The road accidents in cities should not be understood only as a series of “accidents”, but as an urban problem that is concentrated in corridors, intersections and areas where high mobility, speed, poor infrastructure and lack of safe conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and drivers coincide.
This is what the scientific article states Urban road accidents, spatial justice and geospatial analysis: systemic review of empirical studies 2016-2025prepared by Vladimir Hernandez Hernandezprofessor-researcher at the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez (UACJ), and Ireyli Iracheta Laraprofessor-researcher at the Autonomous University of Chihuahua (UACH), who are members of the National System of Researchers (SNII).
The study reviewed scientific literature published between 2016 and 2025 on urban road accidentswith emphasis on research that used Geographic Information Systems (NEXT), spatial analysis and statistical or computational models.
To do this, the authors applied the PRISMA methodology, an international standard for systematic reviews. After filtering publications, eliminating duplicates and evaluating complete texts, they integrated a final corpus of 71 articles.
Data to detect risk areas
The article proposes strengthening the use of georeferenced, geospatial and geostatistical data to improve road safety diagnoses in cities.
This allows each accident to be located at a specific point, intersection, stretch, corridor or area, and not just the general number of crashes, collisions or injuries.
From this information, maps and geostatistical analyzes help identify concentrations, critical points, risk corridors and patterns that are not always visible in a general review of figures.
It is not enough to count crashes
One of the central points of the study is that the maps must be interpreted carefully. An avenue with many accidents is not necessarily the most risky if it also concentrates a large number of trips, pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles or public transportation.
For this reason, the authors distinguish between accumulation of events and risk adjusted by exposure. In other words, knowing where more road events occur is not the same as knowing where there is greater real risk for those who travel.
To make this difference, the studies reviewed incorporate data such as resident population, length of the road network, vehicle volume, pedestrian and cyclist flows, public transportation and urban activity indicators.
What information do you propose to use?
The article points out that road safety diagnoses can improve if different types of data are combined: georeferenced records of accidents, severity of the events, affected users and conditions of the urban environment.
These conditions include land use, density, intersections, cycling infrastructure, sidewalks, safe crossings, lighting, transit stops, road hierarchy, and high-speed corridors.
It also highlights the importance of spatio-temporal data, which allows us to know if a critical point remains, appears or disappears over time. This helps distinguish between areas with structural problems and places where there were temporary increases.
Road safety and the right to move
The study links road safety with the right to mobility. From this perspective, it is not enough for people to be able to move; It also matters under what conditions they do it and how exposed they are to risk.
The question, then, is not only where more accidents occur, but also which territories and groups bear the most road damage. In Latin American cities, this approach becomes relevant due to peripheral expansion, long distances and inequalities in safe infrastructure.
For Mexican and regional cities, the article proposes identifying areas with a high concentration of accidents, adjusting the analysis according to actual exposure, recognizing differences between territories and evaluating whether interventions reduce both road events and the gaps between more and less protected areas.
