Reducing Drunken Driving: Which Policies Are Most Effective?

Traffic fatalities are the leading cause of accidental deaths and the leading cause of all deaths for people between the ages of 16 and 25 [4]. A major cause of traffic accidents is drunken driving. Reed [12] estimates that the annual number of deaths could be reduced by 12,000 if all drunken driving were eliminated. Recently increased attention has been directed toward finding ways to reduce the incidence of drunken driving. This paper evaluates the relative effectiveness of several policies in terms of reduced fatalities. These policies include raising the minimum legal drinking age, increasing legal sanctions and enforcement, and increasing the price and reducing the availability of alcoholic beverages. Most studies have focused on a single policy. Studies by Cook [3], McCornac [7], and Williams, et. al. [16] examined the effect of raising the minimum legal drinking age. Their results indicate that auto fatalities have fallen in states where the minimum legal drinking age has been increased. Ross [13] and Votey [15] both examined the drunken driving deterrence policies in Scandanavian countries. Ross was unable to show that they had any effect on behavior. Using a more sophisticated model, Votey concluded that the severe deterrence policies reduced the incidence of drunken driving. Cook and Tauchen [2] found that increasing taxes on alcoholic beverages reduced consumption and led to fewer auto fatalities and a lower incidence of cirrhosis death. This study differs from those above in that it incorporates all of these aspects of the drunken driving debate. This allows policy makers to compare the relative effectiveness of these policies, and enables them to allocate financial and political resources more effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]