Paper
Are lower legal blood alcohol limits and a combination of sanctions desirable in reducing drunken driver-involved traffic fatalities and traffic accidents?

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(96)00047-4Get rights and content

Abstract

In 1970 and 1978, a set of strict new countermeasures against drunk driving went in to effect in Japan. Analysis of official statistics of motor vehicle fatality data have indicated that alcohol involvement in fatal crashes has declined substantially in Japan since 1970. From the beginning of 1970 to the late 1980s and 1990s, public awareness of and tolerance for the problem of alcohol-impaired driving changed dramatically, as shown in this study. Further it seems that attitudes in Japan on drink driving have improved over the last 20 years or so, instep with a major program of government action. As well as being part of a long running campaign to reduce alcohol related road deaths and injuries, these accident savings are an important part of a national strategy which began in 1970, comprising a well structured legislative program introducing a lower legal limit, progressive penalties for those above the legal limit, over and above Police enforcement strategies underpinning the law and reinforcing the publicity massage. Enactment of the lower legal blood alcohol level with a combination of other severe sanctions is desirable for prevention of alcohol-related traffic casualties, DWI, and accidents, which is shown in this study. Finally, much of the current reduction in alcohol-related fatalities and morbidity reflects that Japanese society has largely endorsed alcohol impaired driving as a socially undesirable behavior. However, this study suggests that it is necessary for policy makers to understand that the DUI problem in Japan must be handled with diverse approaches, rather than relying exclusively on the deterrence based laws.

References (37)

  • R. Homel

    Policing and Punishing the Drinking Driver: A Study of General and Specific Deterrence

    (1988)
  • P. Howat et al.

    Alcohol and driving: is the 0.05% blood alcohol concentration limit justified?

    Drug and Alcohol Review

    (1991)
  • P.M. Hurst

    Blood alcohol limits and deterrence: is there a rationale basis for choice?

  • P.M. Hurst

    Epidimiological aspects of alcohol in driver crashes and citations

    Journal of Saftey Research

    (1973)
  • M. Kobayashi et al.

    Gaitou Ni Yoru Insyu Unten No Jittai ni Kansuru Chosa

    Journal of Police Higher Training Institute

    (1987)
  • H. Kono
  • B.C. Labatt

    Drinkers don't drive in Japan

    (1984)
  • W.L. Loxley et al.

    Drinkers and their driving: compliance with drinking-driving legislation in four Australian states

    Journal of Studies in Alcohol

    (1992)
  • Cited by (34)

    • Sanction changes and drunk-driving injuries/deaths in Taiwan

      2017, Accident Analysis and Prevention
      Citation Excerpt :

      A considerable body of research has examined the general and specific deterrent effects of penalties for drinking-and-driving behaviors and subsequent traffic crashes. Strong evidence was shown for the general deterrent effects of breath tests (Kenkel 1993; Sen, 2001), mandatory jail terms for first offenders, administrative license suspensions, sobriety checkpoints, prohibitions of plea bargaining in drunk-driving cases (Kenkel 1993; Wagenaar et al., 2007), increased fines (Wagenaar et al., 2007), lower blood alcohol content (BAC) limits with roadside random breath testing (RBT) and strict sanctions (Homel, 1994; Deshapriya and Iwase, 1996; Chang and Yeh, 2004; Desapriya et al., 2007), beer taxes (Evans et al., 1991), and mandatory seat belt use laws (Evans et al., 1991; Sen, 2001). As for specific deterrence, the results are mixed (Yu 1994; Hansen 2015; Woodall et al., 2004; Weatherburn and Moffatt, 2011; McArthur and Kraus, 1999).

    • Cultural values and random breath tests as moderators of the social influence on drunk driving in 15 countries

      2016, Journal of Safety Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Although they have occasionally been found to have a direct effect on behaviors (Voas, Tippetts, & Fell, 2003), it seems that, rather than the severity of the law, the level of enforcement — particularly the use of random checkpoints — is effective at deterring drunk driving (Evans, Neville, & Graham, 1991; Homel, 1994). According to Deshapriya and Iwase (1996), “the law works best when enforcement is strict, extensive, and prompt from the time of the law's inception throughout the years.” Åberg (1998) argued that the effect of the enforcement level could be mediated by the perceived probability of detection.

    • Are traffic violators criminals? Searching for answers in the experiences of European countries

      2015, Transport Policy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Additional variables for road safety policies are also considered. Following previous studies on road safety (Albalate, 2008; Castillo-Manzano and Castro-Nuño, 2012; Castillo-Manzano et al., 2013, 2014a; Deshapriya and Iwase, 1996; Eisenberg, 2003; McCarthy, 2005), the influence of preventive policies such as legal blood alcohol limits are considered and a dummy variable is included that takes a value of one for countries and periods where the maximum blood alcohol concentration allowed is lower than 0.5 g/L. Most EU28 countries have set the limit at 0.5 or lower, so it is possible to test whether blood alcohol concentration rates of under 0.5 are effective in reducing road traffic fatalities. Additionally, a variable is included that captures the application of points system-based driver's licenses that, furthermore, takes into consideration the two possible application regimes, i.e., a driver's license with an initial number of points that are docked when drivers are convicted of certain traffic offenses (‘penalty points system’), and a driver's license based on cumulative demerits or points which are given to offending drivers depending on the traffic offense committed (‘demerit points system’).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text