CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter describes a variety of researches from both foreign and local

researcher which are considered significant to this study research’s variables as well as

on several related aspects that will help the development of this study.

Related Literature

Age

A minimum age of 21 is frequently specified in law enforcement age restrictions

(Schweitzer, 2017). Age-related decreases in physical fitness, however, can affect how

well one performs at work, especially when performing duties that call for strength,

lower-body power, muscular endurance, and cardiorespiratory fitness.

According to a study by Marrins et al., as police aged, both male and female

officers had statistically significant reductions in these areas. Additionally, Suttle (2016)

argues that aging may have an impact on job performance in situations requiring physical

strength, working memory, sensory perception, selective attention, information

processing, or quick reaction. Older persons may employ several techniques for

regulating their emotions when their physical capabilities deteriorate.

Older persons may employ several techniques for regulating their emotions when

their physical capabilities deteriorate. Although this depends on the context, Allen &

Windsor’s evaluation of 23 studies suggested that older persons may use situation

selection and attention deployment techniques more frequently than younger adults.

Uncertainty surrounds age-related variations in reappraisal, but they might possibly alter

1
circumstances differently. While studies on suppression shows mixed effects, older

persons may be more likely to use simpler tactics like acceptance. In the end, variations

in emotion regulation among age groups are intricate and impacted by a number of

variables.

The studies revealed that young people are disproportionately affected by road

traffic injuries under motorcycle accidents. According to the study by Hamid and Davoud

(2019), the Eastern Mediterranean Region has high fatality rates and therefore stresses

the enforcement of helmet laws for risk reduction. The effects of enforcing helmet laws

may also depend on the age of the enforcers, such that younger enforcers may relate

better with younger riders, thereby affecting compliance. This statement corroborates the

findings from Du et al. (2020), which indicate that considering the age of both enforcers

and riders in the design of targeted enforcement strategies would help improve

compliance with helmet laws and, consequently, reduce severe injuries among young

motorcyclists.

Furthermore, the study of Chandrasekharan et al. (2016) indicate that

demographic factors appear to influence mortality rates on a road traffic accident. While

focusing primarily on the victims, it also points out the necessity of customizing

enforcement strategies to the demographics of both enforcers and riders. Younger traffic

enforcers are likely to understand the behavior and risk perceptions of younger riders

more clearly and also enhance communication and law enforcement tracking of the use of

helmets.

According to Wiznia et al. (2016) further substantiate this by emphasizing that

most injuries accrue to younger populations in direct relevance to the enforcement of the

2
Motorcycle Helmet Act. They further opine that the demographics of traffic enforcers can

play a significant role in determining whether helmet laws are enforced; thus, programs

led by younger enforcers may stimulate the minds of younger motorcyclists.

Moreover, Banstola and Mytton (2017) discuss the cost-effectiveness of various

interventions for preventing road traffic injuries and emphasize the need for age-specific

educational campaigns. It follows that aiming intervening measures at age-specific traffic

enforcers might improve helmet compliance among younger motorcyclists and contribute

to the mitigation of injuries and fatalities.

Sex

According to Aboah et al., 2023 the study that male and female law enforcers may

utilize varying approaches to law enforcement that can affect the effectiveness of helmet

law enforcement. Male officers will use a more aggressive or assertive enforcement style,

which sometimes can create higher tensions during traffic stops (Aboah et al., 2023). The

Female officers will employ community-based models, creating a stronger sense of

identification with the public and encouraging spontaneous compliance with helmet

legislation (Aboah et al., 2023). These differences illustrate why gender dynamics must

be considered when measuring the challenges of enforcing motorcycle helmet legislation.

Demographics such as age and gender also play a role in enforcing helmet laws.

Older motorcyclists and unhelmeted motorcyclists were found to have higher chances of

experiencing serious injury in the event of an accident (Chang et al., 2016). This calls for

the enactment of enforcement strategies that consider the demographics of the riders as

well as police officers who deal with them. Women officers, for instance, have different

3
outlooks that can be utilized to raise helmet law enforcement (Lockie et al., 2017). The

consideration of demographics within officer training may enhance the role of law

enforcement in the enactment of helmet laws.

Another determinant of enforcement is physical capability of the officers, varying

by gender. Female officers have specific problems with physical performance tests,

which may affect their confidence in stopping cars and issuing citations (Cesario et al.,

2018). Such differences are significant while designing training programs to foster

confidence and competency in all the officers, ultimately maximizing enforcement

efficiency (Lockie et al., 2020).

Use of technology in enforcing helmet laws is another variable that is changing.

The advent of new technologies like real-time helmet violation detection systems

presents opportunities and challenges. Use of such systems might vary depending on

officers’ demographic traits, such as gender (Aboah et al., 2023). Technology can present

objective evidence and facilitate rapid enforcement, and yet officers’ familiarity with

such technology can vary, affecting how easily they can adopt new enforcement practices

(Aboah et al., 2023).

Moreover, the gender composition of police officers can also be a consideration in

public attitudes toward the police and helmet laws. Social processes, especially among

women motorcyclists, can affect helmet wearing and police interactions (Salum et al.,

2019). Police organizations must be sensitive to these social processes in order to create

public-friendly policies and enhance helmet compliance. By recognizing these factors—

gender dynamics, demographic, body capability, technological accommodation, and

4
public opinion—police administrators can more precisely target their enforcement of

helmet law and foster more effective cooperation with the riding public.

Occupation

Research shows that law enforcement efficiency plays an important role in

compliance with laws regarding safety issues like helmet use. Salehi et al. (2021) cite

differences in law enforcement efficiency in different income countries, and that cultural

aspects could often be the reason for noncompliance along with inadequate enforcement

strategies. This means that the occupations of the respondents, especially concerning the

police and traffic enforcers from the Philippines, are important in working toward better

rates of compliance for the Motorcycle Helmet Act.

Urie et al. (2016) studied road accidents and law enforcement efficiency on a

cross-section study in 10 nations, revealing that countries with strong enforcement

mechanisms have a higher degree of compliance with safety laws. This reinforces the

idea that the occupations of enforcement officials impact the success of helmet laws,

which shows potential for enhanced training and strategy development.

Conventional enforcement methods coupled with technology raise the prospect

for increased rates of compliance with helmet laws. For example, Raj et al. (2018)

studied the potential for violations of helmet use to be processed by deep learning, further

suggesting that these systems would help law enforcement in identifying and punishing

violators effectively. The use of image processing and deep learning technologies takes a

5
proactive stand toward compliance monitoring, which facilitates an enforcement

mechanism of the Motorcycle Helmet Act.

Furthermore, Du et al. (2020) look into the establishment of applications that use

CCTV technology for enforcing helmet laws. Their results demonstrated a very high

detection rate for motorcyclists without helmets, which indicates that technological

solutions could significantly boost enforcement. This transposition into the technological

realm requires law enforcement personnel to enhance their skills and to be able to adapt

to and use the said innovations.

It is important to know the demographic and behavioral aspects affecting helmet

use to devise effective enforcement strategies. Wangyang et al. (2018) found significant

demographic variations in injuries sustained by motorcyclists who were either using

helmets or not. Such kind of data could quite well be of help for the Philippine traffic

police as they design enforcement schemes based on demographic understanding.

A study of Aidoo et al. (2018), focusing on helmet use in Kumasi, Ghana, showed

that compliance correlated highly with the measures taken by law enforcement. This

shows that the occupation of enforcement officers indeed facilitates adherence to the law

while also acting to positively influence the community’s perception and behavior

towards helmet use.

The effectiveness of helmet laws in improving safety outcomes has been

empirically demonstrated in various contexts. Shults et al. (2019) evaluated the impact of

mandatory helmet laws in Vietnam, reporting a significant drop in head injuries and

fatalities occurring after the law’s implementation. Such findings strongly provide

evidence that if the Motorcycle Helmet Act is massively enforced in the Philippines, it

6
could also yield similar beneficial results. The work of Ha et al. (2018) contends that

many of the reductions in motorcycle-related injury and death since the 1990s, when

mandatory helmet laws were introduced in Vietnam, were associated with these laws.

These studies also highlight the need for continued collection of data on helmet use and

for ongoing public health intervention to increase compliance.

Despite the favorable attributes toward helmet laws, several constraints still

hinder compliance. Jauhari et al. (2016) listed discomfort and misconceptions about the

necessity of helmets to be among the major obstacles to helmet use. Addressing these

obstacles, therefore, requires law enforcement officers to reach out to the communities,

which would require training and resources aimed at improving public awareness and

education.

The literature illustrates the importance of enforcement occupations in compliance with

motorcycle helmet laws; however, numerous gaps require further exploration. Future

studies might investigate specific training needs of law enforcement personnel in helmet

law enforcement as well as the effects of community engagement strategies on

compliance levels. The long-term impacts of technological innovations on enforcement

effectiveness can also be studied for best practices in relation to law enforcement

agencies.

Furthermore, a better understanding of the cultural perceptions related to helmet

use in these different communities will provide insights into how enforcement strategies

interact across the Philippines. This will lead to tailored interventions that will strike a

chord with the local communities and thus improve compliance with the Motorcycle

Helmet Act.

7
Years in service

Empirical evidence indicates that traffic law enforcers’ service years play a

significant role in enforcing the Motorcycle Helmet Act. For instance, older enforcers are

more aware of local traffic conditions and common violations of helmet-wearing (Chang

et al., 2016; Salum et al., 2019). With this kind of information at hand, they can apply

more targeted enforcement strategies that consider the motorcyclists’ demographic

characteristics, such as age and riding behaviors, that are most critical in addressing

compliance issues.

Furthermore, research emphasizes that more experienced enforcers are likely to

perceive patterns in motorcycle accidents and demographic profile of the riders

(Raaijmakers, 2019; Aitamurto et al., 2017). This is pivotal in creating education

campaigns targeting specific populations, ultimately enhancing helmet compliance rates

and injury severity (Soni & Singh, 2020; Wiznia et al., 2016)

Further, research such as Karuppanagounder and Vijayan (2016) also indicate the

need to do away with helmet-use myths, which can be more common in certain

population groups. Seasoned enforcers with years of experience can apply their know-

how to doing away with these myths and communicating helmet safety advantages

efficiently.

8
 Use of technology in enforcement activities has also come forth as a potential way

of enhancing helmet compliance. Helmet-wearing detection by CCTV cameras has been

explored, and it is realized that enforcers can use technical equipment to increase their

enforcement (Wonghabut et al., 2018). The effectiveness of these technologies also

depends significantly on the years of services and technical skills of enforcers in utilizing

new devices (Meda et al., 2016). Law enforcers can provide insights into the subtleties of

real-world implementation of such technology and campaign initiatives for integration

into existing traffic management systems. It is therefore critical to listen to their voice

regarding technology adoption into enforcement.

Moreover, the experiences learned from the current studies, some knowledge gaps

remain. To begin with, there remains a gap in extensive studies of traffic law enforcers’

individual training requirements in relation to demographic characteristics and helmet

use. Future research can explore the mechanisms through which customized training

courses can optimize the enforcement capacity of enforcers depending on the years of

service and demographic characteristics of the locations they operate.

Issa (2016) also study the influence of driver personality characteristics on road

accidents, and this would be a critical consideration in police decision-making towards

enforcement of adherence to helmet law. More experienced police officers would be able

to identify the riskier characteristics better, and thus reorient enforcement efforts

accordingly. Chandrasekharan et al. (2016) identified predictors of mortality in pre-

hospital intervals following road traffic crashes. This result emphasizes the need for strict

enforcement of helmet use laws because higher compliance can make a substantial

9
difference in reducing mortality. More experienced senior law enforcers might have seen

the impact of non-compliance themselves and therefore be more inclined towards strict

enforcement.

Shrestha et al. (2017) investigated road traffic accident factors and patterns of

injury in Nepal. What is striking about their results is the significance of helmets in

preventing severe injury, and how perhaps seasoned enforcers would have developed a

nuanced understanding of the best way to educate the public about the use of helmets.

The experience of these enforcers could be used to develop strategies that would be more

attractive to riders, and hence result in improved compliance.

According to Chairat et al. (2020) and Satiennam et al. (2020), study the efficacy

of technological solutions like automatic helmet violation detection systems. These

technologies can be of immense help to traffic law enforcers, particularly those with

limited experience, by providing objective proof supporting enforcement. Experienced

enforcers would also have knowledge about the limitations of such technologies, which

would shape how they incorporate them in their day-to-day work.

Chairat et al. (2020) also observed a shift in helmet-wearing behavior when

enforcement was seen through technology. This implies that seasoned enforcers who

know human behavior and compliance are essential in interpreting and translating these

results to actual settings. Their experience can equip them with the knowledge to interact

with the people and create a safety culture.

10
 A research conducted by Güss et al. (2020) challenged the authenticity of police

reports as sources of information. This is problematic for traffic law enforcers, who rely

on accurate reporting to measure the effectiveness of the Helmet Act. Long-time

enforcers can have learned how to overcome these reporting issues, achieving accurate

data capture and analysis.

Carmichael et al. (2020) studied individuals’ attitudes towards police behavior

when they stop motorists on the street. The success of law enforcers, whether in

enforcing the helmet law, can largely rely on public attitude. Experienced enforcers might

possess knowledge of community relations that can facilitate compliance and overall

effectiveness of the Helmet Act.

Mandatory use of helmet

All motorcycle riders, including those driver and passenger, shall wear standard

protective motorcycle helmets while driving regardless of road or highway. This act by

Republic Act No. 10054, Section 3, mandatory Use of Motorcycle Helmets, mandates all

motorcycle riders to wear standard protective helmet anytime when driving a motorcycle.

These standard protective motorcycle helmets are appropriate for motorcycle riders and

are made up of the different design types of helmets for motorcycle riders which pass the

specifications as issued by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). The DTI shall

further issue guidelines, which will include specifications regarding standard protective

motorcycle helmets.

Concurring with the study of Adam et al. (2016), convincing motorcyclists to

wear helmets will be a system-wide transformation in making motorcycle helmet use

11
mandatory. Hence, Congress may wish to adopt a federal universal motorcycle helmet

law that seeks to avert satisfying the healthcare system with the cost of treating head

injuries and preventing further unnecessary deaths. Compared to persuading each state to

pass its own uniform helmet law, a federal ruling will assure wider adoption and allow it

to be expedited into its implementation. While states’ rights should be accorded due

concern, there are motorcyclists riding outside of their home states; henceforth, this

matter has acquired federal importance. Since universal helmet laws force helmet use,

this would be a great possibility for large federal healthcare savings. As they save lives

and save money, this proposal ought to receive much attention from a host of support

groups, such as providers, insurers, and the public at large.

Motorcycle helmet laws require that all riders and passengers must wear helmets

reducing to a great extent the risk of fatalities and brain injuries in case of accidents.

Studies showed that the use of helmets decreases the motorcycle rider fatalities by 22% to

42% and brain injuries 41% to 69% (Coben et al., 2007; Cummings et al., 2006;

Deuterman, 2004; Liu et al., 2008; NHTSA, 2003, 2006, 2019). The 1966 universal

helmet law was the first to be enacted, with states having passed similar laws by the 1975

deadline for the establishment of the 47 states and District of Columbia. Approximate

laws have been repealed by nearly half of all state laws after 1975 due to revocation of

the federal sanctions due to noncompliance. Since that time, some states reinstated

universal helmet laws, while others enacted partial coverage laws pertaining to specific

riders.

Road traffic injuries are the leading causes of deaths across the globe, with over

1.2 million people losing their lives every year. Apart from deaths, over 50 million

12
people suffer nonfatal injuries every year and are left with permanent disabilities that

impede their functioning within the society (Lepard JR, Spagiari R, Corley J, Barthélemy

EJ, Kim E, Patterson R, et al. 2021). Two-wheeled vehicle riders, especially motorcycle

riders, are considered to be the most vulnerable road users, beside pedestrians, as they

account for more than half of all road fatalities [2]. Over the last few decades, there has

been a dramatic increase in motorcycle use in low- and middle-income countries

(LMICs), with up to 83%-87% of households in some areas of Southeast Asia using

motorbikes for primary transportation. Of these Internationally, the World Health

Organization (WHO) indicates that 94% of countries have laws in place mandating the

use of helmets while riding motorcycles, but only 49 nations have comprehensive helmet

laws meeting the WHO standard of both rider and passenger wearing a fastened helmet

for all motorized 2-wheeled vehicles. Most laws are found in high-income countries

(HIC), with 38.4% (15/39) of HICs versus only 13.9% (6/43) of LICs having a

comprehensive helmet law [2]. (Jacob R. Lepard et al., 2021)

Road traffic crashes result in over 1.3 million deaths and a serious injury rate of

20-50 million. Low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) suffer

disproportionately, with rapid motorization and inadequate infrastructure contributing to

increasing fatalities (WHO, 2018; World Bank, 2017). Motorcycle riders account for a

significant share of these deaths, especially in regions that use motorcycles as their main

mode of transport (WHO, 2017). Helmet use is the most effective measure for preventing

head injuries in crashes (Kim et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2008). Yet compliance remains low

across many LMICs, where laws for helmets exist (Bachani et al., 2012; Peltzer &

Pengpid, 2014; Siebert et al., 2019). Within an LMIC, data on helmet use are available

13
for only 38.1% of countries, which hampers the possibility of evaluation and

improvements to the policies (WHO, 2018).

Nepal is a microcosm of this situation: motorcycles constitute 71.5% of motorized

traffic (Department of Transport Management Nepal, 2019), and wearing helmets is

legally mandated. Though experts would fairly regard compliance to be rather high, there

are no official data available (WHO, 2018). The study aims to assess adherence to helmet

laws and gather insights on motorcycle safety in Nepal via observational and survey

methods. A major factor frequently found to have a significant influence on motorcycle

helmet use is the presence and enforcement of mandatory helmet laws. Studies have

shown that the enactment of mandatory helmet laws has been associated with an increase

in helmet use and a decrease in the number of injured and killed motorcycle riders (Chiu

et al., 2000; Ichikawa et al., 2003; Olson et al., 2016).

The German scientists work published in 2019 indicated that road traffic

accidents are the fourth leading cause of death in the general population, and the first

among the youth aged fifteen to nineteen years in Thailand. The situation in Thailand is

worse than treatment in other neighboring low and middle-income countries of the

Southeast Asia region. Motorcycle drivers and passengers account for seventy-three

percent of the deaths in the country. Motorcycle drivers and passengers are said to have

been subject to the provisions of mandatory helmet use law; however, the prevalence of

helmet use at a national level is not high (43.7% in 2010). Methods. We undertook a

systematic review to assess potential social determinants of helmet use behavior

(observational studies) and to summarize previous intervention studies to promote helmet

use (interventional studies) within the country. Studies were identified in PubMed and

14
Web of Science, and by additional review of the Thai-written literature. Results. The

review identified sixteen relevant studies for social determinants of helmet use and five

relevant studies for promoting helmet use in Thailand. The review found many factors

including but not limited to age (teen and child), gender (female), geography (rural), and

alcohol drinking (interaction with another behaviour) were associated with non-helmet

use.

Implementation

Under Republic Act No. 10054, Section 6, it is the responsibility of the

Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC), through its vehicle

hierarchy, to provide guidelines for people toward the implementation of the law through

the Land Transportation Office (LTO). To enforce all-selling motorcycle helmets in the

Philippines, under the Bureau of Product Standards (BPS), the Department of Trade and

Industry (DTI) makes sure all the motorcycle helmets imported to the country conform to

the provisions of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). All

manufactured and imported helmets undergo mandatory testing such that manufacturers

and importers need to obtain a PS license or Import Commodity Clearance (ICC) before

they are allowed to sell their products. An approved items list is regularly published in a

newspaper of general circulation or on the BPS website.

This new law provides that the only helmets allowed for sale are the ones carrying

either the PS or the ICC mark. It is LTO being that agency mandated to register all

vehicles, license all drivers as well as enforce all traffic laws. For violators, a penalty of

15
₱1,500 to ₱20,000 is imposed on the rogue riders. The Motorcycle Helmet Act is one of

the countless traffic-related laws that is being violated in the Philippines.

Vicmudo (2024) study the implementation of the ordinance “No-Helmet, No-

Travel” in Saguday, Quirino, which is part of Republic Act Number 10054. Through

descriptive research design, the data was collected from 150 respondents using a survey.

The results yielded that the ordinance was generally implemented, with the same level of

awareness between enforcement officers and motorcycle users. Some observed factors

that affect compliance were public awareness, enforcement capabilities, helmet

availability, and perception of helmet usage. Mostly, the reasons for non-compliance are

financial problems and unavailability of helmets. The study therefore recommended the

improvement of awareness programs that will strengthen policy enforcement in

promoting the significance of helmet use to road safety. The researchers’ findings will

serve as a sound basis for improving implementation and effectiveness of the “No-

Helmet, No-Travel” policy of Saguday.

Low compliance with the helmet law among motorcycle users remains a

challenge to its effective enforcement. “Aidoo et al. (2018) showed discomfort with the

helmet, don’t own one and forgetfulness to be the leading causes of non-compliance

among riders in Kumasi, Ghana.” These fundamental issues are problematic for traffic

enforcers who must ensure that all riders, including passengers, adhere to the law.

Addressing these issues is fundamental in improving compliance rates.

According to s Ha et al. (2018), a study conducted in Vietnam found that

compulsory helmet laws greatly decreased both head injuries and fatalities due to head

16
trauma but had inadequate follow-up on compliance because of the fact that such use was

not being reflected in the medical records of people using helmets. This fact brings about

complications in focusing the enforcement efforts of the traffic enforcers to some critical

area where it is urgently needed.

Studies have analyzed technology application about helmet enforcement as a

potential solution. Lin et al. (2020) came up with a multi-task learning method based on

CNN for real-time helmet use detection, which hopefully will help traffic enforcers

monitor compliance. The main challenges are tracking one particular motorcycle over

multiple frames and distinguishing drivers from passengers. Such technical limitations

can actually impede effective enforcement due to the struggle that traffic enforcers will

undergo in terms of accuracy and reliability of existing system.

Aboah et al. (2023) emphasized the need for real-time date into the law. However,

they argue that traffic enforcers are normally understaffed in terms of data and resources

to implement the law. Therefore, enforcement may be stronger with automated detection,

but traffic enforcers have to adapt to such technological advances for proper integration

into existing enforcement systems and strategies.

There are various cultural attitudes and socioeconomic conditions acting on the

helmet compliance rates. For instance, Nguyen et al. (2018) stated that in low- and

middle-income countries (LMIC), public knowledge and cultural beliefs regarding helmet

use would always become a barrier in enforcing the rule. Traffic enforcers in such an

environment will, in addition, meet unforeseen challenges like inadequate resources for

17
public mobilization. That calls for culturally specific awareness campaigns for the public

resulting in increased compliance.

Further more, Du et al. (2020) pointed out social-economical determinants of

helmet legislation efficacy. Penalties can be not harsh enough to deter violations in poor

communities, they wrote. There, one of the most important areas where traffic

enforcement would need better legal basis and backing for successful enforcement.

Penalties

Mandatory helmet regulations and related penalties aim to enhance helmet usage

and diminish injuries and deaths across various forms of transportation. Consequences for

failing to comply can vary from fines to harsher penalties, particularly for repeat

offenders or when coupled with other traffic offenses., Heidari Law Group. (2024), Rob

Bohn, (2022). W. Douglas Easton. (2025). Although these regulations have proven

effective, they also encounter resistance and prompt concerns regarding personal freedom

and possible effects on cycling or motorcycling participation. Bicycle Helmet Safety

Institute. (2024).

Research and evaluations consistently indicate that mandatory helmet regulations

boost helmet usage and lower head injuries and fatalities. NHTSA. (2022). For example,

motorcycle deaths decrease by 20. 5% due to mandatory helmet regulations. Lee JM

(2020). In states with primary helmet laws, 84% of riders who suffered fatal injuries were

wearing a helmet, compared to 36. 2% in states with secondary laws and 17. 6% in states

without any helmet laws. Mayrose (2008). A comprehensive review also indicated that

18
road users in nations with mandatory motorcycle helmet laws were significantly more

likely to wear a helmet and less likely to face motorcycle fatalities or traumatic brain

injuries (TBI). Lepard et. al (2021).

Effective enforcement of helmet regulations, including the imposition of penalties

for non-compliance, is essential for optimizing their effectiveness. (World Health

Organization). In the absence of solid enforcement, helmet laws may fall short of

realizing their full potential in promoting proper helmet use. (Helmet Law + promote +

enforce. (2023). In California, for instance, not wearing a DOT-compliant helmet may

lead to fines of up to $250. (Demas Law Group, P. C. and NP Analytics. (2024). )

Nonetheless, research revealed that fear of law enforcement and monetary penalties were

relatively minor reasons for donning a helmet, with safety being the primary motivator.

M Kharkhaneh et al (2006).

Legal Framework

This research was anchored on the Republic Act No. 10054 –An act mandating

all motorcycle riders to Wear Standard Protective Motorcycle Helmet’s while driving and

providing penalties therefore. Otherwise known as the “Motorcycle Cycle Helmet Act of

2009”.

Section 3 of the R.A. 10054 states that all motorcycle riders, including drivers and

back riders, shall at all times wear standard protective motorcycle helmets while driving,

whether long or short drives, in any type of road and highway. Standard protective

motorcycle helmets are appropriate types of helmets for motorcycle riders that comply

with the specifications issued by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). The DTI

19
shall issue guidelines, which should include the specifications regarding standard

protective motorcycle helmets.

Pursuant to Section 6 of the Republic Act No. 10054, the following Implementing

Rules and Regulations are hereby prescribed jointly by the Department of Transportation

and Communications (DOTC), with its attached agency, the Land Transportation Office

(LTO), is mandated by this Act to issue guidelines necessary to implement the provisions

of this Act.

The DTI, through the BPS, is mandated to utilize the United Nations Economic

Commission for Europe (UNECE) Protocols with regard to the standards that will be

applicable to the approval or disapproval of motorcycle helmets that will be sold in the

Philippines.

The DTI, through the BPS, shall conduct a mandatory testing of all manufactured

and imported motorcycle helmets in the Philippines. All manufacturers and importers of

standard protective motorcycle helmets are required to secure a PS license or ICC prior to

the sale and distribution of their products. The BPS shall issue periodically a list of

motorcycle helmet manufacturers and importers and the brands which pass the standards

of the BPS to be published in a newspaper of general circulation or in its website. Upon

the effectivity of this Act, only those standard protective motorcycle helmets bearing the

PS or ICC mark shall be sold in the market.

Section 2 of the R.A. 10054 states that it is hereby declared the policy of the State

to secure and safeguard its citizenry, particularly the operators or drivers of motorcycles

and their passengers, from the ruinous and extremely injurious effects of fatal or life

threatening accidents and crashes. Towards this end, it shall pursue a more proactive and

20
preventive approach to secure the safety of motorists, their passengers and pedestrians at

all times through the mandatory enforcement of the use of standard protective motorcycle

helmet.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of the study illustrated the relevant variables measured

and depicts how this research was interpreted.

The independent variable of the study is the demographic profile of the

respondents with age, sex, occupation, and years in service. The dependent variable on

the other hand, is the challenges encountered in enforcing Motorcycle Helmet Act of

2009 (R.A. 10054) in Sablayan Occidental Mindoro, in term of: Mandatory use of

helmet, implementation, and penalties. The researchers will explore these variables to

determine the significant difference in enforcing Motorcycle Helmet Act of 2009 (R.A.

10054) in Sablayan Occidental Mindoro, when grouped according to profile. likewise,

identify the significance difference exists between them.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Challenges encountered in
Profile of the Respondents enforcing R.A. 10054 in
Sablayan Occidental Mindoro,
Age in term of:
Sex
Occupation Mandatory use of helmet
Years in service Implementation
Penalties

21
Fig.1. Research paradigm.

Operational Definition

To enhance understanding of this research study, key terms are defined as

follows:

Age. It refers to the respondents’ age, which was included as a variable in this

study.

Sex. It refers to the sexual representation of the respondent.

Occupation. It refers to the respondent occupation.

Years in service. It refers to the number of years that the respondents working in

their occupation.

Mandatory use of Helmet. It refers to the challenges encountered of respondents

in implementing mandatory use of helmet.

Implementation. It refers to the challenges encountered by respondents in the

implementation of R.A. 10054.

Penalties. It refers to the fines employed by the enforcer to those who violated the

R.A. 10054.

Hypothesis

For the purpose of this study, the hypothesis was stated:

22
 There is no significant difference between the profile of the respondents and their

Challenges in Enforcing Motorcycle Helmet Act of 2009 (R.A. 10054) in Sablayan,

Occidental Mindoro.

23