Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (3) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Enforcement (law) (3) (entfernen)
Institut
- Abteilung Verhalten und Sicherheit im Verkehr (3) (entfernen)
A sociological perspective on different strategies of reward in urban traffic law enforcement
(1996)
In order to enhance road safety, it is necessary to make road users change their behaviour. There are two forms of police enforcement: punishment for breaking traffic regulations and rewards for rule-conformist behaviour. Punishment does not appear to produce long term changes. There are two main reward strategies: individual and group dependent rewards. Individuals who are members of a clearly defined group have good prospects of winning prizes in a lottery. The strategy of the delegated group dependent reward is based on a donation to a social institution. Traffic safety is a conflict of interests, and game theory considerations can be applied. Results of German and Dutch studies confirm hypotheses based on the game theory concept. Traffic behaviour mostly depends on expectation of others' behaviour. Successful strategies of reward should always be based on individual settlements of the rewards. More investigations are needed. Strategies of group dependent reward are not recommended. The size of reward and probability of winning it should be linked to rate of participation: the greater the participation, the greater the value of reward and probability of winning it. Every driver has a threshold from which he is prepared to change his traffic behaviour for a reward.
The 6th RFP project DRUID aimed at supporting European transport policy makers by suggesting scientifically based recommendations to combat impaired driving. The main DRUID objectives were: 1. In-depth analysis of the problem situation with regard to DUI/DUID in Europe; 2. Assessment of prevalence and accident risks of DUI/DUID on the basis of epidemiological and experimental studies; 3. Evaluation of oral fluid screening devices and cost-benefit analysis of a strengthened drug driving enforcement; 4. Development of a classification system for medicines; 5. Evaluation of driver rehabilitation schemes and strategies of licence revocation; 6. Assessment of the effectiveness of new prescribing and dispensing guidelines for medicines; 7. Ddevelopment of policy recommendations on the basis of DRUID results. All in all, the DRUID results revealed that prevalence of psychoactive substance consumption, DUI/DUID, enforcement levels and legal strategies are very heterogeneous in European countries. Nonetheless, DRUID derives general recommendations as base for national solutions.
The DRUID expert consensus established recommendations on how to define limits for psychoactive substance use in traffic. The European DRUID project established a group of experts who are members of national working groups for defining analytical and/or risk thresholds. This group evaluated the results of DRUID, scientific literature and the experience of representatives of several EU Member States and Norway in determining cut-off levels. 1. Cut-offs should be defined for the most frequently used psychoactive substances; 2. In order to achieve compliance of the population towards cut-off regulations, they should be clear and comprehensible, pointing out the risks when used in traffic; 3. Thus, the definition of cut-offs should be based on current scientific knowledge; 4. The lowest substance concentration exerting an effect on driving should be preferred instead of the lowest limit of quantification/ detection; 5. For all psychoactive substances including alcohol, the same risk should be accepted. When a country intends to determine per se cut-off levels, several considerations have to be taken into account. From a scientific point of view, the same risk should be anticipated for all psychoactive substances including alcohol. Nevertheless, every cut-off discussion should address the question if the DRUID approach, to determine risk thresholds equivalent to alcohol limits, is feasible for the respective case.