cyclehelmets.org |
||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
Introduction and scope
The New Zealand helmet law came into
effect from 1st January 1994. It applies to bicycle riders of all ages, but not
to the riders of other types of cycle (unicycles, tricycles, quadricycles, etc).
The NZ Government stated that the aim was to protect bicyclists from themselves,
not from motor vehicle impacts.
Compliance and enforcement
Helmet use by adults rose from 43% to
92% as a result of the law. For teenagers aged 13-18 the rise was from 56% to
97%, and for younger children from 86% to 98%. By 2008, wearing rates by adults remained high at 93%, but had fallen to 90% for teenagers and 93% for younger children [6].
Helmet fitting and the replacement of old and damaged helmets is
poor.
Enforcement varies by region and the view of individual police officers. In
some areas enforcement is rare while in others bicyclists report being stopped
regularly. Every year or so some sort of 'blitz' campaign is launched, often at
the start of the school or university year.
Scale of convictions: unknown.
In one case a judge refused to fine a bicyclist riding without a helmet on the
grounds of de minimis (too minor an offence to justify the court's time), but by
nature of the type of court this has not set a precedent.
Effect on casualties
Scuffham [3] claimed that
the helmet law led to a 19% reduction in head injury to cyclists over its first
3 years. This is similar to the reduction in cycle use (see below). However,
Robinson [4] showed that there had been no reduction in head
injuries to cyclists over and above the general trend experienced by the
population as a whole. The sudden large increase in helmet wearing by adults and
teenagers was not accompanied by a change in trends in head injuries for these
groups. Perry [5] has also shown that the changes in head
injuries for cyclists matched those of the population at large and not the cycle
helmet wearing rate. Detailed analysis
Effect on cycle use
No surveys to track cycle use were carried
out to monitor the effect of the helmet law. However, the New Zealand Household
Travel Survey [2] shows that cycling decreased by approx 22%
between 1993 and 1997.
Cost benefit
A cost-benefit analysis published in 2002
[1] suggested that there had been a small net benefit from
the law for children aged 5 to 12 years, a small disbenefit for children aged 13
to 18 years, and a large disbenefit for adult bicyclists (19+ years).
The
results were very sensitive to the cost and life of helmets, helmet wearing
rates before the law, and the effectiveness of helmets in preventing head
injuries. Thus the net benefit for younger children was primarily because
wearing rates for this age group were already 87% before the law, so few new
helmets needed to be purchased to comply with the law. The cost of helmets
purchased prior to the law was not taken into account. The analysis has been
further criticised for being optimistic in its assessment of head injury
reductions and for assuming very low costs as result of people quitting cycling
due to the law.
Detailed analysis: [1],
[4].
References
[1] Taylor M, Scuffham P. New
Zealand bicycle helmet law - do the costs outweigh the benefits? Injury Prevention 2002; 8:317-320.
[2]
Land
Transport Safety Authority. 
[3]
Scuffham P, Alsop J, Cryer C, Langley JD. Head injuries to bicycles and the New Zealand
bicycle helmet law. Accident
Analysis & Prevention, 2000;32,p565-573.
[4]
Robinson DL.Costs and benefits of the NZ helmet law.
[5]
Perry N. The
bicycle helmet legislation, curse or cure? University of
Canterbury. Presented to Cycling 2001, Christchurch.
[6] Cycle helmet wearing survey 2008. Ministry of Transport, 2008.
| See also: | |
|
|
||