Drivers in Spain are adapting to speed cameras in ways that can undermine their intended purpose. A systematic review indexed by ScienceDirect examined 94 studies from multiple countries and found that cameras lowered average speeds by about 7.6 km/h. The effect was strongest near visible point cameras and less durable after drivers passed them. Researchers call the resulting pattern, braking before a camera and accelerating afterwards, the “kangaroo jump.”
That behavior highlights a limitation of conventional fixed or mobile cameras, which record speed at a particular location. Their visibility can lead drivers to treat them as isolated obstacles instead of reminders to maintain a safe speed throughout a journey. A short-lived reduction followed by renewed acceleration may shift risky driving to the road beyond the camera instead of eliminating it.
Spain currently operates more than 3,600 fixed and mobile speed cameras across its road network. The Dirección General de Tráfico (DGT), Spain’s traffic authority, uses enforcement to encourage compliance with speed limits and publishes 1,314 stretches of secondary roads where mobile radars may operate. Those published stretches are potential control locations, not a count of cameras.
Section Cameras Break the Cycle
Section cameras measure a vehicle’s average speed between two points, rather than its speed at one spot. Cameras at the beginning and end of a monitored stretch record number plates and passage times. The elapsed time and distance are then used to calculate the average. Spain has operated this type of enforcement since 2010 on motorways and ordinary roads. Because the full section is measured, briefly braking at a camera and accelerating afterwards cannot erase an excessive average speed.
The calculation is straightforward: over a five-kilometre section with a 110 km/h limit, travelling at the limit takes about 2 minutes 44 seconds. Completing the same distance in 2 minutes 30 seconds produces an average of 120 km/h, regardless of a driver’s speed at either camera. Section enforcement so encourages steady compliance across the route, instead of a momentary slowdown at a visible device.
Uncertainty about camera locations can also encourage more cautious driving over longer distances. The review describes section cameras as particularly effective on fast interurban roads. It also finds them effective near schools and in construction zones. Heavy vehicles show higher rates of compliance, especially in poor weather, when signs are clear and enforcement is sustained.
Public perception of these systems is also developing. Surveys indicate that many drivers acknowledge changing their behavior around speed cameras, and acceptance of the measures is relatively high, particularly among older drivers and women.
Debate continues over the best approach to speed enforcement, but the findings point to section cameras as a practical way to reduce dangerous speed fluctuations and promote more consistent compliance. Spain’s experience may offer lessons for other countries facing similar challenges. Developments in vehicle technology, including Porsche’s plans for the 718 Boxster and Cayman, also reflect the continuing change of mobility. More details are available in this report on Porsche's electric strategy.
