Quantitative analysis assesses infrastructure and economic factors' impact on road accidents in Poland, indicating critical correlations.
Every year, road accidents cause significant human and social losses, posing one of the key challenges for public policy in Poland. The aim of this article is to quantitatively assess the relationship between selected infrastructural and economic conditions and the scale of road accidents in Poland in the period 2010–2024. The analysis was carried out using a log–linear regression model, which allows the results to be interpreted in terms of elasticity. The dependent variable was the total number of road accidents, while the set of explanatory variables included the density of paved roads, the length of expressways and motorways, urban population density, the level of private car ownership, and average gross wages. The results indicate that the development of road infrastructure and an increase in the population’s income contribute to reducing the number of accidents, while the growing number of passenger cars significantly increases the risk of accidents. The estimated model explains approximately 94% of the variation in accident counts (R2 = 0.94). The elasticity of passenger car ownership is positive (β = 1.39), indicating increased accident exposure with rising motorization, while paved road density (β = −46.56) and expressways (β = −2.03) show negative elasticities. Average wages are also negatively associated with accidents (β = −4.64). These results quantify the proportional structure of long-term accident dynamics rather than merely confirming directional relationships. The analysis also revealed a negative correlation between urban population density and the number of accidents, which may indicate greater effectiveness of traffic management and control systems in urban areas. The results of the study provide empirical evidence relevant for the development of investment and regulatory strategies in the area of transport infrastructure and road safety.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gorzelańczyk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: