary
- 4.4 Data notes and limitations
- 4.4.1 Australia
- 4.4.2 New Zealand
- 4.1 Australian road safety data
- 5. Engagement Findings
- 5.1 Children
- 5.1.1 Causes of pedestrian trauma for children
- 5.1.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.2 Older people
- 5.2.1 Causes of pedestrian trauma for older people
- 5.2.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.3 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
- 5.3.1 Causes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander pedestrian trauma
- 5.3.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.4 Māori
- 5.4.1 Causes of Māori pedestrian trauma
- 5.4.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.5 People who are blind or have low vision
- 5.5.1 Causes of trauma for pedestrians who are blind or have low vision
- 5.5.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.6 Other people with disability
- 5.6.1 Causes of trauma for pedestrians with disabilities
- 5.6.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.7 Socio-economic factors
- 5.7.1 Causes of pedestrian trauma for lower socio-economic groups
- 5.7.2 Possible counter-measures
- 5.8 Geographic factors
- 5.8.1 Causes of pedestrian trauma related to geography
- 5.9 Expert engagement insights into systemic causes of inequity
- 5.10 Expert engagement insights into implications for practice
- 5.1 Children
- 6. Best Practice Case Studies
- 6.1 Te Ara Mua – Future Streets
- 6.1.1 Results
- 6.1.2 Universal access
- 6.1.3 Detailed site evaluation
- 6.2 Community-led school safety planning
- 6.1 Te Ara Mua – Future Streets
- 7. Future Trends
- 7.1 General
- 7.2 Population
- 7.2.1 Increasing population
- 7.2.2 Ageing population
- 7.2.3 Gender
- 7.3 Vehicle type
- 7.3.1 Increasing size of vehicles
- 7.3.2 Technology
- 7.4 Micromobility and electric bicycles
- 8. Synthesis
- 8.1 The nature of inequity in pedestrian safety
- 8.2 Pedestrians generally
- 8.3 Older people
- 8.4 Children and young adults
- 8.5 Gender
- 8.6 Culture
- 8.6.1 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
- 8.6.2 Māori
- 8.6.3 Other cultures and new immigrants
- 8.7 Disability
- 8.8 Socio-economic factors
- 8.9 Geographic factors
- 8.10 Other issues
- 8.10.1 General crash circumstances involving pedestrians
- 9. Implications for Practice
- 9.1 Safer roads and paths
- 9.1.1 Facilitating crossing
- 9.1.2 Potential targeted approaches
- 9.1.3 Areas with drinking venues or homelessness
- 9.1.4 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Māori pedestrians
- 9.1.5 Paths shared with bicycle or micromobility users
- 9.2 Safer road users
- 9.3 Safer speeds
- 9.3.1 Urban speed limits
- 9.3.2 Destinations and high-speed roads
- 9.4 Safer vehicles
- 9.5 Government agencies
- 9.6 Limitations of existing research and data
- 9.6.1 Limitations of data
- 9.6.2 Limitations of research
- 9.1 Safer roads and paths
- 10. Conclusions and Recommendations
- 10.1 Conclusions
- 10.2 Recommendations
- 10.2.1 Recommendations to Austroads
- 10.2.2 Recommendations to Austroads members
- 10.2.3 Recommendation to Austroads and New Zealand Transport Agency
- References
- Appendix A Full Conceptualisation of Inequity in Pedestrian Safety
- A.1 What is equity?
- A.1 What is equity?
- A.2 What is transport equity?
- A.3 Defining road safety equity for pedestrians
- Appendix B Full Literature Review
- B.1 Children and young people
- B.2 Older people
- B.3 Gender
- B.4 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
- B.5 Māori
- B.6 People with disability
- B.6.1 People who are blind or have low vision
- B.6.2 Other people with disability
- B.7 Socio-economic and geographic factors
- B.7.1 International research
- B.7.2 Australian and New Zealand research
- B.8 Falls in the street
- B.9 Other factors
- B.10 Key insights from the literature review
- B.11 Implications for policy and practice
- B.11.1 Achieving equitable road safety for pedestrians
- B.12 Shared responsibility?
- B.13 Safe vehicles
- B.14 Additional barriers to Australia and New Zealand’s road safety vision
- B.14.1 Linguistic issues
- B.14.2 Methodological issues: measuring road safety
- Appendix C Expert Interview Questions