Traffic cameras in Turku raise concerns among drivers, say experts

Traffic surveillance cameras are often criticized for creating unnecessary fluctuations in traffic flow, according to traffic safety engineer Jaakko Klang. He emphasizes that the purpose of these cameras is to promote proper and safe driving behavior, not to catch or penalize drivers for speeding. Klang monitors traffic near a surveillance camera on Satakunnantie in Turku, a zone with a speed limit of 50 kilometers per hour. On this occasion, sudden braking is notably absent, likely due to nearby construction restrictions or the presence of the camera, leading drivers to maintain a more moderate speed.

Klang notes that drivers tend to brake less at camera locations compared to highways with higher speed limits where automatic monitoring is placed over zones of 60 to 80 kilometers per hour. He observes that many drivers seem aware of camera placements. While some consider erratic braking a significant danger, Klang dismisses concerns, citing accident statistics that show no unusual increase in collisions caused by these actions.

Feedback about camera monitoring is consistently sent to the Regional Council of Southwest Finland, with around 10-20 complaints per year. Most often, the correspondence questions the legitimacy of a speeding penalty received from police, with some believing that certain cameras are placed in “unnecessary” locations.

Klang identifies three types of feedback providers: law-abiding drivers who are unaffected by cameras, those who drive slightly over the limit yet feel safe, and those who frequently disregard speed limits. Additionally, the head of the Pirkanmaa regional council highlights that while cameras do not cause accidents, they may incite road rage among other drivers. Traffic speeds have remarkably decreased since the introduction of automatic surveillance on major roads, resulting in fewer injury accidents and collisions.