Behavioral impact of graduated driver licensing on teenage driving risk and exposure
Graduated driver licensing (GDL) is a critical policy tool for potentially improving teenage driving while reducing teen accident exposure. While previous studies demonstrated that GDL reduces teenage involvement in fatal crashes, much remains unanswered. We explore the mechanisms through which GDL influences accident rates as well as its long term effectiveness on teen driving. In particular, we investigate: (1) whether GDL policies improve teenage driving behavior, or simply reduce teenage prevalence on the roads; (2) whether GDL exposed teens become better drivers in later years. We employ a unique data source, the State Data System, which contains all police reported accidents (fatal and non-fatal) during 1990-2005 for 12 states. We estimate a structural model that separately identifies GDL's effect on relative teenage prevalence and relative teenage riskiness. Identification of the model is driven by the relative numbers of crashes between two teenagers, two adults, or a teenager and an adult. We find that the GDL policies reduce the number of 15-17-year-old accidents by limiting the amount of teenage driving rather than by improving teenage driving. This prevalence reduction primarily occurs at night and stricter GDL policies, especially those with night-time driving restrictions, are the most effective. Finally, we find that teen driving quality does not improve ex post GDL exposure.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2002.
"How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?,"
NBER Working Papers
8841, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
- Dee, Thomas S. & Grabowski, David C. & Morrisey, Michael A., 2005. "Graduated driver licensing and teen traffic fatalities," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 571-589, May.
- Daniel Eisenberg, 2003. "Evaluating the effectiveness of policies related to drunk driving," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 249-274.
- Steven D. Levitt & Jack Porter, 2001. "How Dangerous Are Drinking Drivers?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(6), pages 1198-1237, December.
- William N. Evans & Thomas S. Dee, 2001. "Behavior Policies and Teen Traffic Safety," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 91-96, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jhecon:v:29:y:2010:i:1:p:48-61. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.