Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Higher Fines—Fewer Traffic Offences? A Multi-Site Observational Study

  • Published:
European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Assess the impact of a 100-per cent increase of fines on compliance with speed-limits (50 km/h) and parking regulations in urban areas. Norm violations were measured through standardized observations in all five major cities in Switzerland before and after fines had been raised by 100 % or more at two pre- and two post-intervention periods. The speed of 20,000 cars was measured, and 10,000 parked cars were controlled. Levels of police controls remained stable over the entire period, but enforcement activity varied considerably across cities. Violations of parking regulations decreased by 32 %. Speed-limit violations remained unaffected in the longer run by higher fines. When cities without relevant enforcement activity were excluded, a reduction by 17 % was observed. No causal inferences can be drawn given the absence of a control area. However, the data suggest that higher fines deter traffic violations, provided enforcement activity remains at relevant levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. “Ordonnance sur les amendes d’ordre” (Ordinance on summary traffic fines) of 4 March 1996 (Systematic Inventory of Laws, 741.031). The former ordinance dated of 22 March 1972.

  2. The amounts in Swiss francs were converted into US $. Over the last decade, the exchange rate used to be fairly stable around 1.

  3. The authors are greatly indebted to all the police officers who collected the observational data during many working hours, and to their commanders who decided to devote human resources to this evaluation.

  4. This percentage (as well as all other indications of improvement in percentages) is based on the following formula: improvement = (OR-1)/OR, thus (1.19-1)/1.19 = 0.1597 or 16 %.

  5. As one reviewer mentioned, observations made over time are not necessarily statistically independent (see also Bouyer 2000, 222). In the present case, it cannot be ruled out that certain drivers were observed more than once. Given the number of drivers observed (of 1000) per day and measurement point, the number of drivers assessed more than once is most probably negligible, however, although ultimately unknown.

  6. For driving beyond 65 km/h (or actually 70 km/h, taking the margin of tolerance into account), the summary procedure (with tickets handed out by the police) is not available. This limit remained unchanged by the reform of fines. However, prosecutors had adapted their sanction scale for extreme drivers accordingly.

  7. For the present study, however, only streets with moderate traffic (where exceeding speed-limits was technically possible) have been selected. Any seasonal effects should be limited, therefore.

  8. An example are the changes of speed limits from 130 to 120 on highways, and from 100 to 80 in Switzerland that were followed by massive shifts in public opinion surveys (summarized in Killias et al. 2011).

References

  • Andenaes, J. (1974). Punishment and deterrence. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle (1991). The Rhetoric. Translated and with an introduction by George A. Kennedy. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Beyleveld, D. (1980). A bibliography on general deterrence research. Westmead: Saxon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouyer, J. (2000). Méthodes statistiques – Médecine – Biologie. Paris: INSERM Estem.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, P. J. (1980). Research in criminal deterrence: laying the groundwork for the second decade. Crime and Justice, 2, 211–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drago, F., Galbiati, R., & Vertova, P. (2009). The deterrent effect of prison: evidence from a natural experiment. Journal of Political Economy, 117(2), 257–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elvik, R., & Christensen, P. (2007). The deterrent effect of increasing fixed penalties for traffic offences: the Norwegian experience. Journal of Safety Research, 38(6), 689–695.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Entorf, H. & Spengler, H. (2008). Is being soft on crime the solution to rising crime rates? Evidence from Germany. IZA-Discussion Paper, 3710. Retrieved from http://ftp.iza.org/dp3710.pdf

  • Killias, M., Scheidegger, D., & Nordenson, P. (2009). The effects of increasing the certainty of punishment. A field experiment on public transportation. European Journal of Criminology, 6(5), 387–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killias, M., Kuhn, A., & Aebi, M. F. (2011). Grundriss der kriminologie. Bern: Stämpfli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawpoolsri, S., Li, J., & Braver, E. (2007). Do speeding tickets reduce the likelihood of receiving subsequent speeding tickets? A longitudinal study of speeding violators in Maryland. Traffic Injury Prevention, 8(1), 26–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee D. N. (2012). Do traffic tickets reduce motor vehicle accidents? Evidence from a natural experiment, University of Missouri-Columbia. https://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/1119.html. Accessed 5 Feb 2016.

  • Lu F., Zhang J., Perloff J. M. (2012). Deterring traffic violations: evidence from a randomized experiment, Renmin University of China/University of California at Berkeley. http://www.webmeets.com/files/papers/res/2013/139/Deterrence.pdf. Accessed 5 Feb 2016.

  • Lum, C., Hibdon, J., Cave, B., Koper, C. S., & Merola, L. (2011). License plate reader (LPR) police patrols in crime hot spots: an experimental evaluation in two adjacent jurisdictions. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7(4), 321–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D. L., Umamaheswar, J. & Lin, L. C. (2011). Multisite randomized trials in criminology. Communication presented at the NSCR International Workshop on New Advances in Experimental Criminology, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

  • Nagin, D. (2013). Deterrence in the 21st century. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (p. 42). Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, H. L. (1982). Deterring the drinking driver. Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavares, A., Mendes, S., & Costa, C. (2008). The impact of deterrence policies on reckless driving: the case of Portugal. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 14(4), 417–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittle C.R. (1969). Crime rates and legal sanctions. Social Problems, 16(4), 409–423.

  • Vaucher, S., & Fink, D. (2014). Strassenverkehrsdelinquenz und alkohol. Retrospektive 2001–2012. Statistische analyse der auswirkungen der revision des Strassenverkehrsgesetzes von 2005. Neuchâtel: Bundesamt für Statistik.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villettaz, P. (1998). La prévention générale de la peine: son impact sur la délinquance routière (PhD Dissertation). University of Lausanne, Switzerland.

  • Villettaz, P., Gilliéron, G., & Killias, M. (2014). The effects on re-offending of custodial vs. non-custodial sanctions: An updated systematic review of the state of knowledge. Stockholm: National Council of Crime Prevention (BRA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikström, P.-O., Tseloni, A., & Karlis, D. (2011). Do people comply with the law because they fear getting caught? European Journal of Criminology, 8(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Law School, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Martin Killias

  2. School of Criminal Sciences, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Patrice Villettaz

  3. University Hospital of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Sophie Nunweiler-Hardegger

Authors
  1. Martin Killias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrice Villettaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sophie Nunweiler-Hardegger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Killias.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 6 Proportion of cars (in per cent) observed on selected streets in excess of the speed limit of 50 km/h, by city and by observation period (N = 1000 each in every city and at every measurement)
Full size table
Table 7 Proportion of cars (in per cent) observed on selected streets in excess of the speed limit of 50 km/h, by category of seriousness, by city and by observation period (N = 1000 each in every city and at every measurement)
Full size table
Table 8 Number of cars observed on selected streets in excess of the speed limit of 50 km/h, by observation period and for all five cities combined
Full size table
Table 9 Proportion of cars (in per cent) observed on selected parking lots whose pre-paid parking time had elapsed, by city and observation period
Full size table
Table 10 Number of cars observed on selected parking lots whose pre-paid parking time had elapsed, by observation periods and for all five cities combined
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Killias, M., Villettaz, P. & Nunweiler-Hardegger, S. Higher Fines—Fewer Traffic Offences? A Multi-Site Observational Study. Eur J Crim Policy Res 22, 619–634 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-016-9301-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-016-9301-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation