Deterring Drunk Driving: Beliefs, Preferences, Outcomes, and Welfare Implications

描述(由申请人提供)：法律如何减少水灾和改善道路安全工作还不是很清楚。这项为期4年的研究考察了司机的决策，因为它受到执法和保险公司的影响，并基于我们的经验发现，评估具体的政策干预。我们将进行/分析来自4个调查的数据：(1)北卡罗来纳州罗利和希科里、宾夕法尼亚州费城和威尔克斯-巴雷、威斯康星州密尔沃基和拉克罗斯以及华盛顿州西雅图和亚基马的1600名18-54岁的成年人；(2)16个执法机构；(3)多达60家汽车保险公司和(4)60名律师。我们将从政府来源和我们对个人的调查中获得有关司机记录的信息。在目标1，个人风险感知的准确性，我们将个人对饮酒/驾驶结果的主观信念与我们的调查、州和其他次要来源的客观数据进行比较，并评估准确性的差异来源。在目标2，风险感知和其他因素对酒后驾驶行为的影响，我们评估了(1)主观信念和(2)其他因素(例如，时间和风险偏好、人身伤害的内部成本、对他人的利他主义、认知能力、人口统计特征和收入)对酒后驾驶行为的影响。目标3、信息不对称、逆向选择和道德风险的焦点是机动车保险市场。许多人自愿购买超过强制责任限额的保险。司机可能比保险公司更了解他/她的饮酒情况、驾驶习惯和能力。我们的分析将有助于使用新的和更丰富的数据集来评估这些问题；我们将有优势地设计我们的调查问卷来解决这些问题。对逆向选择和道德风险的经济分析由提案中描述的4个步骤组成。我们还对政策选择进行了法律分析，以减少逆向选择的不利影响。在目标4，福利影响和政策分析中，我们估计了一个酒后驾驶行为和保险合同选择的两阶段模型，用于评估不对称信息和特定公共政策变化的福利成本。我们的分析方法将对实际选择的观察数据与我们对个人的调查引发的行为反应结合在一起。至少，我们将评估的政策是：(1)如逮捕概率所反映的那样，加强执行酒后驾车法律；(2)增加强制执行刑期；(三)提高了在高级环境下的体验评级；以及(4)关于酒后驾车如何与事故相关的信息活动。我们预计将撰写至少9篇论文。与公共健康相关：酗酒在美国和其他国家都是一个主要的社会问题。存在许多法律和法规，但对酒后驾车造成后果的概率的主观或客观信念知之甚少。本研究考察了司机受执法和保险公司影响的复杂决策过程，并基于实证结果，评估了具体的公共政策干预及其有效减少酒后驾驶行为的能力。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): How laws to reduce DWI and improve roadway safety work is not well understood. This 4-year study examines decision making of drivers as it is affected by law enforcement, and insurers, and based on our empirical findings, evaluates specific policy interventions. We will conduct/analyze data from 4 surveys; (1) 1,600 adults aged 18-54 in Raleigh and Hickory, NC; Philadelphia and Wilkes-Barre, PA; Milwaukee and La Crosse, WI; and Seattle and Yakima, WA; (2) 16 law enforcement agencies; (3) up to 60 automobile insurers and (4) 60 attorneys. We will obtain information on driver records from government sources and our survey of individuals. In Aim 1, Accuracy of Individual Risk Perceptions, we compare individuals' subjective beliefs about outcomes of drinking/driving, with objective data from our surveys, state, and other secondary sources and assess sources of variation in accuracy. In Aim 2, Effects of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors on Drinking and Driving Behaviors, we assess impacts of (1) subjective beliefs and (2) other factors (e.g., time and risk preference, internal cost of personal injury, altruism toward others, cognitive ability, demographic characteristics and income on drinking/driving behaviors. The focus of Aim 3, Asymmetric Information, Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard is on the market for motor vehicle insurance. Many people voluntarily purchase insurance above compulsory liability limits. The driver potentially knows much more about his/her alcohol consumption, driving habits and abilities than do insurers. Our analysis will contribute to assessing these issues using new and richer data sets; we will have the advantage of designing our questionnaire to address these issues. The economic analysis of adverse selection and moral hazard consists of 4 steps described in the proposal. We also perform a legal analysis of policy options to reduce the adverse effects of adverse selection. In Aim 4, Welfare Implications and Policy Analyses, we estimate a 2-stage model of drinking and driving behavior and insurance contract choice to be used to assess welfare costs of asymmetric information and specific public policy changes. Our analytic approach combines use of observational data on actual choices with behavioral responses elicited by our survey of individuals. At a minimum, the policies we will evaluate are: (1) increased enforcement of DWI laws as reflected in the arrest probability; (2). increased mandatory sentences; (3). increased experience rating in premium setting; and (4) an information campaign regarding how drinking and driving are related to accidents. We anticipate writing at least 9 papers. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: Alcohol abuse is a major social problem in the U.S. as well as in other countries. Numerous laws and regulations exist, but little is known about the subjective or objective beliefs about the probability of consequences resulting from drinking and driving. This research examines the complex decision making process of drivers as it is affected by law enforcement and insurers, and based on the empirical findings, evaluates specific public policy interventions and their ability to effectively reduce drinking and driving behavior.