This is an unedited manuscript accepted for publication and provided as an Article in Press for early access at the author’s request. The article will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and galley proof review before final publication. Please be aware that errors may be identified during production that could affect the content. All legal disclaimers of the journal apply.
Ahtisahm,
Parveen Kumar,
Abstract
SRTS programs aim to encourage active transportation for children through enhanced safety,
accessibility, and infrastructure within the areas surrounding schools. SRTS has become increasingly
popular worldwide as a method of promoting public health, decreasing traffic, and promoting
community cohesion. Yet bringing SRTS to urban environments comes with special challenges. Urban
locations often have high traffic volumes, inadequate pedestrian facilities, socioeconomic inequities,
and variable policy backing that deter program success. Furthermore, schools in cities tend to have
inadequate space and resources for mandatory safety improvements, and community engagement can
be uneven by neighborhoods. This review integrates results from a mixed array of studies, including
NIH-supported evaluations, policy analysis, and implementation case studies. It distills best practices
like stakeholder engagement, data-informed planning, equity- oriented outreach, and alignment with
larger urban mobility planning. The programs that integrated infrastructure upgrades with education
and enforcement had the most persistent effects. Importantly, city SRTS efforts that focused on
disadvantaged neighborhoods had greater walking and bicycling rates, lower rates of injury, and
enhanced percept. The research highlights the need to adapt SRTS policy to the urban context,
prioritizing flexibility, inclusivity, and intersectoral coordination. By linking SRTS to city planning
and public health objectives, cities can realize the maximum potential of the programs. In all, this
book embodies SRTS’s transformative potential to create healthier, safer, and more just urban spaces.
It presents a guide for policymakers and practitioners looking to apply tested strategies to complex
city environments.
Keywords: Safe zone, safe route, SRTS, urban, safety, pedestrian, school, traffic accidents.
[This article belongs to Trends in Transport Engineering and Applications ]
Ahtisahm, Parveen Kumar. Safe Routes to School: Best Practice and their Applicability to Urban Context. Trends in Transport Engineering and Applications. 2026; 13(01):32-36.
Ahtisahm, Parveen Kumar. Safe Routes to School: Best Practice and their Applicability to Urban Context. Trends in Transport Engineering and Applications. 2026; 13(01):32-36. Available from: https://journals.stmjournals.com/ttea/article=2026/view=234437
References
1. Shoari N, Gupta S, Malhotra R. Bayesian spatio-temporal modelling of child pedestrian road
traffic injuries and socioeconomic inequalities in England. Accident Analysis & Prevention.
2023;181:106964.
2. Indhumathy D, Thenmozhi M. Knowledge and practice of road safety rules among rural school
children in Tamil Nadu, India. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2016;3(12):3519–3523.
3. Raj P, Kumar S, Srinivasan K. Road safety awareness among high school students in Tamil Nadu.
Indian J Community Med. 2011;36(4):293–296.
4. Kumar P, Yadav P, Singh A. Pedestrian facility reassessment in school zones: A review. J Transp
Safety Secur. 2023;15(6):845–863.
5. Cayabyab AZ. Built environment characteristics and child pedestrian collisions near schools. J
Transport Health. 2023;28:101528.
6. Rahman MH. Evaluation of engineering countermeasures in school zones using microsimulation
techniques. Transportation Research Record. 2019;2673(8):391–402.
7. Yadav P, Kumar P, Mishra S. Pedestrian safety index modelling for school zones: A case study of
Patna, India. Int J Inj Control Saf Promot. 2024;31(2):215–228.
8. Dias C, Bandara S, Perera L. Pedestrian behaviour risk assessment in school zones using GIS
based mapping. Case Stud Transport Policy. 2021;9(4):1965–1974.
9. Khattak AJ, Wali B, Williams BM. Speed differentials and driver behaviour in school zones. J
Safety Res. 2020;73:123–131.
10. Strawderman L, Zhang J, Babski-Reeves K. Driver attention and distraction due to roadway
signage. Human Factors. 2015;57(2):301–312.
11. Tetali S, Edwards P, Murthy GVS, Roberts I. Road traffic injuries among children in urban India:
Socioeconomic and gender disparities. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:366.
12. Singh SK, Jain S, Gupta A. Gender differences in school travel mode choice in Indian cities.
Transportation Research Part A. 2018;118:579–590.
13. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). National Road Safety Policy. New Delhi:
Government of India; 2018.
14. Indian Roads Congress (IRC). Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities (IRC:103). New Delhi: IRC;
2019.
Trends in Transport Engineering and Applications
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 01 |
| Received | 19/01/2026 |
| Accepted | 04/02/2026 |
| Published | 09/02/2026 |
| Publication Time | 21 Days |
Login
PlumX Metrics