PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 28, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Do Crash Barriers and Fences Have an Impact on Wildlife–Vehicle Collisions?—An Artificial Intelligence and GIS-Based Analysis

View Full Paper
RPRaphaela PaganyUniversity of SalzburgWDWolfgang DornerUniversity of Stuttgart

Key Points

  • The research aims to assess the impact of crash barriers and fences on wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVCs).
  • Analyzed 113 km of road network and 1571 WVCs in Freyung-Grafenau, Germany.
  • Utilized a neural network to analyze 5596 road inspection images for barrier recognition.
  • Combined infrastructure data with WVC records in GIS for spatial evaluation of impact.
  • Crash barriers significantly reduce WVCs compared to roads without barriers.
  • Smaller animals show a lower share of collisions on roads with crash barriers.
  • No conclusive evidence was found for the effectiveness of fences due to limited data on fenced sections.

Abstract

Wildlife–vehicle collisions (WVCs) cause significant road mortality of wildlife and have led to the installation of protective measures along streets. Until now, it has been difficult to determine the impact of roadside infrastructure that might act as a barrier for animals. The main deficits are the lack of geodata for roadside infrastructure and georeferenced accidents recorded for a larger area. We analyzed 113 km of road network of the district Freyung-Grafenau, Germany, and 1571 WVCs, examining correlations between the appearance of WVCs, the presence or absence of roadside infrastructure, particularly crash barriers and fences, and the relevance of the blocking effect for individual species. To receive infrastructure data on a larger scale, we analyzed 5596 road inspection images with a neural network for barrier recognition and a GIS for a complete spatial inventory. This data was combined with the data of WVCs in GIS to evaluate the infrastructure’s impact on accidents. The results show that crash barriers have an effect on WVCs, as collisions are lower on roads with crash barriers. In particular, smaller animals have a lower collision share. The risk reduction at fenced sections could not be proven as fenced sections are only available at 3% of the analyzed roads. Thus, especially the fence dataset must be validated by a larger sample number. However, these preliminary results indicate that the combination of artificial intelligence and GIS may be used to analyze and better allocate protective barriers or to apply it in alternative measures, such as dynamic WVC risk-warning.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Pagany et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a287350a974eb0d3c02bf3https://doi.org/10.82491/opusthd-185
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Wildlife fencing at German highways and federal roads – requirements and management implications2024 · 4 citations
  2. 2A GIS-Based Decision Support Framework for Sustainable Landscape Governance: Mitigating Wildlife Road Collision Risks in Fragmented Mediterranean Contexts2026
  3. 3Uncovering barriers and paths for ensuring road mitigation to reduce wildlife collisions: Establishing grounds for action2025 · 1 citations
  4. 4Predicting the effectiveness of wildlife fencing along roads using an individual-based model: How do fence-following distances influence the fence-end effect?2024 · 7 citations
  5. 5Reevaluating Wildlife–Vehicle Collision Risk During COVID-19: A Simulation-Based Perspective on the ‘Fewer Vehicles–Fewer Casualties’ Assumption2025