Department of Dangerous Driving

. . . [T]here is considerable diversity in driving behavior across vehicle classes: the most dangerous drivers (pickup truck owners) are nearly four times as likely to be involved in fatal accidents as the safest drivers (minivan owners) after controlling for the physical safety attributes of their vehicles. Second, controlling for driver safety produces estimates of the physical safety of interactions between vehicles that closely mirrors theoretical engineering results. Large and heavy vehicles are the safest to be inside during an accident but also cause the most damage to others.

Source: Jacobsen (2012: p. 36). Published here (July 2013).   

Change in Traffic Law

I evaluate the effects of a new road traffic law in the Czech Republic that became effective on July 1, 2006. The law brought in tougher punishments through introduction of demerit point system and manifold increase in fines, together with augmented authority of the policemen on the spot. I find a sharp 33.3 percent (s.e. 10.8) decrease in accident-related fatalities during the first three months. This translates into 34 to 239 saved lives with 95 percent certainty. Sadly, my estimates of the effects beyond the first year are zero (s.e. 5.8). Unique data on traffic police activity indicate, that resources on enforcement were decaying in the aftermath of the change in law and that the traffic police may have shifted its focus towards more general enforcement activities.

Source.  

To reduce traffic accidents . . .

Two Georgetown professors have demonstrated that a 60 percent reduction in Kenya’s traffic accidents is possible by simply placing stickers in minibuses that make passengers aware of their right to discourage their drivers from driving recklessly.

Source 

HT: USAID

Marijuana, Alcohol, and Traffic Fatalities

To date, 16 states [in the US] have passed medical marijuana laws, yet very little is known about their effects. Using state-level data, we examine the relationship between medical marijuana laws and a variety of outcomes. Legalization of medical marijuana is associated with increased use of marijuana among adults, but not among minors. In addition, legalization is associated with a nearly 9 percent decrease in traffic fatalities, most likely to due to its impact on alcohol consumption. Our estimates provide strong evidence that marijuana and alcohol are substitutes.

That is from this new paper by Anderson and Rees. 

The authors conclude:

Using data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) for the period 1990- 2009, we find that traffic fatalities fall by nearly 9 percent after the legalization of medical marijuana. This effect is comparable in magnitude to those found by economists using the FARS data to examine other policies. For instance, Dee (1999) found that increasing the minimum legal drinking age to 21 reduces fatalities by approximately 9 percent; Carpenter and Stehr (2008) found that mandatory seatbelt laws decrease traffic fatalities among 14- through 18-year- olds by approximately 8 percent. 

Why does legalizing medical marijuana reduce traffic fatalities? Alcohol consumption appears to play a key role. The legalization of medical marijuana is associated with a 6.4 percent decrease in fatal crashes that did not involve alcohol, but this estimate is not statistically significant at conventional levels. In comparison, the legalization of medical marijuana is associated with an almost 12 percent decrease in any-BAC fatal crashes per 100,000 licensed drivers, and an almost 14 percent decrease in high-BAC fatal crashes per 100,000 licensed drivers.

The negative relationship between legalization of medical marijuana and traffic fatalities involving alcohol is consistent with the hypothesis that marijuana and alcohol are substitutes. In order to explore this hypothesis further, we examine the relationship between medical marijuana laws and alcohol consumption using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and The Brewer’s Almanac. We find that the legalization of medical marijuana is associated with decreased alcohol consumption, especially by 20- through 29-year-olds. In addition, we find that legalization is associated with decreased beer sales, the most popular alcoholic beverage among young adults (Jones 2008). 

However, because other mechanisms cannot be ruled out, the negative relationship between medical marijuana laws and alcohol-related traffic fatalities does not necessarily imply that driving under the influence of marijuana is safer than driving under the influence of alcohol. 

How to reduce traffic in large cities in developing countries?

I left home very early today, I wanted to skip the Guatemala City traffic. Yesterday, because it was raining, it took me an hour and a half to get to work, what usually takes 25 minutes. I thought it was going to rain today as well so I got up around 4:40 am. It took me 20 minutes to get to school. Unfortunately, half way to school, on the main highway that comes from El Salvador, a school bus and a pickup truck had crash, I don't know if there were children in the bus. The pick-up was laying over the structure that separates the two ways of the highway. This is not unusual, every time it rains most likely there are going to be car accidents in the City, which I assume is also true for other large cities in the word.  

Then the idea of the "E-day" came to mind. We could coordinate in an "e-day" a week. Meaning that one day a week most of the work that can be done from home using technology is done from home.

One can apply a cost benefit approach, at least conceptually to this proposal. The more people go to work outside their homes the higher the transportation costs (oil consumption, pollution, time wasted, car accidents and human lives, you name it). This cost is specially high during rainy days. Think about the traffic in a typical rainy day in Mexico City, Guatemala City, or Legos, Nigeria, it is crazy!

The e-days is specially suitable to the service industries: education, sales and marketing, law offices, the media, government offices, etc. It fits more to some industries than others. 

Large cities can use technology to their advantage. In this regards, as economists say, there are indeed several million dollars laying on the street, ready to be picked up. [meaning that we can gain a lot from using more technology].

I would not favor a formal, government rule, to impose this, rather a social coordination around this equilibrium [a cultural change, a change in the mind set]. Different industries, or companies, can use the e-day as it better benefits their operations. 

A sketch of the Economic analysis

There are very high costs when all of us go out to our offices. The more people go outside to work the higher the transportation costs. But when people stay at home there are some face to face interactions that do not happen when we work at home, this is potentially a cost of the "e-day." Therefore there has to be a point where the marginal costs of working at home are equal to the marginal benefit. But that point is not where all of us go to work outside our homes. And, there are some possible benefit of using the technology that we are not really aware of. This might lead us to other issues, such as monitoring costs, etc. But mechanisms can be designed by every company to deal with them. 

Figure of the day: Traffic fatalities decline

Source