The component interventionHeader has not been created yet or is not available for this content page type.

The component headerBackButton has not been created yet or is not available for this content page type.

General Overview

Type of stakeholder

EICS Framework

Region of Reference

Africa
Asia
Australia
Europe
North-America
South-America
World

Description

This intervention refers to the integration of an in-vehicle emergency communication system, which can comprise panic buttons that trigger audible or silent alarms – ideally linked to a centralised control centre and/or law enforcement agencies – as well as onboard CCTV cameras with remote access. Such systems allow distressed passengers to raise an alarm in the event of witnessing or experiencing sexual harassment, or other criminal activities.

Such systems can alert the driver, a control centre, and law enforcement agencies. More advanced systems can support remote monitoring of onboard CCTV cameras, and be integrated with live vehicle location tracking (using GPS) systems, akin to those described in the Digital Live Tracking and Tracing Tools intervention.

Facts/Illustrations/Case studies

Example of a CCTV camera installed in a bus. Source: https://www.jcbl.com/blog/how-effective-is-cctv-in-buses.aspx
Example of a panic button installation in a bus. Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-35668942

Types of Impact

To/from the stop/station/rank✕
Waiting for train/bus/paratransit✕
In the vehicle✓
At interchanges✕

This intervention only targets the portion of travel on board the vehicle.

Day-time travel✓
Night-time travel✓
Peak-time travel✓
Off peak-time travel✓

All travel time categories could be positively impacted by this intervention.

Bus✓
Train✓
Rideshare✓
4 wheelers informal✓
3 wheelers informal✓
2 wheelers informal✓
Cycling✕
Walking✕

Only motorized modes of transport are impacted by this intervention.

Girls✓
Boys✓
Adult Women✓
Men✓
Elderly Women✓
LGBTQI+✓

All public transport users will be positively impacted by this intervention.

Resources

Monetary Resource Requirements
Cost is dependent upon the scale of implementation. While a basic system with panic buttons that only alert the driver of the vehicle has minimal capital and operational costs, once the system is centralised and able to communicate with a command-and-control centre, and includes CCTV and GPS potentially, the capital and operational costs increase substantially.
Capital Cost Requirements Operational Cost Requirements
Non-Monetary Resource Requirements
The skills and time required for implementation vary depending on the scale of implementation. A basic system with a panic button that only alerts the driver would require the driver to have been trained in advance to know how to handle the situation in an appropriate manner. A more comprehensive implementation involving CCTV, live location tracking through GPS, and communication with a command-and-control centre would require technical skills to operate the various systems and coordinate according to signals received. In addition, if such a measure were to be introduced as a mandatory requirement, political will would be required to revise existing legislation.
Skills Time Political Will

SWOT Analysis

Scalable to suit a wide range of budgets
Rollout can be staggered, enabling piloting of systems in different contexts to determine which combination of technologies has the most impact
Stable technology with much experience to learn from globally

The system is only effective if those receiving the signal are adequately trained and have the capacity to respond appropriately
Less effective in the context of bicycle, motorcycle, and tricycle taxis

Job creation
Reduction in other criminal activities
Can aid existing law enforcement agencies to exercise their mandate more effectively and efficiently

In larger cities with extensive transport networks more comprehensive systems can be costly to implement and operate
Civilians may resist increased surveillance
If the driver is the perpetrator, panic buttons that only alert the driver may endanger the victim more

Effectiveness

While in-vehicle emergency communication systems have been found to be effective in many environments, it has been found to be less effective in others [5]. In addition, every context is different, and therefore piloting of systems in advance of the full-scale rollout is always advised.

Perception by (female) passengers
Perception by governing bodies
Level of confidence in these ratings

Implementation

Implementation of this intervention can be phased in over time. The benefits ensue immediately upon implementation and improve as perpetrators become aware of the greater likelihood of consequences to their behaviour (as a result of greater ease of reporting and identification). Should the system’s operations be stopped, the benefit is lost immediately.

Implementation timeframe

0-1 year✓
1-3 years✓
>3 years✕

Timeframe to realise benefits

0-1 year✓
1-3 years✓
>3 years✕

Scale of Implementation

This intervention can be implemented at any scale required, however, is best if at a minimum is implemented across an entire transport network.

National

Regional

City

Station or
Suburb

Ease of Implementation

Depending on the scale of functionality chosen, ease of implementation will vary. A panic button that only sends a signal to the vehicle driver is easy to implement. Once communication is implemented between vehicles and a central command and control centre, it becomes less easy to implement.