The enforcement of speeding: should fines be higher for repeated offences?

Speed limits are a well-known instrument to improve traffic safety. However, speed limits alone are not enough; there is need for enforcement of these limits. When one observes fine structures for speed offences one often finds two characteristics. First, the fine increases with the severity of the violation. Secondly, the fine depends on the speeders' offence history. We focus on this last point and confront two fine structures, both increasing with speed: a uniform fine and a differentiated fine, which depends on the offence history. Drivers differ in their propensity to have an accident and hence in their expected accident costs. Literature then prescribes that the fine for bad drivers should be higher than for good drivers. However, the government does not know the type of the driver. We develop a model where the number of previous convictions gives information on the type of the driver. We find that the optimal fine structure depends on the probability of detection and on the strength of the relationship between the type and having a record. We illustrate this by means of a numerical example.

Catching or fining speeders: A political economy approach.

According to Becker (1968) it is best to use very high fines and low inspection probabilities to deter traffic accidents because inspection is costly. This paper uses a political economy model to analyse the choice of the fine and the inspection probability. There are two lobby groups: the vulnerable road users and the ‘strong’ road users. If only vulnerable road users are effective in lobbying, we find that the expected fine is higher than if only the interests of car drivers are taken into account. When we consider the choice between inspection probability and the magnitude of the fine for a given expected fine, we find that the fine preferred by the vulnerable road users is higher than socially optimal. The reverse holds if only the car drivers are effective lobbyists. The orders of magnitude are illustrated numerically for speeding and contrasted with current fines for drunk driving in the European Union.Investment; Pricing; Decisions; Decision; Transport; Economy;

Catching or Fining Speeders: A Political Economy Approach

According to Becker (1968) it is best to use very high fines and low inspection probabilities to deter traffic accidents because inspection is costly. This paper uses a political economy model to analyse the choice of the fine and the inspection probability. There are two lobby groups: the vulnerable road users and the ‘strong’ road users. If only vulnerable road users are effective in lobbying, we find that the expected fine is higher than if only the interests of car drivers are taken into account. When we consider the choice between inspection probability and the magnitude of the fine for a given expected fine, we find that the fine preferred by the vulnerable road users is higher than socially optimal. The reverse holds if only the car drivers are effective lobbyists. The orders of magnitude are illustrated numerically for speeding and contrasted with current fines for drunk driving in the European Union.Political economy, enforcement, traffic safe

Catching or fining speeders: a political economy approach

According to Becker (1968) it is best to use very high fines and low inspection probabilities to deter traffic accidents because inspection is costly. This paper uses a political economy model to analyse the choice of the fine and the inspection probability. There are two lobby groups: the vulnerable road users and the ‘strong’ road users. If only vulnerable road users are effective in lobbying, we find that the expected fine is higher than if only the interests of car drivers are taken into account. When we consider the choice between inspection probability and the magnitude of the fine for a given expected fine, we find that the fine preferred by the vulnerable road users is higher than socially optimal. The reverse holds if only the car drivers are effective lobbyists. The orders of magnitude are illustrated numerically for speeding and contrasted with current fines for drunk driving in the European Union.Political economy, enforcement, traffic safety

Economic analysis of traffic safety.

In this dissertation I focus on the behaviour of people – and more particularly on the choice of speed/level of care and the number of trips they make - as 85 percent of all accidents are mainly due to road users’ error. This behaviour can be influenced by the use of different instruments such as traffic regulation, liability rules, infrastructural and technical measures, education and sensitisation. The focus of this work lies on regulation and its enforcement, liability rules and economic instruments, which influence the behaviour of people and hence traffic safety. The first paper of this dissertation deals with

The enforcement of speeding: Should fines be higher for repeated offences?

Speed limits are a well-known instrument to improve traffic safety. However, speed limits alone are not enough; there is need for enforcement of these limits. When one observes fine structures for speed offences one often finds two characteristics. First, the fine increases with the severity of the violation. Secondly, the fine depends on the speeders’ offence history. We focus on this last point and confront two fine structures, both increasing with speed: a uniform fine and a differentiated fine, which depends on the offence history. Drivers differ in their propensity to have an accident and hence in their expected accident costs. Literature then prescribes that the fine for bad drivers should be higher than for good drivers. However, the government does not know the type of the driver. We develop a model where the number of previous convictions gives information on the type of the driver. We find that the optimal fine structure depends on the probability of detection and on the strength of the relationship between the type and having a record. We illustrate this by means of a numerical examplestatus: publishe

Traffic safety: Speed limits, strict liability and a km tax

Policy makers can improve traffic safety by the use of different instruments. These instruments include regulation (e.g. speed limits, vehicle standards, etc.), enforcement of regulation, liability rules, physical measures (e.g. roundabouts, speed humps, etc.), economic instruments (pricing of transport, insurance pricing), education and sensitisation. In this paper we focus on two specific determinants of accidents: speed and the number of kilometres people drive. If there is no government intervention, people do not take into account the full cost of their driving and they will drive too fast and too much. In our setting, the government can use three instruments to influence the behaviour of people: speed limits, strict liability and a kilometre tax. We set up a theoretical model of traffic accidents to analyse the choice of the speed level and the number of kilometres under the different instruments and determine the optimal combinations. Given our assumptions we never reach the social optimum. To illustrate our results we discuss a numerical example.status: publishe

Economic analysis of traffic safety

In this dissertation I focus on the behaviour of people – and more particularly on the choice of speed/level of care and the number of trips they make - as 85 percent of all accidents are mainly due to road users’ error. This behaviour can be influenced by the use of different instruments such as traffic regulation, liability rules, infrastructural and technical measures, education and sensitisation. The focus of this work lies on regulation and its enforcement, liability rules and economic instruments, which influence the behaviour of people and hence traffic safety. The first paper of this dissertation deals withstatus: publishe

Catching or fining speeders: A political economy approach

According to Becker (1968) it is best to use very high fines and low inspection probabilities to deter traffic accidents because inspection is costly. This paper uses a political economy model to analyse the choice of the fine and the inspection probability. There are two lobby groups: the vulnerable road users and the ‘strong’ road users. If only vulnerable road users are effective in lobbying, we find that the expected fine is higher than if only the interests of car drivers are taken into account. When we consider the choice between inspection probability and the magnitude of the fine for a given expected fine, we find that the fine preferred by the vulnerable road users is higher than socially optimal. The reverse holds if only the car drivers are effective lobbyists. The orders of magnitude are illustrated numerically for speeding and contrasted with current fines for drunk driving in the European Union.status: publishe

Catching or Fining Speeders: A Political Economy Approach

According to Becker (1968) it is best to use very high fines and low inspection probabilities to deter traffic accidents because inspection is costly. This paper uses a political economy model to analyse the choice of the fine and the inspection probability. There are two lobby groups: the vulnerable road users and the ‘strong’ road users. If only vulnerable road users are effective in lobbying, we find that the expected fine is higher than if only the interests of car drivers are taken into account. When we consider the choice between inspection probability and the magnitude of the fine for a given expected fine, we find that the fine preferred by the vulnerable road users is higher than socially optimal. The reverse holds if only the car drivers are effective lobbyists. The orders of magnitude are illustrated numerically for speeding and contrasted with current fines for drunk driving in the European Union.status: publishe