The National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running

Research and Program Results

“Research suggests that intentional red-light runners, who account for a significant percentage of red-light runners, are most affected by enforcement countermeasures.”
-- FHWA Intersection Safety Issue Briefs, 2004

Red light camera enforcement is no longer an emerging technology but is a proven, well-established traffic safety tool that provides effective, continuous enforcement.

Documented evidence of photo enforcement's safety benefits has been recorded in the U.S and around the world, reinforced by new reports and studies showing that cameras lead to significant decreases in intersection violations and crashes. As a supplement to traditional law enforcement, red light cameras can bring about behavior changes resulting in more motorists obeying traffic signals and signs and avoiding the crashes, injuries and loss of life caused by red light running.

A 2005 review of red light camera studies around the world concluded that cameras reduce red light violations by 40–50 percent and reduce injury crashes by 25-30 percent.

Here are some other recent findings:

• A 2007 study of the Philadelphia, PA red light camera program conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety tracked signal violation rates at intersections before and after extending the yellow light sequence and again after red light camera enforcement had been in effect for about a year. The first step reduced signal violations by 36 percent. The cameras reduced the remaining violations by 96 percent. At the same time, violations were virtually unchanged at two control group intersections. To read an article about the study and the Philadelphia program, click here.

• A multi-year study of the red light camera program in Virginia Beach found that red light running violations more than tripled after the law that permitted the city to use red light cameras was allowed to expire in 2005. The results showed that red light cameras provided a strong deterrent against red light running and that once the cameras were turned off, aggressive drivers returned to their old habits. To read the study abstract, click here.

• A 2005 U.S. Federal Highway Administration-funded study estimated total societal cost reductions from red light camera programs in seven U.S. cities to be over $14 million per year, or over $38,000 for each studied red light camera location. To read the executive summary, click here.

• A 2005 review of 10 U.S. and international research studies on red light cameras conducted by the respected Cochrane Collaboration, a U.K.-based research organization found that “Red-light cameras are effective in reducing total casualty crashes…. In the best conducted of these studies, the reduction was nearly 30%.” To read the full study, click here.

Red Light Camera Results In Specific
U.S. Cities

Orange County, CA	A 2005 Orange County, California government report found that one year after red light camera installation, accidents dropped by 46.7 percent in Garden Grove, 28.2 percent in Costa Mesa, 16.2 percent in Santa Ana, 12.1 percent in San Juan Capistrano and 5.7 percent in Fullerton.
Ventura, CA	Ventura, California, which installed cameras at 17 different locations in 2001, has seen red light running crashes drop 80 percent at the intersections with red light cameras, and a 29 percent reduction in red light running crashes across the city.
Savannah, GA	Savannah, Georgia has seen a 20 percent reduction in crashes and a 60 percent reduction in violations at intersections with red light cameras since Oct. 2003. Less than 1 percent of the 21,000 tickets issued have been appealed.
Charlotte, NC	In Charlotte, crashes at the city's red light camera intersections dropped from 4,597 to 2,591, or almost 40 percent. Right-angle crashes have dropped by almost 30 percent and rear-end crashes decreased by almost 50 percent.
Fayetteville, NC	Fayetteville has studied traffic data for three years of data before and then three years after the intersections where cameras were installed. Total crashes have dropped from 256 to 214. Right-angle crashes dropped from 91 to 47, a drop of almost 50 percent. Rear-end crashes increased by two.
Greensboro, NC	Red light violations dropped 20 percent since the cameras were installed. Right-angle crashes dropped from between 23 to 29 percent.
High Point, NC	Total crashes decreased 15 percent, and right-angle crashes 23 percent in the first year. Total crashes decreased 9 percent and right-angle crashes 29 percent in the second year.
Raleigh, NC	The Institute for Transportation Research and Education at North Carolina State University compared the number of red-light related accidents in Raleigh between camera and non-camera intersections. The result: right-angle crashes were reduced by 42 percent at red-light camera intersections, rear-end crashes went down 25 percent and total red-light related crashes decreased by 22 percent.
Rocky Mount, NC	Rocky Mount has seen total crashes decrease 31 percent, with rear end crashes dropping by 23 percent, and right-angle crashes 17 percent at the intersections with cameras. On the actual approaches with cameras in place, total crashes decreased 28 percent, rear end crashes 25 percent, and angle crashes 25 percent.
Columbus, OH	The city has seen the number of intersection crashes drop 47 percent at the eight intersections equipped with red light cameras in 2006. Red light running violations have dropped by nearly 63 percent.
Dayton, OH	Dayton began its project in February 2003, has seen a 42 percent reduction in crashes at eight intersections monitored by red-light cameras.
Toledo, OH	Traffic crashes at camera intersections have dropped 36 percent since cameras were installed.
Knoxville, TN	Traffic accidents at 13 high-volume Knoxville intersections dropped 17 percent after the installation of red light cameras in 2006. Right-angle crashes were down 45 percent and rear-end crashes were down 1 percent.
El Paso, TX	In just the first four months of operation, crashes at red light camera intersections in El Paso have dropped 1.6 percent while crashes citywide increased 7.6 percent. The cameras have already issued as many red light running citations as the entire police force did in all of 2006.
Garland, TX	A 2006 study of the red light camera program in Garland, Texas, found that crashes caused by red light runners decreased by 56 percent at intersections with cameras; crashes at intersections without cameras decreased by 38 percent. Injuries at the locations with cameras decreased by 27 percent, from 95 to 69 injuries.

Bibliography of Selected U.S and International Red Light Running/Camera Enforcement Studies

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 2006. Use of Automated Traffic Enforcement to Improve Safety. Washington, D.C.: ( Policy Resolution PR-14-06)

Andes, J. 2006. “Red-light cameras reducing crashes; Number of tickets issued also down as fewer test system”. The Columbus Dispatch. Columbus, OH:

Antonucci, N. et al. 2004. NCHRP: Report 500: Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan: Volume 12, A Guide for reducing collisions at signalized intersections. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_500v12.pdf .

Blackburn R.R., and Gilbert, D.T. 1995. Photographic enforcement of traffic laws. Washington, D.C.: (National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Synthesis of Highway Practice 219, Transportation Research Board).

Blakey, L. 2003. “Red Light Cameras: Effective Enforcement Measures for Intersection Safety,” Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal . Washington, D.C.: (March 2003).

Bonneson, J. and Zimmerman, K. 2004. “Effect of Yellow Interval Timing On Red-Light Violation Frequency at Urban Intersections”. Transportation Research Record . Washington, D.C.: (Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A & M University, 2004).

Bonneson, J. and Zimmerman, K. 2004. Development of Guidelines for Identifying and Treating Locations with a Red-light Running Problem . College Station, TX: (Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A & M University, 2004).

Bonneson, J.A.; Zimmerman, K.H.; and Pratt, M.P. 2005. Red-light-running Handbook Workshop Series: Year 1 Summary Report. Austin TX: (Texas Department of Transportation, 2005).

Bonneson, J.A.; Zimmerman, K.H.; and Quiroga, C. 2003. Review and Evaluations of Enforcement Issues and Safety Statistics Related to Red-Light Running . College Station, TX: (Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System, September 2003).

Bureau of State Audits. 2002. Red Light Camera Programs: Although They Have Contributed to a Reduction in Accidents, Operational Weaknesses Exist at the Local Level . California State Auditor. Sacramento, CA: (2001-125, July 2002).

Calgary Police Service. 2006. Red Light Camera Program. http://www.calgarypolice.ca/sections/traffic/redlight.html. C

City of Dallas, TX. 2006. “ Dallas Automated Red Light Enforcement Camera Program: Procurement Process Overview, Lessons Learned And Site Selection Process . Dallas, TX: (October 2006).

City of Garland, TX Transportation Department. 2006. Report on the Effectiveness of Automated Red Light Enforcement . Garland, TX: (September 2006).

City of Mesa, AZ. 2006. 2006 City of Mesa Red Light Camera Public Opinion Survey Results . Mesa, AZ: (April 2006).

City of Paradise Valley, AZ. 2006. Photo Enforcement Program . http://www.ci.paradise-valley.az.us/police/photoenforcement.html

City of San Francisco: Department of Parking and Traffic. 2006. Red Light Photo Enforcement Program. http://www.sfgov.org/site/livablestreets_index.asp?id=14440 .

City of Ventura, CA. “City of Ventura Administrative Report: Renewal of Contract with Redflex Systems”. (May 22 nd , 2006).

Click, S.M., and Jones, D.L. 2006. Calculation of Yellow Change and All-Red Clearance Intervals: The North Carolina Experience. McLean, VA: ( Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 2006, Paper #06-1099, 2006).

Council, F. et al. 2005. Crash Cost Estimates by Maximum Police-Reported Injury Severity within Selected Crash Geometries . Washington, D.C.: (Federal Highway Administration HRT-05-051, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005).

Federal Highway Administration. 2003. Guidance for Using Red Light Cameras . Washington, D.C.: (Federal Highway Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Publication No. FHWA-SA-03-018, March 2003).

Federal Highway Administration. 2007. Intersections: Intersection Safety Facts and Statistics. http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersections/inter_facts.htm .

Federal Highway Administration. 2004. Intersection Safety Issue Briefs , Washington, D.C.: (Federal Highway Administration and Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004).

Flannery, A. and Maccubbin. R. 2002. Using Meta Analysis Techniques to Assess the Safety Effect of Red Light Running Cameras. Washington, D.C.: (Prepared for the Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13623, 2002).

Gains, A. 2003. A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras: Two year pilot evaluation. London, UK: (Department of Transport, 2003).

Garber, N.J. et al. 2005. An Evaluation of Red Light Camera (Photo-Red) Enforcement Programs in Virginia: A Report in Response to a Request by Virginia's Secretary of Transportation. Charlottesville, VA: ( Virginia Transportation Research Council, VTRC 05-R21, January 2005).

Gardner, Per. 2004. Traffic Signal Safety: Analysis of Red-Light Running in Maine . Orono, ME: (Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Maine, May 2004).

Golob, J.M. et al. 2003. Impacts of the San Diego Photo Red Light Enforcement System on Traffic Safety. Washington, D.C.: (Presented at Transportation Research Board meeting, 2003).

Henry, RD. 2005 Signal Timing on a Shoestring Washington, D.C.: (Federal Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-HOP-07-006, March 2005).

Hill, S. and Lindly, J. 2004.“Red Light Running Prediction And Analysis”. Transportation Research Record . Washington, D.C.: (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of Alabama, 2004).

Huang, H.; Chin, H.C.; and Heng, A.H.H. 2006. Effect of Red Light Camera on Accident Risk at Intersections . Washington, D.C.: (presented at the 2006 National Transportation Board Annual Meeting, 2006).

Hunter, W.W. 2004. The Use of Red-light-running Automated Enforcement Equipment in North Carolina: A Descriptive Summary . North Carolina: (Prepared for AAA of the Carolinas, 2004).

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2006. Automated Enforcement Laws. http://www.ncutlo.org/autoenforce622.htm.

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2006. Communities with Red Light Cameras (as of July 2006) IIHS webpage . http://www.iihs.org/research/topics/rlc_cities.html

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. 2005. Q&A Red Light Cameras (as of December, 2005) IIHS webpage. http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/rlr.html#12 .

International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2004. Highway Safety Desk Book . Alexandria, VA: (September 2004).

Kraus, E. and Quiroga, C. 2003. Legislative Issues Related to Automated Enforcement of Red Light Running. Washington, DC: (Presented at Transportation Research Board meeting, Paper No. 03-3308, 2003).

Kraus, E., and Quiroga. C. 2004. “Red Light Running Trends In Texas,”. Transportation Research Record . Washington, D.C.: (Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A & M University, 2004).

Kriz, K.; Moran, C.; and Regan, M. 2006. An Analysis of a Red-Light Camera Program in the City of Milwaukee. Milwaukee, WI: (Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, 2006).

Lum, K.; Wong, P.; and Wong, Y. 2003. “A Before-and-After Study on Red-Light Camera Installation”, ITE Journal . Washington, D.C.: (March 2003).

McGee, H.W. 2003. Making Intersections Safer: A Toolbox of Engineering Countermeasures to Reduce Red-Light Running . Washington, D.C.: ( The Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003).

McGee, H.W. and Eccles, K.A. 2003. "Impact of Red Light Camera Enforcement on Crash Experience," NCHRP Synthesis 310 . Washington, D.C.: (National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, 2003).

Milazzo, II, J.; Hummer, J.; and Rouphail, N.M. 2003. Red Light Running: Dilemma Zones, Photo Enforcement Tolerances, Policy Recommendations. Raleigh, NC: (presented at the 2003 Lifesavers Conference on National Highway Safety Priorities, 2003).

Milazzo, II, J. 2005. Operational and Policy Perspectives on Red-Light Camera Programs.

Raleigh, NC: (Transportation Research Board, 2005).

Miller, J. et. al.2006. Safety Impacts of Photo-Red Enforcement at Signalized Intersections: An Empirical Bayes Approach . Charlottesville, VA: (Virginia Transportation Research Council and the University of Virginia, presented at Transportation Research Board meeting, 2006).

Nambisan, S. 2007. A Comparative Evaluation of the Safety Performance of Roundabouts and Traditional Intersection Controls , Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal . Washington, D.C.: (March 2007).

National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances. 2004. Automated Traffic Law Enforcement Model Law . www.ncutlo.org/autoenforce622.htm .

Passetti, K. 1997. Use of Automated Enforcement for Red Light Violations . College Station, TX: (Department of Civil Engineering, The Texas A&M University, 1997).

PB Farradyne Inc. 2002. City of San Diego Photo Enforcement System Review Final Report. Commissioned by the City of San Diego Police Department.

Peek Traffic Systems. 2006. Automated Red Light Enforcement – A Pilot Study . Palmetto, FL: (2006).

Peden M. et al, eds. The World Report on Road Traffic Injury Prevention. World Health Organization, Geneva: (2004).

Peota, C. 2006. “Public Health Enemy #1”. Minnesota Medicine. Minneapolis, MN: (Minnesota Medical Association, Volume 89, May 2006).

Quiroga, C. et al. 2003 . Red Light Running – A Policy Review . College Station, TX: (Center for Transportation Safety, Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University, 2003).

Radwan, E. et al. 2005. Red-light Running and Limited Visibility Due to LTV's Using the UCF Driving Simulator. Orlando, FL: (Center for Advanced Transportation Systems Simulation, University of Central Florida, Florida Department of Transportation, 2005).

Redelmeier, D. 2003. "Traffic-Law Enforcement and Risk of Death from Motor-Vehicle Crashes: Case-Crossover Study". The Lancet. New York, NY: ( Volume 361, June 28 th , 2003): 2177-2182.

Retting, R.A. 2004. Photo Enforcement Issues. Washington, D.C.: (Virginia Transportation Conference, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, October 2004).

Retting, R.A. 2003. “Speed cameras — public perceptions in the US”. Traffic Engineering and Control. London, UK: (Volume 44, March 2003): 100-101.

Retting, R.A.; Ferguson, S.A.; and Hakkert, A.S. 2003. “Effects of red light cameras on violations and crashes: a review of the international literature”. Traffic Injury Prevention. Philadelphia, PA: (Volume 4, 2003):17-23.

Retting, R.A.; Kyrychenko, S. 2001. Crash Reductions Associated with Red Light Camera Enforcement in Oxnard, California . Arlington, VA: (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, April 2001).

Retting, R.A. et al. 1999. “Evaluation of red light camera enforcement in Fairfax, Va., USA”. Institute of Transportation Engineers Journal . Washington, DC: (August 1999).

Rodegerdts, L. et al. 2007. NCHRP: Report 572: Roundabouts in the United States: Washington, D.C.: (National Cooperative Highway Research Program, (Transportation Research Board) http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_572.pdf

Sisiopiku, V. 2002. Assessment of Red Light Running Camera Enforcement Technologies . 2002. East Lansing, MI: (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan State University, Presented at the Transportation Research Board, January 2002).

Souleyrette, R. et. al. 2004. Effectiveness of All-Red Clearance Interval on Intersection Crashes . Ames, IA: (Center for Transportation Research and Education, Iowa State University, May 2004).

Washington, S. and Shin, K. 2005. The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Automated Enforcement) on Safety in Arizona . Phoenix, Arizona.: (Arizona Department of Transportation, 2005).

Yang, C.; Wassim, N.2006. Analysis of red light violations data collected from intersections equipped with red light photo enforcement cameras. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Washington, D.C.: (DOT HS 810 580)

back to top