VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY VU THI HUONG KHUE A STUDY ON A RANKING METHOD FOR THE PROVINCIAL ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY INDEX IN VIETNAM MASTER’S THESIS VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY VU THI HUONG KHUE A STUDY ON A RANKING METHOD FOR THE PROVINCIAL ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY INDEX IN VIETNAM MAJOR: INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING CODE: 8900201.04QTD RESEARCH SUPERVISOR: Assoc Prof VU HOAI NAM Hanoi, 2021 COMMITMENT I pledge that this thesis is my own intellectual product The thesis was conducted with integrity and no data has ever been published in any other works Hanoi, July the …., 2021 Author Vu Thi Huong Khue ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would first like to thank my thesis supervisor Assoc Prof Vu Hoai Nam of the Department of Highway and Traffic engineering at National University of Civil Engineering The door to Assoc Prof Vu Hoai Nam office was always open whenever I ran into a trouble spot or had a question about my research or writing He consistently allowed this paper to be my own work, but steered me in the right the direction whenever he thought I needed it I would also like to acknowledge the experts as the second readers of this thesis: Prof Dr Sci Nguyen Dinh Duc – Director of the Infrastructure Engineering program at Vietnam Japan University; Prof Hironori Kato – Co-Director of the Infrastructure Engineering program at Vietnam Japan University; Dr Phan Le Binh – Lecturer of the Infrastructure Engineering program at Vietnam Japan University; Prof Shinichi Takeda – Lecturer of the Infrastructure Engineering program at Vietnam Japan University; and other lecturers of the Infrastructure Engineering program at Vietnam Japan University Without their valuable comments, this research could not have been successfully conducted Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to my parents and to my boyfriend for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my years of study and through the process of researching and writing this thesis This accomplishment would not have been possible without them Thank you Author Vu Thi Huong Khue CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview 1.2 Background 1.3 Problem statement 1.4 Goals and objectives 1.5 Study methodology 1.6 Thesis organization 1.7 Findings and Research contributions CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Vietnam road safety in the recent years 2.1.1 Road safety statistics 2.1.2 Current road safety ranking by Vietnamese Government 12 2.2 Literature Review on Road safety ranking methods 18 2.2.1 Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method 18 2.2.2 Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method 19 2.2.3 Statistical method 20 2.2.4 Delphi method 21 2.2.5 Weighting method 22 2.2.6 Aggregation method 23 2.2.7 Several studies by Vietnamese researchers 24 2.3 Summary 25 CHAPTER METHOD DEVELOPMENT 26 3.1 The requirements of the new method in the context of Vietnam 26 3.2 The selection of new road safety performance indicators for the model 27 3.2.1 The requirements of the proposal indicators 27 3.2.2 Type of indicators 27 3.2.3 The proposal indicators 29 3.3 Ranking Model Development 30 3.3.1 Research’s hypothesis 30 3.3.2 Ranking principles 31 3.4 The method procedure 31 CHAPTER MODEL PERFORMANCE 34 4.1 Data collection 34 4.1.1 Traffic accident data source 34 4.1.2 Population data source 34 4.2 Data description 34 4.3 Data treatment 37 4.4 Model performance 39 4.5 Results score ranking 44 CHAPTER MODEL EVALUATION 48 5.1 The DEA as the reference method 48 5.1.1 Reasons of choosing DEA model 48 5.1.2 DEA Methodology 48 5.1.3 Results DEA score ranking 49 5.2 Comparison and Discussion 52 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 55 6.1 Conclusions 55 6.2 Limitations 55 6.3 Recommendations and further studies 55 REFERENCES 56 APPENDIXES 59 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1: The percentage changing of road traffic accidents, deaths and injuries due to RTAs from 2016 to 2018 10 Table 2.2: List of criticized provinces by the Deputy Prime Minister 12 Table 3.1: Road traffic accidents statistics characteristics 29 Table 3.2 Risk indicators characteristics 30 Table 4.1: Data category 34 Table 4.2: List of provinces stayed in low position in increasing RSIs or tend to reduce RSIs but still being in the Government's criticism list (2016-2018) 36 Table 4.3: List of provinces and cities having sudden increase/decrease in statistics from 2016 to 2018 37 Table 4.4: z-value transforming of 63 Vietnamese provinces from 2016 to 2018 (R1) 40 Table 4.5: z-value transforming of 63 Vietnamese provinces from 2016 to 2018 (R2) 41 Table 5.1: Input and output data for DEA method 48 Table 0.1: The denominators Nij of the data set in 2016 77 Table 0.2: The denominators Nij of the data set in 2017 79 Table 0.3: The denominators Nij of the data set in 2018 81 i LIST OF FIGURES Pages Figure 2.1: Mean and standard deviation of Total number of road traffic accidents, total number of deaths and injuries due to RTAs from 2016 to 2018 Figure 2.2: Twenty provinces and cities having the highest and the lowest total number of road traffic accidents, total number of deaths and injuries due to RTAs in 2016 Figure 2.3: Twenty provinces and cities having the highest and the lowest total number of road traffic accidents, total number of deaths and injuries due to RTAs in 2017 Figure 2.4: Twenty provinces and cities having the highest and the lowest total number of road traffic accidents, total number of deaths and injuries due to RTAs in 2018 Figure 2.5: Road safety factors trend in 63 provinces nationwide from 2016 to 2018 13 Figure 2.6: The distribution chart of road traffic accidents, deaths and injuries due to road traffic accidents and population of 63 provinces and cities nationwide in 2018 14 Figure 2.7: The distribution chart of road traffic accidents, deaths and injuries due to road traffic accidents and car registered of 63 provinces and cities nationwide in 2018 15 Figure 2.8: The distribution chart of road traffic accidents, deaths and injuries due to road traffic accidents of 63 provinces 2016-2018 17 Figure 3.1: Normal distribution color and scale for road safety ranking principles 31 Figure 3.2: Research methodology flowchart 33 Figure 4.1: Distribution chart of RTAs, F and J from the smallest to the largest in 63 provinces nationwide (2016-2018) 35 Figure 4.2: Distribution chart of R1 in 63 provinces and cities nationwide (2016-2018) 38 Figure 4.3: Distribution chart of R2 in 63 provinces and cities nationwide (2016-2018) 39 Figure 4.4: z-values distribution of R1 on control chart 43 Figure 4.5: z-values distribution of R2 on control chart 43 Figure 4.6: z-score and rank of 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 by using R1 44 Figure 4.7: z-score and rank of 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 by using R2 45 Figure 4.8: Road safety distribution map in 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 by ranking R1 46 Figure 4.9: Road safety distribution map in 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 by ranking R2 47 Figure 5.1: DEA score and rank of 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 50 Figure 5.2: Road safety distribution map in 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 by using DEA method 51 ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS WHO M.O.T M.P.S N.T.S.C AHP DEA RTAs RSIs RS F J S.D World Health Organization Ministry of Transport Ministry of Public Security National Traffic Safety Committee Analytic Hierarchy Process Data Envelopment Analysis Road traffic accidents Road safety indicators/indices Road safety Fatalities/Deaths Injuries/Injured people Standard deviation iii CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview Road safety is an essential element of daily life and the government or public agencies are constantly drove to assure that their citizens can take place without incident Nonetheless, road traffic accidents currently act as the 9th leading cause of fatality in the world (roughly 1.35 million deaths per year due to road traffic collisions) (WHO, 2018) [1] On the one hand, to assess the effort of each nation as well as each area in ensuring road safety, countries use road safety indicators as a ranking scale As the result, experts and specialists study and develop policies, indices to improve and ensure road safety [1] Vietnam has been applying simple indicators to indicate the road safety performance of the provinces and the cities However, these indicators have shown the evidence of drawbacks and need to be adjusted or replaced to achieve better evaluations on the national and regional road safety level 1.2 Background Safety can be simply illustrated as the nonappearance of a hazard or vulnerability In the field of transportation, road safety can be defined by the human capacity in moving freely without injury or fatality An admirably harmless traffic network would not occur collisions within differing travelers Although non-accident is an excellent situation in theory and various transportation offices set a goal of zero fatalities on routes, people endure getting wounded or died on paths and roadways along the country The objection offer in the road safety course is to reduce the density of road collisions and the following fatalities and wounds by fully applying presently possible instruments, expertise, and technology [1] In additions, road safety experts usually assess safety by the amount and proportion of traffic collisions and by the severity of those accidents, which represented by three parameters: crash frequency, crash rates and crash outcomes In the simplest terms, Table 0.2: The denominators Nij of the data set in 2017 Regions Nij Northwest Northeast Northerm Vietnam Red River Delta North Central Central Vietnam South Central Coast Central Highland 2017 Dien Bien Hoa Binh Lao Cai Lai Chau Son La Yen Bai Bac Giang Bac Kan Cao Bang Ha Giang Lang Son Phu Tho Quang Ninh Thai Nguyen Tuyen Quang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Ha Noi Hai Duong Hai Phong Hung Yen Nam Dinh Ninh Binh Thai Binh Vinh Phuc Ha Tinh Nghe An Quang Binh Quang Tri Thanh Hoa Thua Th.Hue Binh Dinh Binh Thuan Da Nang Khanh Hoa Ninh Thuan Phu Yen Quang Nam Quang Ngai Dak Lak Dac Nong Gia Lai Kon Tum Deaths 0.2164 0.5793 0.3978 0.2792 0.5095 0.3490 0.4413 0.1144 0.2343 0.2397 0.3160 0.3487 0.3378 0.4413 0.3868 0.1395 0.1234 0.9009 0.2613 0.1443 0.1828 0.1010 0.0802 0.1058 0.0577 0.3887 0.5482 0.2988 0.3336 0.4583 0.3713 0.4016 0.5528 0.1735 0.3570 0.1339 0.3000 0.3768 0.3545 0.6705 0.1551 0.6105 0.1901 Output Injuries Cars damage 0.1156 0.1323 0.2455 0.5364 0.4507 0.0000 0.2658 0.1323 0.3842 0.0000 0.7106 0.8230 0.5244 0.3945 0.2222 0.1943 0.2903 0.2002 0.0504 0.0589 0.1215 0.4180 0.2933 0.3121 0.3051 0.0000 0.4444 0.7007 0.4444 0.0000 0.0367 0.4317 0.0726 0.8242 0.9602 0.0000 0.1358 0.0000 0.0419 0.0981 0.0914 0.0000 0.1102 0.0000 0.1205 0.3532 0.1213 0.0000 0.0384 0.0000 0.1051 0.1816 0.3044 0.8940 0.2642 0.0000 0.2476 0.0000 0.6309 0.0000 0.6060 0.4097 0.2205 0.2306 0.4037 0.4366 0.0765 0.0154 0.0524 0.0000 0.3715 0.2214 0.1822 0.0000 0.2346 0.0861 0.7440 0.8364 0.6335 0.6732 0.1653 0.0916 0.7238 0.6174 0.0949 0.1514 Input a b -0.1151 0.1306 -0.4749 0.3924 -0.1727 0.3642 -0.8076 0.1996 -0.2811 0.1760 -0.0160 0.7909 -0.4186 0.3375 -0.2233 0.3573 -0.4728 0.4516 -0.1807 0.0559 -0.1342 0.2120 -0.0558 0.2978 -0.0551 0.1711 -0.0907 0.1756 -0.6975 0.5980 -0.1139 0.0129 -0.0123 0.2748 -0.0267 0.0642 -0.0043 0.0891 -0.0037 0.0242 -0.9848 0.1037 -0.0288 0.8147 -0.1098 0.0850 -0.0545 0.4794 -0.0234 0.0135 -0.0244 0.1949 -0.0166 0.0840 -0.0761 0.3583 -0.2195 0.3977 -0.0564 0.2529 -0.9706 0.7775 -0.0596 -0.1817 0.1275 0.5328 -0.0107 0.0515 -0.0247 0.1550 -0.8921 0.4222 -0.4236 0.3674 -0.0506 0.3268 -0.0410 0.4861 -0.7553 0.6103 0.1722 0.1696 -0.6135 0.5592 -0.0996 0.1618 79 Regions Nij Southeast Southerm Vietnam Mekong River Delta 2017 Lam Dong Binh Duong Binh Phuoc Ba Ria-V.Tau Dong Nai Tay Ninh H.C.M city An Giang Bac Lieu Ben Tre Ca Mau Can Tho Dong Thap Hau Giang Kien Giang Long An Soc Trang Tien Giang Tra Vinh Vinh Long Deaths 0.3428 0.3668 0.1924 0.2921 0.3181 0.0713 0.7981 0.2009 0.0769 0.4210 0.0556 0.1987 0.2970 0.1517 0.2287 0.2821 0.2287 0.5748 0.1496 0.2928 Output Injuries Cars damage 0.1959 0.3665 0.5369 0.3593 0.0720 0.1831 0.2322 0.7604 0.0644 0.3988 0.0426 0.1321 0.8042 0.2875 0.0948 0.1677 0.0600 0.0419 0.2402 0.4379 0.4582 0.2981 0.2686 0.0000 0.1817 0.1258 0.0964 0.0000 0.2339 0.0000 0.3318 0.4845 0.3366 0.2888 0.3792 0.5963 0.1691 0.0000 0.3934 0.0000 Input a b 0.1166 0.5098 0.0874 0.2644 0.0096 0.2537 0.9945 0.8510 0.0209 0.0616 0.0169 0.2410 -0.0505 0.2823 -0.0100 0.1841 0.0392 0.0215 -0.8650 0.6093 0.2836 0.1620 0.2159 0.0413 0.0538 0.1875 -0.0015 0.1865 0.0057 0.0448 0.0237 0.1339 -0.0312 0.3422 0.1016 0.1166 -0.0323 0.0715 -0.3274 0.5838 80 Table 0.3: The denominators Nij of the data set in 2018 Regions Nij Northwest Northeast Northerm Vietnam Red River Delta North Central Central Vietnam South Central Coast Central Highland 2018 Dien Bien Hoa Binh Lao Cai Lai Chau Son La Yen Bai Bac Giang Bac Kan Cao Bang Ha Giang Lang Son Phu Tho Quang Ninh Thai Nguyen Tuyen Quang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Ha Noi Hai Duong Hai Phong Hung Yen Nam Dinh Ninh Binh Thai Binh Vinh Phuc Ha Tinh Nghe An Quang Binh Quang Tri Thanh Hoa Thua Th.Hue Binh Dinh Binh Thuan Da Nang Khanh Hoa Ninh Thuan Phu Yen Quang Nam Quang Ngai Dak Lak Dac Nong Gia Lai Kon Tum Deaths 0.1847 0.6039 0.3268 0.3481 0.5115 0.3339 0.8516 0.0988 0.1635 0.1022 0.1805 0.2112 0.2248 0.2623 0.1771 0.1413 0.1247 0.8846 0.3143 0.1380 0.1846 0.0998 0.0732 0.1081 0.0549 0.3811 0.5208 0.3026 0.3550 0.4335 0.4219 0.3764 0.5997 0.1455 0.3563 0.1455 0.2258 0.3914 0.3538 0.6598 0.1507 0.6312 0.1611 Output Injuries Cars Damage 0.1299 0.1359 0.2803 0.5435 0.3316 0.3925 0.2461 0.0830 0.3555 0.0000 0.7795 0.7247 0.8189 0.8532 0.1891 0.1815 0.2225 0.1888 0.0289 0.0363 0.0912 0.1561 0.1380 0.1525 0.2270 0.0000 0.3249 0.3667 0.2426 0.1416 0.0407 0.3640 0.0824 0.8280 0.9539 0.0000 0.1387 0.0000 0.0417 0.2366 0.1115 0.0091 0.1303 0.0000 0.1345 0.3549 0.1084 0.0000 0.0375 0.0000 0.1098 0.3540 0.3279 0.7355 0.2440 0.3933 0.2196 0.1219 0.6069 0.0000 0.6359 0.4051 0.2692 0.2032 0.4551 0.5432 0.0937 0.0701 0.0535 0.0000 0.3703 0.2698 0.2231 0.2909 0.2826 0.1227 0.6648 0.6974 0.5829 0.4575 0.1770 0.2864 0.7495 0.7141 0.1110 0.1376 Input a b -0.2368 0.1429 0.7979 0.4724 0.2603 0.2532 -0.3756 0.2022 0.1754 0.2896 0.2601 0.7533 0.2039 0.6298 0.2453 0.3234 0.2409 0.4220 -0.3047 0.0419 0.1598 0.1125 -0.0403 0.2088 0.0530 0.1159 0.1033 0.2956 0.8407 0.4022 0.1982 0.0210 -0.2919 0.3240 -0.1942 0.0826 0.3592 0.1448 -0.1773 0.0375 -0.5202 0.0742 0.5705 0.7761 0.2006 0.0924 0.1969 0.4985 0.0477 0.0198 0.1592 0.2691 0.2311 0.1129 0.1966 0.4244 0.8525 0.5762 0.3608 0.3591 0.1603 0.5231 -0.1144 0.4586 -0.6253 0.4902 0.0207 0.0575 0.0236 0.1410 0.4742 0.4322 0.5828 0.3423 0.0469 0.3039 -0.1679 0.3604 -0.1825 0.5811 -0.0420 0.1794 0.9593 0.6270 0.0364 0.1499 81 Regions Nij Southeast Southerm Vietnam Mekong River Delta 2018 Lam Dong Binh Duong Binh Phuoc Ba Ria-V.Tau Dong Nai Tay Ninh H.C.M city An Giang Bac Lieu Ben Tre Ca Mau Can Tho Dong Thap Hau Giang Kien Giang Long An Soc Trang Tien Giang Tra Vinh Vinh Long Deaths 0.3429 0.3594 0.1930 0.2727 0.2981 0.1109 0.8112 0.1711 0.0608 0.4391 0.0540 0.2522 0.2927 0.2049 0.2747 0.2544 0.2387 0.5269 0.1531 0.2860 Output Injuries Cars Damage 0.2342 0.4240 0.5966 0.1612 0.0741 0.1802 0.2028 0.4894 0.0692 0.2447 0.0576 0.1729 0.7677 0.7825 0.0824 0.1658 0.0603 0.1216 0.2390 0.4476 0.3736 0.2652 0.2551 0.0000 0.1446 0.0387 0.1085 0.0000 0.2691 0.0000 0.3394 0.4807 0.3877 0.3592 0.4118 0.5636 0.1406 0.0884 0.4097 0.0000 Input a b 0.2080 0.4632 0.5696 0.2448 0.1859 0.3326 0.6646 0.7564 0.0988 0.0739 0.3112 0.4088 -0.3046 0.2911 -0.2172 0.1158 0.0369 0.0557 0.1796 0.6159 -0.2250 0.1433 0.0893 0.0668 0.0676 0.1833 0.4044 0.1903 0.0399 0.0408 0.0851 0.1175 0.1097 0.4216 0.2903 0.1218 -0.6325 0.0803 0.4328 0.5430 82 Appendix 10: The gk values of 63 Vietnamese provinces by regions from 2016 to 2018 – the DEA method Regions Northwest Northeast Northerm Vietnam Red River Delta North Central Central Vietnam South Central Coast Central Highland Provinces Dien Bien Hoa Binh Lao Cai Lai Chau Son La Yen Bai Bac Giang Bac Kan Cao Bang Ha Giang Lang Son Phu Tho Quang Ninh Thai Nguyen Tuyen Quang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Ha Noi Hai Duong Hai Phong Hung Yen Nam Dinh Ninh Binh Thai Binh Vinh Phuc Ha Tinh Nghe An Quang Binh Quang Tri Thanh Hoa Thua Th.Hue Binh Dinh Binh Thuan Da Nang Khanh Hoa Ninh Thuan Phu Yen Quang Nam Quang Ngai Dak Lak Dac Nong Gia Lai 2016 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.5152 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 8.1887 16.0342 4.0775 3.7892 2.6623 2.4516 1.0000 34.6359 2.3362 3.7182 1.0000 1.0625 1.0000 10.5346 40.7143 1.9288 36.3676 3.4737 1.0000 1.0000 6.8160 8.5781 2.4273 3.6385 1.7257 1.0000 1.0000 1.5183 1.4924 1.0000 1.7152 1.3171 1.0584 1.1903 1.0000 2017 1.0689 1.0000 1.7640 1.0000 1.0000 1.0475 1.3494 3.9649 3.4420 1.0000 1.8361 2.3487 1.3455 1.0000 2.8809 1.0000 11.0816 1.0000 4.7850 2.2089 1.0000 110.5714 5.1194 59.1104 3.1653 3.2723 1.0000 4.8603 4.2801 1.4251 1.0000 2.6556 1.5331 1.0000 1.4612 1.0000 2.2702 2.0914 1.0000 1.0000 1.2087 1.0000 2018 1.0000 1.0954 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.2445 1.0000 2.2843 2.6301 1.0000 1.0000 1.6623 1.0000 1.0927 2.5294 1.0000 3.6317 1.0000 4.9286 1.0000 1.0000 68.7314 2.5748 49.3478 3.8649 1.0099 1.0000 1.5185 5.4731 1.1202 1.0000 2.3507 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2.1531 2.0690 1.6798 0.7343 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 83 Regions Southeast Southerm Vietnam Mekong River Delta Provinces Kon Tum Lam Dong Binh Duong Binh Phuoc Ba Ria-V.Tau Dong Nai Tay Ninh H.C.M city An Giang Bac Lieu Ben Tre Ca Mau Can Tho Dong Thap Hau Giang Kien Giang Long An Soc Trang Tien Giang Tra Vinh Vinh Long 2016 1.0000 1.1119 2.7497 1.0000 5.1666 1.0000 11.7571 1.0000 1.1122 1.9482 1.6058 1.3535 1.0000 1.1752 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.8848 1.0000 1.2728 1.9503 2017 1.0000 1.5358 1.2845 4.5728 5.6060 1.0000 6.6410 1.0000 3.1344 1.4011 1.0000 1.5619 1.0000 2.9625 5.8014 1.0000 1.0069 2.8048 1.0000 1.4437 4.5619 2018 1.0088 1.3241 1.0821 5.7362 4.9035 1.0000 7.4731 1.0000 2.2107 1.8624 5.3754 1.3195 1.7273 3.7179 6.2595 1.0000 1.0000 3.8594 1.0000 1.0000 8.6193 84 Appendix 11: The Hk values of 63 Vietnamese provinces by regions from 2016 to 2018 Regions Northwest Northeast Northerm Vietnam Red River Delta North Central Central Vietnam South Central Coast Central Highland Provinces Dien Bien Hoa Binh Lao Cai Lai Chau Son La Yen Bai Bac Giang Bac Kan Cao Bang Ha Giang Lang Son Phu Tho Quang Ninh Thai Nguyen Tuyen Quang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Ha Noi Hai Duong Hai Phong Hung Yen Nam Dinh Ninh Binh Thai Binh Vinh Phuc Ha Tinh Nghe An Quang Binh Quang Tri Thanh Hoa Thua Th.Hue Binh Dinh Binh Thuan Da Nang Khanh Hoa Ninh Thuan Phu Yen Quang Nam Quang Ngai Dak Lak Dac Nong Gia Lai 2016 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.6600 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.1221 0.0624 0.2452 0.2639 0.3756 0.4079 1.0000 0.0289 0.4280 0.2689 1.0000 0.9412 1.0000 0.0949 0.0246 0.5185 0.0275 0.2879 1.0000 1.0000 0.1467 0.1166 0.4120 0.2748 0.5795 1.0000 1.0000 0.6586 0.6701 1.0000 0.5830 0.7592 0.9448 0.8401 1.0000 2017 0.9355 1.0000 0.5669 1.0000 1.0000 0.9547 0.7411 0.2522 0.2905 1.0000 0.5446 0.4258 0.7432 1.0000 0.3471 1.0000 0.0902 1.0000 0.2090 0.4527 1.0000 0.0090 0.1953 0.0169 0.3159 0.3056 1.0000 0.2057 0.2336 0.7017 1.0000 0.3766 0.6523 1.0000 0.6844 1.0000 0.4405 0.4781 1.0000 1.0000 0.8273 1.0000 2018 1.0000 0.9129 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.8035 1.0000 0.4378 0.3802 1.0000 1.0000 0.6016 1.0000 0.9152 0.3954 1.0000 0.2754 1.0000 0.2029 1.0000 1.0000 0.0145 0.3884 0.0203 0.2587 0.9902 1.0000 0.6585 0.1827 0.8927 1.0000 0.4254 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.4644 0.4833 0.5953 1.3618 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 85 Regions Southeast Southerm Vietnam Mekong River Delta Provinces Kon Tum Lam Dong Binh Duong Binh Phuoc Ba Ria-V.Tau Dong Nai Tay Ninh H.C.M city An Giang Bac Lieu Ben Tre Ca Mau Can Tho Dong Thap Hau Giang Kien Giang Long An Soc Trang Tien Giang Tra Vinh Vinh Long 2016 1.0000 0.8994 0.3637 1.0000 0.1936 1.0000 0.0851 1.0000 0.8991 0.5133 0.6227 0.7388 1.0000 0.8509 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.5306 1.0000 0.7857 0.5127 2017 1.0000 0.6511 0.7785 0.2187 0.1784 1.0000 0.1506 1.0000 0.3190 0.7137 1.0000 0.6402 1.0000 0.3376 0.1724 1.0000 0.9931 0.3565 1.0000 0.6927 0.2192 2018 0.9913 0.7552 0.9241 0.1743 0.2039 1.0000 0.1338 1.0000 0.4523 0.5369 0.1860 0.7579 0.5789 0.2690 0.1598 1.0000 1.0000 0.2591 1.0000 1.0000 0.1160 86 Appendix 12: The DEA score and rang of 63 Vietnamese provinces from 2016 to 2018 2016 DMUs Dien Bien Hoa Binh Lao Cai Son La Yen Bai Bac Giang Thai Nguyen Ha Noi Hai Phong Ha Tinh Nghe An Binh Thuan Da Nang Phu Yen Gia Lai Kon Tum Binh Phuoc Dong Nai HCM city Can Tho Hau Giang Kien Giang Long An Tien Giang Dak Lak Hai Duong Lam Dong An Giang Dong Thap Dac Nong Tra Vinh Quang Ngai Ca Mau Ninh Thuan Lai Chau Khanh Hoa Ben Tre Quang Nam Binh Dinh Soc Trang Ninh Binh Bac Lieu 2017 DEA score 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.94 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.85 0.84 0.79 0.76 0.74 0.67 0.66 0.66 0.62 0.58 0.58 0.53 0.52 0.51 DMUs Hoa Binh Lai Chau Son La Ha Giang Thai Nguyen Bac Ninh Ha Noi Hung Yen Nghe An Hue Da Nang Ninh Thuan Quang Ngai Dak Lak Gia Lai Kon Tum Dong Nai HCM city Ben Tre Can Tho Kien Giang Tien Giang Long An Yen Bai Dien Bien Dac Nong Binh Duong Quang Ninh Bac Giang Bac Lieu Thanh Hoa Tra Vinh Khanh Hoa Binh Thuan Lam Dong Ca Mau Lao Cai Lang Son Quang Nam Hai Phong Phu Yen Phu Tho 2018 DEA score 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.99 0.95 0.94 0.83 0.78 0.74 0.74 0.71 0.70 0.69 0.68 0.65 0.65 0.64 0.57 0.54 0.48 0.45 0.44 0.43 DMUs Quang Ngai Dien Bien lao Cai Lai Chau Son La Bac Giang Ha Giang Lang Son Quang Ninh Bac Ninh Ha Noi Hai Phong Hung Yen Nghe An Hue Binh Thuan Da Nang Khanh Hoa Dak Lak Dac Nong Gia Lai Dong Nai HCM city Kien Giang Long An Tien Giang Tra Vinh Kon Tum Ha Tinh Binh Duong Thai Nguyen Hoa Binh Thanh Hoa Yen Bai Ca Mau Lam Dong Quang Binh Phu Tho Quang Nam Can Tho Bac Lieu Phu Yen DEA score 1.36 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.99 0.99 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.89 0.80 0.76 0.76 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.58 0.54 0.48 Rank 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 87 2016 DMUs DEA score Vinh Long 0.51 Bac Ninh 0.43 Thanh Hoa 0.41 Quang Ninh 0.41 Phu Tho 0.38 Binh Duong 0.36 Vinh Phuc 0.29 Hue 0.27 Ha Nam 0.27 Lang Son 0.26 Ha Giang 0.25 Vung Tau 0.19 Quang Binh 0.15 Bac Kan 0.12 Quang Tri 0.12 Hung Yen 0.09 Tay Ninh 0.09 Cao Bang 0.06 Tuyen Quang 0.03 Thai Binh 0.03 Nam Dinh 0.02 2017 DMUs DEA score Binh Dinh 0.38 Soc Trang 0.36 Tuyen Quang 0.35 Dong Thap 0.34 An Giang 0.32 Vinh Phuc 0.32 Ha Tinh 0.31 Cao Bang 0.29 Bac Kan 0.25 Quang Tri 0.23 Vinh Long 0.22 Binh Phuoc 0.22 Hai Duong 0.21 Quang Binh 0.21 Ninh Binh 0.20 Vung Tau 0.18 Hau Giang 0.17 Tay Ninh 0.15 Ha Nam 0.09 Thai Binh 0.02 Nam Dinh 0.01 2018 DMUs DEA score Ninh Thuan 0.46 An Giang 0.45 Bac Kan 0.44 Binh Đinh 0.43 Tuyen Quang 0.40 Ninh Binh 0.39 Cao Bang 0.38 Ha Nam 0.28 Đong Thap 0.27 Soc Trang 0.26 Vinh Phuc 0.26 Vung Tau 0.20 Hai Duong 0.20 Ben Tre 0.19 Quang Tri 0.18 Binh Phuoc 0.17 Hau Giang 0.16 Tay Ninh 0.13 Vinh Long 0.12 Thai Binh 0.02 Nam Dinh 0.01 Rank 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 88 Appendix 13: z-score and rank of 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 (R1) Provinces 2016 2017 2018 z-score Rank z-score Rank z-score Rank Binh Duong 4.1710 63 4.2415 63 4.7548 63 Ba Ria - Vung Tau 3.5580 62 3.7338 62 3.3517 62 Ninh Thuan 2.5939 61 2.1535 61 1.5385 61 Quang Ngai 2.0131 60 2.1648 60 1.3039 60 Binh Thuan 1.2751 59 1.1971 59 1.1732 59 Thua Thien Hue 1.1022 58 1.1123 58 1.4276 58 Gia Lai 1.0140 57 1.1551 57 1.3088 57 Quang Tri 0.9588 56 1.0031 56 1.0673 56 Binh Phuoc 0.8309 55 0.9037 55 1.0480 55 Ho Chi Minh city 0.7815 54 0.8289 54 0.7877 54 Vinh Long 0.7249 53 0.4933 53 0.4363 53 Ca Mau 0.6513 52 -0.0606 52 -0.4115 52 Cao Bang 0.5308 51 -0.0320 51 0.1958 51 Phu Yen 0.4680 50 0.3238 50 0.1369 50 Quang Binh 0.3582 49 0.3198 49 0.3346 49 Yen Bai 0.3194 48 0.4888 48 0.5687 48 Bac Kan 0.2920 47 0.1378 47 0.6305 47 Dak Lak 0.2376 46 0.4532 46 0.3934 46 Lao Cai 0.1000 45 0.1867 45 -0.2237 45 Tien Giang 0.0898 44 0.1052 44 0.0499 44 Ben Tre 0.0025 43 0.0293 43 0.0410 43 Dac Nong -0.0317 42 0.0103 42 0.0428 42 Binh Dinh -0.0715 41 -0.1034 41 -0.1471 41 Long An -0.1069 40 -0.2078 40 -0.3123 40 Kom Tum -0.1273 39 -0.0218 39 -0.0302 39 Quang Nam -0.1514 38 -0.0603 38 -0.0597 38 Soc Trang -0.2013 37 -0.1322 37 -0.0790 37 Ha Noi -0.2118 36 -0.2142 36 -0.2841 36 Lam Dong -0.2648 35 -0.3311 35 -0.2195 35 Lai Chau -0.3508 34 0.1321 34 0.1446 34 Tra Vinh -0.3738 33 -0.5062 33 -0.6432 33 Ha Nam -0.3931 32 -0.3460 32 -0.2951 32 Ninh Binh -0.4196 31 -0.3586 31 -0.3705 31 Hoa Binh -0.4239 30 -0.3499 30 -0.2548 30 Tay Ninh -0.4439 29 -0.3748 29 0.0637 29 Ha Tinh -0.4534 28 -0.5275 28 -0.4815 28 Thai Nguyen -0.4540 27 -0.4318 27 -0.3818 27 Dong Nai -0.4646 26 -0.4970 26 -0.4918 26 Kien Giang -0.4692 25 -0.6425 25 -0.5846 25 89 Provinces 2016 2017 2018 z-score Rank z-score Rank z-score Rank Khanh Hoa -0.4730 24 -0.5512 24 -0.5667 24 Hung Yen -0.4824 23 -0.4125 23 -0.3374 23 Hai Duong -0.4931 22 -0.4565 22 -0.3681 22 Thanh Hoa -0.5212 21 -0.4863 21 -0.5119 21 Son La -0.5267 20 -0.5146 20 -0.5832 20 Lang Son -0.5380 19 -0.7185 19 -0.7170 19 Dong Thap -0.5610 18 -0.6021 18 -0.7148 18 Tuyen Quang -0.5646 17 0.0807 17 -0.2018 17 Da Nang -0.5748 16 -0.6680 16 -0.7580 16 Bac Giang -0.5869 15 -0.5829 15 0.7343 15 Quang Ninh -0.5944 14 -0.6908 14 -0.6361 14 Can Tho -0.7038 13 -0.3180 13 -0.3196 13 Nghe An -0.7283 12 -0.7012 12 -0.6824 12 Dien Bien -0.7341 11 -0.7284 11 -0.7638 11 Hau Giang -0.7676 10 -0.5006 10 -0.3178 10 Thai Binh -0.7678 -0.7743 -0.8624 Phu Tho -0.7906 -0.7697 -0.8973 Ha Giang -0.7972 -0.9907 -1.1183 Bac Ninh -0.8102 -0.8203 -0.8320 Bac Lieu -0.8386 -0.9425 -1.0432 Nam Dinh -0.8712 -0.8374 -0.8299 Vinh Phuc -0.8954 -0.9814 -1.0454 Hai Phong An Giang -1.0192 -1.0199 -1.0089 -1.0005 -1.0577 -1.0991 90 Appendix 14: z-score and rank of 63 provinces from 2016 to 2018 (R2) Provinces 2016 2017 2018 z-score Rank z-score Rank z-score Rank Binh Duong 5.2770 63 4.6942 63 4.9836 63 Ba Ria - Vung Tau 2.9651 62 3.3294 62 3.3014 62 Ninh Thuan 2.1994 61 1.8513 61 1.1298 61 Quang Ngai 1.5111 60 1.8486 60 0.9714 60 Ho Chi Minh city 1.3871 59 1.7685 59 1.8217 59 Binh Thuan 1.3282 58 1.3973 58 1.1946 58 Thua Thien Hue 1.2400 57 1.4134 57 1.7455 57 Quang Tri 0.7340 56 0.8561 56 0.8926 56 Binh Phuoc 0.5395 55 0.7422 55 0.8696 55 Vinh Long 0.4971 54 0.4696 54 0.3538 54 Gia Lai 0.4949 53 0.6002 53 0.7464 53 Cao Bang 0.3813 52 -0.1686 52 -0.0402 52 Phu Yen 0.3567 51 0.3423 51 0.0695 51 Quang Binh 0.3450 50 0.4436 50 0.4705 50 Yen Bai 0.2953 49 0.4245 49 0.4466 49 Ca Mau 0.1940 48 -0.3287 48 -0.5374 48 Dak Lak 0.1596 47 0.4279 47 0.2403 47 Tien Giang 0.1536 46 0.2359 46 0.1518 46 Ben Tre 0.0607 45 0.1352 45 0.1568 45 Dac Nong 0.0581 44 0.0304 44 -0.0639 44 Binh Dinh 0.0488 43 0.0064 43 -0.0649 43 Bac Kan 0.0458 42 -0.1879 42 0.1984 42 Lao Cai -0.0459 41 -0.0056 41 -0.3908 41 Ha Noi -0.0522 40 -0.0222 40 -0.0011 40 Long An -0.0772 39 -0.1972 39 -0.3192 39 Ninh Binh -0.1332 38 -0.0472 38 -0.0288 38 Ha Nam -0.2297 37 -0.2012 37 -0.1234 37 Quang Nam -0.2703 36 -0.2217 36 -0.2489 36 Lam Dong -0.2808 35 -0.2804 35 -0.1920 35 Thanh Hoa -0.3028 34 -0.2729 34 -0.2946 34 Soc Trang -0.3478 33 -0.3685 33 -0.2790 33 Tay Ninh -0.3585 32 -0.3132 32 0.2468 32 Thai Nguyen -0.3742 31 -0.3723 31 -0.3101 31 Kom Tum -0.3926 30 -0.3787 30 -0.3593 30 Hai Duong -0.3995 29 -0.3819 29 -0.3434 29 Ha Tinh -0.3995 28 -0.5473 28 -0.4970 28 Hung Yen -0.4185 27 -0.4347 27 -0.3801 27 Dong Nai -0.4313 26 -0.4959 26 -0.4673 26 Kien Giang -0.4325 25 -0.5097 25 -0.5003 25 91 Provinces 2016 2017 2018 z-score Rank z-score Rank z-score Rank Khanh Hoa -0.4327 24 -0.4400 24 -0.4731 24 Lai Chau -0.4497 23 -0.1958 23 -0.2758 23 Bac Giang -0.4705 22 -0.4896 22 0.7991 22 Hoa Binh -0.4727 21 -0.4435 21 -0.3779 21 Tra Vinh -0.4802 20 -0.6069 20 -0.6652 20 Da Nang -0.4893 19 -0.6002 19 -0.6769 19 Son La -0.5153 18 -0.5695 18 -0.5753 18 Dong Thap -0.5352 17 -0.6393 17 -0.6582 17 Tuyen Quang -0.5410 16 -0.0778 16 -0.2038 16 Lang Son -0.5782 15 -0.6682 15 -0.7521 15 Quang Ninh -0.5782 14 -0.6747 14 -0.6301 14 Thai Binh -0.5820 13 -0.6544 13 -0.7525 13 Hau Giang -0.6238 12 -0.2948 12 -0.2752 12 Bac Ninh -0.6333 11 -0.6765 11 -0.6672 11 Can Tho -0.6380 10 -0.3380 10 -0.3153 10 Nghe An -0.6707 -0.6824 -0.6387 Phu Tho -0.6955 -0.7276 -0.7657 Dien Bien -0.7292 -0.7611 -0.7620 Nam Dinh -0.7565 -0.8056 -0.7670 Bac Lieu -0.7956 -0.9144 -0.9755 Ha Giang -0.8355 -1.0221 -1.1040 Hai Phong -0.9147 -0.9717 -0.9573 An Giang Vinh Phuc -0.9478 -0.9601 -0.9968 -1.0304 -1.0437 -1.0360 92 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM Independence – Freedom – Happiness Hanoi, date month year 2021 CONFIRMATION OF THE MASTER’S THESIS REVISION Full name: Vu Thi Huong Khue Student ID: 19110058 Date of birth: 3rd July 1996 Place of birth: Ha Noi Master’s programs in: Infrastructure engineering Title of thesis: A study on a ranking method for the provincial road traffic safety index in Vietnam Defense date: 3th July, 2021 Based on the recommendation of the Master’s thesis evaluation committee, the thesis has been revised as follows: No Detail of comment or inquiry Definition of wetland and classification follow the guidelines of MONRE, 2016 in Decision 1093 date 22/8/2016 Research overview of coastal wetland Explanation Section in the master’s thesis Revision made Wetlands/coastal wetlands Classification 1.3.1/ P9 Revision made 2.1/ P19 SUPERVISOR'S CONFIRMATION SIGNATURE OF STUDENT Assoc Prof Vu Hoai Nam Vu Thi Huong Khue CONFIRMATION OF MASTER’S THESIS EVALUATION COMMITTEE .. .VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY VU THI HUONG KHUE A STUDY ON A RANKING METHOD FOR THE PROVINCIAL ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY INDEX IN VIETNAM MAJOR: INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING... organization The dissertation includes four chapters excluding introduction and conclusion parts  Chapter analyses the road safety statistics and the current situation of road safety ranking in. .. Enforcement, Education, Economics and Enablement One of the issues in term of Engineering is the accident statistics and the road safety ranking to serve for the monitoring the national road safety