終身吊銷駕駛執照制度之實施成效評估—被吊照人吊照前後開車實證分析

國立交通大學

運輸科技與管理系

博士論文

終身吊銷駕駛執照制度之實施成效評估—被吊

照人吊照前後開車實證分析

THE EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

LIFETIME DRIVER LICENSE

REVOCATION—AN EMPIRICAL DRIVING

INCIDENCE ANALYSIS

研 究 生：曾建民

指導教授：張新立、吳宗修

終身吊銷駕駛執照制度之實施成效評估

—被吊照人吊照前後開車實證分析

THE EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LIFETIME

DRIVER LICENSE REVOCATION—AN EMPIRICAL

DRIVING INCIDENCE ANALYSIS

研 究 生：曾建民 Student : Chien-Ming

Tseng

指導教授：張新立、吳宗修 Advisers : Hsin-Li Chang, T. Hugh Woo

國 立 交 通 大 學

運 輸 科 技 與 管 理 系

博 士 論 文

A Dissertation

Submitted to Department of Transportation Technology and Management College of Management

National Chiao Tung University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement

For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

In

Transportation Technology and Management

Hsinchu, Taiwan, Republic of China

終身吊銷駕駛執照制度之實施成效評估

—被吊照人吊照前後開車實證分析

學生：曾建民 指導教授：張新立

吳宗修

國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系博士班

摘要

交通事故之發生固然造成受害者生命、身體及財產上的實害，對於肇

事致人死亡或受傷而逃逸，或酒精過量致人死亡或重傷者，在被處以終身

吊銷駕駛執照之情況下，其法益的削減包括刑事罰、民事罰以及行政罰 (終

身吊照)等亦不可謂不重。民國 90 年 10 月大法官會議曾針對肇事逃逸被終

身吊銷駕駛執照之案例做出解釋，明確指出本項處分與憲法並無牴觸，惟

終身吊照是否影響人民之基本權？或確實使肇事者遠離道路不再開車？則

有近一步探究之必要。本研究為探討終身吊照之效果及其對被吊照人之衝

擊，針對終身吊照者進行二階段之調查，有效樣本計 768 位，結果顯示其

中 23.4% 之受訪者，吊照後與吊照前之開車情況幾乎完全相同，59.8% 之

受訪者明顯降低開車頻率，完全不再開車者僅 16.8%。整體而言，被終身吊

照者平均降低了 65.7% 之開車里程。就與吊照前幾乎完全相同開車之受訪

者而言，其開車之目的主要在於工作、通勤、拜訪親友及接送小孩；就明

顯降低開車頻率之受者而言，其開車主要為了工作及接送小孩。羅吉特迴

歸結果顯示，是否遵守終身吊照處罰而不開車之程度，主要與個人屬性 (年

齡、所得)、處罰情況 (入監、吊照長度) 以及開車需要(工作、通勤、購

物)有關；年長者及低所得者較遵守終身吊照不再開車之規定；被判入監者

較 多 維 持 與 吊 照 前 幾 乎 完 全 相 同 之 開 車 頻 率 。 Generalized Estimating

Equations (GEEs) 模式結果亦顯示，個人屬性 (年齡、所得、駕照種類)、

處罰情況 (入監、高額民事賠償)以及開車需要 (工作、通勤、休閒旅遊及

接送小孩)、開車頻率、吊照、吊照 x 駕照種類，皆明顯影響整體之開車里

程。綜合而言，終身吊照確實具有使肇事者遠離道路不再開車之一般效果，

但也可能產生不公平的處分結果，使弱勢者更形弱勢。

THE EVALUATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LIFETIME DRIVER

LICENSE REVOCATION—AN EMPIRICAL DRIVING INCIDENCE

ANALYSIS

Student：Chien-Ming

Tseng Advisors：Dr. Hsin-Li Chang

Dr. T. Hugh Woo

Department of Transportation Technology and Management

National Chiao Tung University

ABSTRACT

Car accidents bring many damages including death, injury and property loss

to the victims. On the other side, in the case of hitting-and-running and causing

death/or injury or drunk-driving and causing death/or serious injury, there are

many kinds of penalties for offenders including criminal punishment, civil

compensation and administrative lifetime driver license revocation (ALLR). In

October 2001, the Taiwan constitutional court pointed out that ALLR does not

violate the Constitution. Considering driving is a necessity of living, it should be

further considered whether ALLR has impacted human basic rights, such as the

rights of moving freedom, the right to work and the right of existence, and

kicked those illegal drivers out of the road.

This study investigated the effectiveness of ALLR and its impact on

offenders, based on a two-stage survey of 768 offenders. It was found that after

ALLR had been imposed, 23.4% of these offenders were still driving almost the

same as before, 59.8% drove significantly less frequently, and only 16.8% of the

offenders gave up driving completely. Overall, 65.7% of the offenders’ annual

mileage driven was reduced by ALLR punishment. For those offenders who

drove at almost the same driving frequency, working, commuting, visiting

relatives/or friends, and driving kids were the main activities compelling them to

continue driving. However, for those offenders whose driving was significantly

reduced, the necessity of traveling to work and driving kids were their main

reasons for continuing to drive.

Results of logistic regression models showed that offenders’ compliance

with ALLR was significantly correlated with their personal characteristics (age,

income), penalty status (incarceration, duration of ALLR), and the need to drive

for working, commuting and shopping. Elderly and low-income offenders were

more likely to abide by the ALLR restriction. Offenders who had been

incarcerated were more likely to drive the same as before ALLR when compared

to those offenders who had not been incarcerated. The study results of

Generalized Estimating Equations (GEEs) model also showed that personal

characteristics (age, income, license category), penalty status (incarceration,

high civil compensation), driving needs (work, commuting, traveling and

driving kids), indicator of group membership, indicator of post-ALLR, and the

interaction of license category together with post-ALLR were all significantly

associated with the mileage driven. It was found that ALLR is fairly effective in

keeping offenders off the road, but it can reduce their ability to make a living,

誌 謝

有人說專注於做研究，是一種快樂！我終於體會了！當初報考交大博

士班口試時，有位老師問我為什麼還要讀博士？我回答說：

「我的雙胞胎小

孩剛要出生，若有幸錄取，我將不會告訴他們，爸爸曾經參加這個考試；

若未獲錄取，等他們長大後，我將告訴他們，在他們剛出生時，爸爸曾經

參加交大博士班入學未獲錄取，我希望小孩不要注重結果，但要注重過程，

不要因為怕失去而放棄參加。」研究期間，雖偶有困頓，但在片片段段的

專注過程中，不僅有樂趣，而且收穫豐碩。

博士論文能夠完成，首先要感謝恩師張新立及吳宗修二位老師的指

導，張老師不厭其煩諄諄教誨的教育家風範，與吳老師給予自由發揮空間

而適時提醒，皆使我在學術倫理及為人處世上，獲益匪淺。

論文計畫書及口試期間，承蒙本校交研所 汪進財教授、工管系 許尚

華教授、師範大學 王國川教授及成功大學 李治綱教授詳細審閱、指導及

斧正，精闢寶貴之意見使本論文更加完備充實，謹致衷心感謝之意。

在運輸與科技管理學系學習的七年多中，系上師長的細心教誨、學長

與同學的提攜與照顧及學弟妹的支持與協助，使研究過程充滿喜悅與溫

馨，雖有研究低潮，終能平順度過，系上助理秀蔭與幸榮在行政事務與生

活瑣事上，給予諸多的協助，尤其在最後口試的相關作業上的幫忙，心中

充滿感激。感謝植谷、純志、賓權、清成、祖宏、政樺、來順、馨文、晉

光、士銘、陸陣、家緯、則斌、忠平、鵬庭、承瑋、建安、建仁、俊哲、

嘉銘、信豪、家峯、善斌、議賢、苑綾、弘霖、依潔、忠漢、長治、高文、

威志、傑閔、燦仁、育豪、維崧、黃山、俊斌、大舜、智明你們的幫助。

還有其他沒有列出名字的各位學長姐、同學及學弟妹們，在此同致謝忱。

最後謝謝摯愛的父親、母親及慧玟，因為她全心且無私的照顧立行與

立揚，以及對我無邊的寬容與支持，我才能克服挫折完成博士學位。

曾建民 謹誌

中華民國 95 年 5 月

Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction………....1

1.1 Research background and motivations……….……….……...1

1.2 Research objectives………..……….……...5

1.3 Research approach………..………..…….………...6

1.4 Overview of thesis………..………..….….……….10

Chapter 2 Literature review……….….….……11

2.1 The principles of constitution……….…….……11

2.1.1 The meaning of human’s basic rights……….……..…11

2.1.1.1 The right of freedom……….…….……11

2.1.1.2 The right to work……….………….…….……12

2.1.1.3 The right of existence……….……….….…….……13

2.1.2 The restrictive principles and types of basic rights……….……….14

2.1.2.1 Restrictive principles……….……….….……..……14

2.1.2.2 The types of restriction……….………..….….….……17

2.1.3 The limitation of basic rights for ALLR offenders………..….….……...18

2.1.3.1 The restriction on moving freedom………….………….…….……18

2.1.3.2 The restriction on the right to work………….………….……….…20

2.1.3.3 The restriction on the right of existence……….………….……..…21

2.1.4 The constitutional interpretations 284, 531……….…… ….………...…21

2.2 Literature of license suspension/revocation………….……….….…….……22

2.3 Literature of methodology……….………….…….……23

2.3.1 Logistic regression model………..………….…….……23

2.3.2 Generalized estimating equations (GEEs)……….………….…….……27

2.3.2.1 The form of GEEs………..……….………….…….……27

2.3.2.4 Missing data issues………...……….…….….31

Chapter 3 The ALLR policy………...………….….…...32

3.1 The development of the law………...……....…...32

3.2 Current results of implementing………..………...……..…...34

Chapter 4 The trend of constitutional interpretation on ALLR………..….…36

4.1 The relationship of ALLR and the privilege against self-incrimination…... 36

4.2 The relationship of ALLR and the principle of equality……….…...38

4.3 ALLR and the principle of propriety…..………...………..…..38

4.4 ALLR and the principle of necessity…..………...…..………..39

4.5 ALLR and the principle of proportion…..………...…..…..…..40

Chapter 5 Empirical study…..………...………...………...41

5.1 Materials and methods…..………...…..………..…..41

5.1.1 Data source…..………….……...………...41

5.1.2 Data collection………….……...……….………...41

5.1.3 Measures and variables….……...……….………..…….…...43

5.1.3.1 The measurement of the compliance of ALLR as a whole……...…...43

5.1.3.2 The measurement of the compliance of ALLR for different driving groups………...………...44

5.1.3.3 The measurement of the driving mileage for ALLR for offenders both before and after ALLR………..………...47

5.2 Study results…..………...………..49

5.2.1 Basic results..………...……….…..49

5.2.1.1 Offenders’ characteristics……...………...…..50

5.2.1.2. Penalty status………...……….…..50

5.2.2 Driving incidence under ALLR……...……….…..51

5.2.2.1 Driving exposure under ALLR……...………..……….…..51

5.2.2.2 Changes in driving behavior……...………...55

5.2.3 Logistic regression analysis for different driving frequency groups.….56 5.2.3.1. The findings from Model 1 – those who ignored ALLR punishment.……….……….…56

5.2.3.2 The findings from Model 2 – those who absolutely complied with ALLR..……….……57

5.2.4 GEE model analysis for mileage driven for still driving offenders…....59

Chapter 6 Discussions……….……….…62

6.1 Discussion 1 -- A discussion of concept……….………….……….…..62

6.2 Discussion 2 -- A discussion of empirical driving incidence…….…………63

Chapter 7 Conclusions..…..……….67

REFERENCES..…..………70

Appendix: Questionnaires

List of Figures

Figure 1: Research approach………8

Figure 2: ALLR effectiveness system analysis framework………..…………9

Figure 3: Traffic violations resulting ALLR……….……… …34

Figure 4: Data collection procedure………..……….…43

Figure 5: The procedure of measuring offenders’ compliance with ALLR………45

Figure 6: The mileage distribution before and after ALLR………52

Figure 7: A comparison of the cumulative probability of mileage before and after ALLR………..………53

Figure 8: A comparison of mileage before and after ALLR by three different driving exposures groups………...….……55

List of Tables

Table 1: The possible criminal penalties for hitting-and-running offence……….……18 Table 2: Present articles for ALLR (January, 2001).………..…34 Table 3: Description of explanatory variables for two logistic regression models……47 Table 4: Basic results of the sampled ALLR offenders (N = 768) ………49 Table 5: Percentage of the three different driving exposure groups after ALLR……..52 Table 6: Estimated results for the two logistic regression models……….…...58 Table 7: Study results of the GEE parameters and standard error estimates…….……60

Chapter 1 Introduction

In September 1991, the Taiwan Constitutional Court pointed out:

Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act 62-2: In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurements immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/her rest of life. For the purpose of promoting road traffic safety, protecting the majority of road users who comply with the law/regulation, and maintaining the social order, this Article does not violate the Constitution.

However, in October 2001, the Taiwan Constitutional Court pointed out again:

Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act 62-2: In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurements immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/her rest of life. For the purpose of increasing traffic safety, protecting the majority of normal road users who comply with the law/or regulation, and maintaining the social order, it does not violate the Constitution. But for those who had committed hit-and-run offence and been revoked driver licenses, in the cases of the drivers having improved their behaviors and having the ability to re-fit the society, the authority has to reconsider whether it is needed to provide a chance for such offenders to rehabilitate their driver licenses.

The original aim of the punishment of administrative lifetime license revocation (ALLR) is to deter serious traffic violations and protect the majority of road users who comply with the traffic law/or regulation by keeping those disqualified drivers off the road. It plays a positive effect no matter in keeping road safety, maintaining society order and protecting the benefits of normal road users.

licenses were revoked whole lifetime. From the viewpoint of authorities, they may think that such rigorous penalty can protect the benefits of most normal road users and keep the traffic safely. Thus, the authorities have made more articles in the Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act to revoke driver license whole lifetime during last thirty years in Taiwan. From the viewpoint of those drivers who were imposed by ALLR, it seems unreasonable to prohibit from driving whole lifetime only owing to one fault or mistake. Furthermore, such offenders have no chance to rehabilitate their driving privilege, no matter how they revise their attitudes and behaviors. Moreover, driving is a necessity of living for most people in a modern society. Many activities including working, traveling, shopping and other daily needs highly rely on vehicles. ALLR may decrease the ability of working, diminish the freedom of moving and reduce the power of surviving. Therefore, ALLR may not only infringe the right of moving freedom which protected by the Constitution of the Republic of China, but also impact the right to work. Moreover, in the case of offenders who are professional drivers, losing driver licenses represent they can’t be drivers and have to give up their jobs. Finally, ALLR may impact their normal life and decrease their ability of surviving.

According the Constitution of the Republic of China, Article 10: “The people shall have freedom of residence and of change of residence.” Article 15: “The right of existence, the right to work and the right of property shall be guaranteed to the people.” Article 23: “All the freedoms and rights enumerated in the preceding Articles shall not be restricted by the law except such as may be necessary to prevent infringement upon the freedoms of other persons, to avert an imminent crisis, to maintain social order or to advance public welfare.” Therefore, people have the right to move freely which including the freedom of using different transportation modes (Lee, 2001). Only in the situations of: (1) the necessary to prevent infringement upon the freedoms of other persons; (2) to avert an imminent crisis; (3) to maintain social order; (4) to advance public welfare, shall not be restricted by the law. Wilson,

ex-president of the United States of America, said that: “The innate characteristics of the Constitution is the thought and habit of people. It has to be developed along with the environment of country, the type of society and the living habits of people”. Aristotle, a philosopher of Greece, also stated: “The Constitution is a profile of politics as well as culture of a society.”(Lee, 2001) In other words, the Constitution has to go along with the time forward, reflect the essential of culture and politics, and implement its concrete norms in our real society. Thus, the function of Constitution can be enhanced and glorified, and the society can be progressed soundly. Consequently, the Constitution doesn’t only restrain government from inadequate using political power to infringe the basic right of people but also make a regime become a solid authority to actively protect people’ rights (Shao, 1998).

Many economic and social activities, such as working, commuting, shopping… etc., rely heavily on a means of transportation. Driving a vehicle is thought to be a basic human right for people living in a modern society; indeed, people need to operate a vehicle to fulfill some economic or social requirements. Therefore, the impact of ALLR with no chance of rehabilitation may too much suffering for offenders and unable to be imaged by a normal road user. Thus, such offenders usually want to rehabilitate their driving privileges and seek many ways to recover their driver licenses in different ways. Finally, some drivers who were punished by ALLR had made their suit to the Constitution Court against the Article 62-2 of Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act: “In a crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurement immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/her rest of life.”

Car accidents usually bring many damages including death, injury or property loss to the victims. On the other hand, in the case of hitting-and-running and causing death/injury, or drunk driving and causing death/serious injury, there are many kinds of penalties for the

offenders including criminal penalty, civil compensation and ALLR punishment. All these punishments are immense to offenders. To legislate a law/or regulation, it is important that the sanction must be considered in accordance with the principle of balance and proportion (Lee, 2001; Shie, 1997). Generally, the benefits of offenders that deprived from the sanction must be equivalent to the benefits of the others that protected by such law/or regulation. Moreover, after a period of implement, while it fails to achieve the original purposes which setting in the beginning of legislating the law/or regulation, such sanction has to be abandoned. In the case of ALLR punishment, offenders have no chance of rehabilitation of having their driving privileges reinstated, no matter how much they improve their attitudes and behaviors. The sacrificed benefits, which deprived from offenders, may not equivalent to the benefits, which gained by the others. Therefore, we doubt that the lawmaking of ALLR may not conform to both the principle of balance as well as the principle of proportion.

Some short-term license suspension/revocation (S/R) offenders may be willing to follow a no-driving restriction to avoid being caught by the police during their license suspension period, in order to protect their future driving privileges. On the other hand, a long-term license S/R offender may have little motivation to adhere to such rules, especially when, in the case of ALLR presently in effect in Taiwan, there is no chance for rehabilitation. Furthermore, the punishment for driving a vehicle while under ALLR suspension is the same as driving while under S/R or while disqualified; ALLR offenders therefore have less incentive to stay off the road. Hence, we suspect that the percentage of ALLR offenders who continue to drive is higher than those with short-term license S/R.

Most previous studies have focused on exploring the effectiveness of license S/R as well as the reduced level of driving while under S/R. Very few studies have investigated the impact of S/R on specific offenders. Many economic and social activities, such as working, commuting, shopping… etc., rely heavily on a means of transportation. Driving a vehicle is

thought to be a basic human right for people living in a modern society; indeed, people need a vehicle to fulfill some certain economic and social requirements. Therefore, lifetime revocation of a driver’s license, with no chance of rehabilitation, may be regarded as infringing on the offender’s human rights of offenders. Moreover, according to present Taiwan traffic regulations, the punishment for driving a vehicle, while under ALLR, is only a fine of 12 000 NTD (New Taiwan Dollars, 34 NTD = 1 USD). Apart from the fine, there is no other punishment. Thus, rich offenders may hardly notice such a penalty, choosing to continue to operate their vehicles; poor offenders, on the other hand, may be forced to abide by the ALLR no-driving restriction, and give up driving. This may result in unequal punishment, where a rigorous penalty such as ALLR, may have a greater impact on the less fortunate members of society by reducing their ability to make a living.

1.2 Research objectives

There are many previous studies exploring the effect of a short-time license S/R in developed countries e.g. the United States of America, Canada, Australia and most of European countries. However, ALLR may not be implemented in these developed countries. Therefore, very few studies have focused on a long-term license S/R. In Taiwan, there is rare literature concerning about license S/R. Although, there are some literatures explored ALLR, however, such studies only come from the researchers belong to the field of the law and focused on whether such regulations violate the Constitution. There is no any study look into the effect of ALLR as well as its impact on offenders.

This dissertation mainly studied the effect of ALLR as well as its impact on offenders. We first focused on the trend on the Constitution and discussed whether such sanction violates the trend. Secondly, we investigated the effectiveness of ALLR and its impact on offenders. Consequently, the main objectives of this dissertation are as followings:

as well as ALLR.

(2) To realize the impact of ALLR policy on the living and the human rights of offenders, including how their basic human rights are disturbed by ALLR, such as the freedom of moving, the ability of working and surviving.

(3) Has the ALLR deprived the right of existence, the right to work, and the freedom of moving?

(4) To explore how the people, whose driving rights have been deprived whole their rest lives, travel to fulfill their needs for economic and social activities. Whether revoking driver license lifetime really keeps the disqualified drivers from the road?

(5) To comprehend that the percentage of ALLR offenders who continue to drive may be higher than those who with short-term license S/R.

(6) To demonstrate that ALLR may result in unequal punishment, where a rigorous penalty such as ALLR, may have greater impact on the less fortunate members of society by reducing their ability to make a living.

(7) To explore the determinant factors that forced offenders to fully comply with the ALLR and totally give up driving, to partially abide by ALLR and reduce driving, or to completely ignore the punishment and drive almost the same as before the ALLR. (8) To determine the association between the mileage driven, both before and after ALLR,

by the offenders and potential explanatory factors.

1.3 Research approach

This paper collected data either from offenders involved in hitting-and-running offences causing death/or injury, or drunk driving offences causing death/or serious injury, who had been punished by ALLR. To explore the policy of ALLR, we first looked into the principle of the law legislating especially on the viewpoint of the Constitution and probed into whether the rigorous punishment infringe into people’s basic rights which including the freedom of

moving, the right to work and the right of existing. For ALLR offenders, the punishments usually accompany criminal penalty, civil compensation and administrative disciplinary action—ALLR. We focused on the relationship between these punishments and constitutional legislating principles, that these punishments may infringe basic human rights that were guaranteed by the Constitution. Even though, these punishments may not an unconstitutional act that according to the Taiwan Constitutional Court’s interpretations. However, it may violate the trend of the Constitutional legislation. Therefore, we are not focus on weather the ALLR punishment violates the constitution or not, but on the trend of worldwide constitutional development. Thus, this thesis also makes a description of human’s basic rights, which include the meaning of human’s basic rights, the types and principles of restriction, the meaning of constitutional interpretation, the principles and trend of constitution. Moreover, we also make a comment on the Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act Article 62.

Secondly, we investigated ALLR offenders’ driving exposure and behaviors after having been imposed by ALLR sanction. A before-and-after comparison of offenders’ driving habits, after ALLR had been imposed, was undertaken first, to measure the effectiveness of ALLR. A logistic regression model was then employed to show how driving experiences, under ALLR, were associated with the offenders’ characteristics, such as socio-economic factors, penalty status and the needs for transportation. When ALLR punishment is most effective and whether this rigorous punishment has a greater impact on the less fortunate will be discussed. It may be that such rigorous punishment is fairly effective in keeping offenders off the road, but may give rise to other societal problems. Finally, a multivariate regression model, Generalized Estimating Equations (GEEs) (Liang and Zeger, 1986; Hardin and Hilbe, 2003), was used to determine the association between the mileage driven by the offenders and potential explanatory factors. Research Approach was showed as Figure 1.

Literature Review (Local & Abroad) Study Scope

ALLR offenders ALLR & ConstitutionalTrend

A comparison of local and abroad Impact on the right towork Impact on the right ofliving Impact on moving freedom Driving purposes Driving frequency change Driving mileage To enhance traffic safety To protect the others’ profits To maintain social order Effectiveness of ALLR Is ALLR rigorous? The right of freedom The right to work The right of property License rehabilitation Discussions & Conclusions

Figure 1: Research approach

As to the measurement of the effectiveness of ALLR, the ideal concept is to compare the “protective benefits” which including keeping road safety, maintaining society order and protecting normal road users’ benefits with “sacrificed benefits” which coming from ALLR offenders. However, it is difficult to measure either the effectiveness of keeping road safety,

maintaining society and protecting normal road users’ benefits. Moreover, in order to consist with S/R literatures, this study mainly adopted the driving exposure both before and after ALLR to measure its effectiveness. Figure 2 shows ALLR effectiveness system analysis framework.

By comparing (A) with (B)

: study scope

Figure 2: ALLR effectiveness system analysis framework

ALLR Effectiveness

(A) Protective benefits

Keeping road safety Maintaining society order Protecting normal road users’ benefits (B) Sacrificed benefits Impact on moving freedom Impact on the right to work Impact on the right of living

Comparing driving exposure before & after ALLR

Driving a vehicle (excluded motorcycle) Riding a motorcycle Complied with ALLR

Didn’t complied with ALLR Reduced driving exposure after ALLR Completely gave up driving after ALLR Driving with same exposure after ALLR

1.4 Overview of thesis

This thesis is organized as follows. Chapter 2 presents brief literature reviews that include three parts. In the first part, the relationship of ALLR legislation and constitutional principles were expounded. The second part is regarding the effectiveness of license S/R as well as such offenders’ driving exposure while under license S/R. In the third part, the methodologies concerning this dissertation include a Logistic Regression Model and Generalized Estimating Equations (GEEs) were reviewed. Chapter 3 introduces the present ALLR policy in Taiwan that includes the background of ALLR development, the current ALLR articles and the current results of implementing. Chapter 4 looks into the trend of constitutional interpretation on ALLR. Chapter 5 addresses the empirical analysis that collects the data of offenders who were punished by ALLR sanction and demonstrates the empirical results includes offenders’ basic characteristics, reasons for driving, offenders’ driving exposure and behaviors while under ALLR. Chapter 6 and chapter 7 make discussion and conclusions respectively.

Chapter 2 Literature review

2.1.1 The meaning of human’s basic rights

The human’s basic rights are to concrete the concept of freedom and implement it to real society. Carl Schmitt, a constitutional scholar of Germany, has stated “the human’s basic rights are the right takes precedence over the existing of country. It is not the rights that authorized by the law, which legislated by the country, but rights that have existed and much be admitted by the country (McCormick, 1996). The types of human’s basic rights include the right of freedom and the right of equality in the initial stage. Along with the development of constitution, the more emphasis was on such a life that under culture and dignity. Although there is no exact the words of human’s basic right in the Constitution in Taiwan, however, there are many times the Constitutional Court mentioned the concept of human’s basic rights while in some cases under constitutional interpretations. ALLR deprives offenders of the privilege of driving a vehicle. In other words, it keeps disqualified road user off the road. Thus, it inevitably impacts the freedom of moving. Meanwhile, in a modern society of capitalism, lose driver license may also impact the ability of working. Furthermore, it may decrease the niche of surviving. In this section, the meaning of the right of freedom, the right to work and the right of existing are discussed.

2.1.1.1 The right of freedom

According the Constitution of the Republic of China, Article 10, the meaning of freedom of residence and change of residence is somewhat the freedom of moving, it is a human’s basic right. It represents people can choose their residence freely, and the State cannot infringe it arbitrary. The freedom of residence includes choosing residence freely both in the State and abroad. It cannot be infringed or interfered unlawfully, or dealt with discrimination. Excepting for criminal cases or some special cases according to the law, people moving freely in the

State or changing of residence from the State to abroad that guaranteed by the Constitution all over the world cannot be banned (Lin, 1998).

The freedom of residence and personal freedom are interrelated, with the characteristics of having subjective right. The function of such rights, from a defensive aspect, is to prevent unlawful infringing upon human’s basic rights from the State. Either an unlawful limitation on people’ freedom comes form the State or an individual person; he/she has the right to claim for the damage. The freedom of moving includes passive freedom of moving and active freedom of moving. The former means that the freedom of moving has to be protected by the State from an unlawful infringement. A person should has the right to resist, passively, the moving which is not an authorization by law as well as on his/her own will. The authorization by law means an authorization must be based on either on the law or the Constitution unequivocally. Therefore, the passive freedom of moving includes no residence shall be invaded except in accordance with the law, no person or his residence shall be searched except in accordance with the law, no residence shall be held in custody except having a legal reason. The latter means that the State shall promote the opportunities to fulfill the person’s freedom and rights concretely. In other words, it represents a freedom that people have the right to move anywhere without the State’s permission. Generally, it includes the people shall have freedom of residence, setting residence, and freely using any kind of transportation modes (Lee, 2001).

2.1.1.2 The right to work

The ‘work’ includes two kinds of concept. Subjectively, it represents a person who connects it to his live; objectively, it represents a repeated behavior within a certain period. The materials, which are necessary to maintain a living, only come from either the property or labor. Especially the income from labor is the means of maintaining a living for most persons who have no capital or productive instrument. Hence, by the way of choosing a job freely, to

get a reasonable reward in order to make a living has a great meaning. It forms the type of society and keeps it stable. The theory of constitution in nineteen century is based on two fundamental elements that include the right of freedom and the right of property. Thus, the relation of the State and people was based on the freedom and property. However, the fundamental elements of constitution in the present generation were expanded to three main factors, namely the right of freedom, the right of property and the right to work. All these three basic rights were guaranteed by the Constitution. The right to work, both its theoretical and empirical development, became gradually one of the most important basic rights that guaranteed by the Constitution (Haeberle, 1984).

The right to work and the right of property are the most important factors to support a living. The theory of constitution in present generation, the right to work, therefore, stands at the same important position as the right of freedom and the right of property (Wang, 1992). Besides the right to work is guaranteed to the people that included in Article 15 of the Constitution. The Constitution Section 4, Social Security, is also including the State shall provide suitable opportunities of working for the people who are able to work, improve the livelihood of laborers as well as the capital and labor shall in accordance with the principles of harmony and cooperation.

2.1.1.3 The right of existence

The freedom and equality, on the surface, base on the law, however, it led to an unfree and unequal situation in a real economic society. The society then recognized that it was not enough to guarantee a person’ existence and a dignitary living while only has the basic right of freedom. Consequently, the concept of social rights emerged from such circumstance. It is believed that people shall have the rights, which covering the field of economy, society and culture such as working, education, health and social insurance…etc., to attain the aim of owning personal dignity as well as moral integrity. To solve this dilemma which arose from

capitalism, most of western developed countries consequently to adopt an amendatory way that legislating more positive laws to guarantee the right of existence including both in economic and social field. Especially after World War II, the concept of human rights has been paid more attention by most of countries. At the mean time, after facing some serious challenges which come from political and economic situation. The social rights were therefore became an important part of constitution. Finally, the right of existence aroused to be an important issue that protected by the Constitution (Tsai, 1999).

The right of existence, which protected by the Constitution, includes esteem for life and continuity of living. From the view point of the relationship of the people and the State, although the State has the right to request people abiding the law, on the other side, people also have the right to request the State esteem their life and take care of their living. In the Republic of China, the concept of the right of surviving has been included in the Constitution, Article 15. In Japan, the right of surviving was more unequivocal included in the Constitution. Its Article 25 states that: “All the people of the State shall have the right to have a minimum requirement of a living with health and culture. The state should try any possibility to promote social welfare, social insurance and public health (Chuan, 1991).” Meanwhile, the Japan government widely legislating social security laws to fulfill the content of social welfare, to establish a sound social protect and insurance system, such as living protect law, aging welfare law, child subsidies law, citizen annuity law, and citizenry health insurance law…etc. To ensure the protection of the right of surviving not only make all the people have a dignitary, healthy and cultural living on the base of freely existence, but also have a positive meaning for glorifying the justice and harmonizing the whole society.

2.1.2 The restrictive principles and types of basic rights 2.1.2.1 Restrictive principles

arbitrary. The State cannot use an illegal means to deter people’s illegal behavior. It was the basic requirement of rationality of a State in the modern constitutionalism. The state to legislate a law to restrict people basic rights must be in accordance with three principles of constitution, that show as followings (Lee, 2001；Shia, 1997):

(1) The principle of law reservation

According to the Constitution, Article 23, to restrict people’s basic right shall be in accordance with the law. Besides, the authority also can make an authoritative regulation to restrict people’s basic rights, however, such regulation must under the explicit authorization of the law. Moreover, to make such regulation shall not be violated the principle of re-authorized prohibition. In other words, such regulation should not be beyond the range of authorization of the law.

(2) The principle of equality

To restrict people’s freedom or rights by a law shall be in accordance with the principle of equality, which means that the same things should have the same treatments and the different things should have the different treatments, and cannot arbitrarily use different treatments.

(3) The principle of proportion

To judge weather a restriction on people’s basic rights violates of the Constitution should consider the necessity of the aim of such restriction, the rationality of restriction content and the characteristics of restriction activities? Accordingly, it must be reviewed individually by the principles of proportion and equality. The principle of proportion, believed by most of constitutional scholar that in the Article 23 of the Constitution of the R.O.C., usually includes three sub-principles that discussed as followings:

The principle of appropriateness, also known as the principle of corresponding with the aim, means that legislating a law to impose restriction on people’s basic right should fit in with the aim. Generally, if the legislation of a law is not covered in the Article 23 of the Constitution, it represents such legislation is not correspond to such principle. This principle can also conduct ‘the principle of arbitrarily-prohibition’ and ‘the principle of inappropriateness-prohibition’. The means or measures that the State adopt to restrict people’s rights shall be appropriate and helpful to achieve the aim. From the viewpoint of human dignity and human freedom, an inappropriate restriction on people’s moving freedom is the same as punishment.

(b) The principle of necessity

The principle of necessity, also called ‘the principle of minimum harm’, means that a necessary action, which in all possible ways to achieve the aim, can make a least harm. In other words, it is a choice within the means under the same aim. Therefore, to restrict or intervene a basic right, even though such restriction or intervention is in accordance with the principle of appropriateness, followings are also needed to inspect. a) How many means can achieve the aim? b) What are the restrictions that produced by these different means? c) To choose a means which holds the minimum harm. (c) The special principle of proportion

The special principle of proportion, also called ‘the principle of ratio’. It means that even a measure to restrict basic rights is in accordance with the principle of appropriateness as well as the principle of necessity and being a minimum hurt, still can’t over the special principle of proportion. Except the aim shall be appropriate, the measure also has to be considered whether it is appropriate or whether the measure of restriction goes beyond the proportion. The State exerts its authority cannot use a measure which unbalanced with the outcome. A measure that the State enforce shall be

necessary for its aim, however, such measure cannot bring overload to the people. In other words, the measure and the outcome should be equivalent. The profit, come from the effectiveness of the goal, should be equivalent to the lost-profit, deprived from the people. While the measure didn’t reach the original aim but brought an over-burden to the people, either the aim must be modified or abandoned.

2.1.2.2 The types of restriction

In Taiwan, there are four types of direct restriction which can be adopted to limit people’s basic rights which showed as followings (Lee 2001):

(1) To be a means of punishment

To punish an offender by means of incarceration or restriction on their freedom i.e. to limit a criminal offender’s residence (Criminal Litigation, 116,120), to restrict the right of changing residence for an offender who is free form probation, to restrict the right on moving abroad for an obligor who didn’t pay his/her taxes over a certain amount (Taxes Levy Act, 24-3), to commit a hit-and-run offence causing death/injury will be punished an incarceration of 6 months to 5 years etc.

(2) To ensure authority of the State can be realized

According the Epidemic Prevention and Control Act, the authority has the right to limit people to get in and out the fashion area, while an epidemic disease is widespread. A person, who is in a restrain period, can’t depart from his/her restrain area unless having permission (Ensure Safety Act, 74-2-5). Whether to leave or enter a country must have a passport and visa, unless having a permission of foreign ministry, the authority can’t issue a passport for a country having no relationship with the Republic of China (Passport Act, Article 14). (3) To advance public welfare

The management of high bearing capacity on freeway is on the aim of promoting its traffic smooth, however, it inevitably restrict people’s moving freedom.

(4) To maintain social order

In order to maintain social order, it is necessary to restrict people to use transportation models such as abiding with traffic light, driving on the right side, restraining a motorcycle from using freeway, speeding prohibition.

2.1.3 The limitation of basic rights for ALLR offenders

Punishment according to the law may include criminal sanction, civil levy sanction and administrative sanction. Each sanction has its own theory of law and limitation. Legislators adopting one or two or more than two sanctions to deter a behavior that violates the law usually have their specific consideration (Lee, 2001). However, before adopting any kind of sanction should consider the people of the State how to inform their positive or negative action (Whang, 2001). In the case of hitting-and-running and being punishment by ALLR, sanctions include criminal, civil levy and administrative punishment. In which, the level of civil levy sanction depends on the negative legal profit come from victim including life, body and property damage that decided by the court. The criminal and administrative sanctions inevitably lead to a various restriction on the basic rights including moving freedom, the right to work and the right of existing.

2.1.3.1 The restriction on moving freedom

(1) Criminal penalty

Table 1 shows the different criminal penalties may be produced for a hit-and-run offence including the penalty of desertion, an attempted crime, hitting-and-running, innocent homicide, innocent hurt etc (Tseng & Hwang, 2000). Consequent term of imprisonment, various according to the law, substantially limit the freedom for offenders.

Table 1: The possible criminal penalties for hitting-and-running offence

Crime

Criminal Act, Article

Contents

imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years. Attempted

homicide

271-2 He/she, who commits a homicide, can be sentenced to death, life imprisonment, or over ten years imprisonment. Attempted homicide should be punished.

Hit-and-run 185-4 He/she who operates a motor vehicle causing death or injury and run can be punished imprisonment from 6 months to 5 years.

Innocent homicide

276 He/she who commits an innocent homicide can be punished imprisonment under two years or custody or under 2000 NTD fine.

Innocent hurt

284 He/she commits an innocent hurt can be punished imprisoned under 6 months, or custody, or 500 NTD fine; in the case of causing serious injury can be punished imprisonment under one year, or custody, or 500 NTD fine.

(2) Administrative punishment

The Constitution Court against the Article 62-2 of Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act: “In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurement immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/her rest of life.”

In September 1991, the Taiwan Constitutional Court pointed out:

Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act 62-2: In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurements immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/her rest of life. For the purpose of increasing traffic safety, protecting the majority of road users who comply with the laws/or regulations, and maintaining the social order, this Article does not violate the Constitution.

However, in October 2001, the Taiwan Constitutional Court pointed out again:

Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act 62-2: In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurements immediately and report to police. The driver, who violates this Article and runs away, whose driver license will be revoked whole his/or her rest of life. For the purpose of increasing traffic safety, protecting the majority of road users who comply with the laws/or regulations, and maintaining the

social order, it does not violate the Constitution. But for those who had committed hit-and-run offence and been revoked driver licenses, in the cases of the drivers having improved their behaviors and having the ability to re-fit the society, the authority has to reconsider whether it is needed to provide a chance for those drivers to rehabilitate their driver licenses.

Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act 62-2: “In the case of crash, the driver who causes death/or injury should take protective or other necessary remedy measurements immediately and report to police. A driver who violates this Article can be punished by suspending his/her driver’s license from 3 months to 6 months. In the case of running, his/her driver’s license can be revoked.” Article 67: “The driver, who punished by the Article 62, cannot reinstate his/her driver’s license.” Article 68: “The driver who violates the Road Traffic Safety and Penalty Act or the Road Safety regulation and be punished by driver license S/R, all the privilege of operating motor vehicles, such as cars, trucks, motorcycles…etc. will be revoked at the same time.” Hence, such administrative sanction makes offenders loss their driving privilege during their rest of life including all the transportation modes e.g. cars and motorcycles. Inevitably, it seriously impacts the offenders’ moving freedom. Moreover, according to the present driver license design system, ALLR offenders have no chance to reinstate their driving privilege no matter they can demonstrate their ability and willingness to follow the regulations of the road and society.

2.1.3.2 The restriction on the right to work

To revoke a person’s driver license lifetime represents he/she can’t operate a motor vehicle for his/her rest of life. In the modern society, losing driving capacity may decrease the ability of working. Especially in a capitalistic society, it may represent serious impact one’s ability of working. Owing to the moving freedom and ability decreased, in the case of working heavily rely on vehicle, the ability of competition may decrease largely and further impact their work. The most serious situation is that professional drivers have to give up their

jobs and change their work. In the capital side of the capitalistic society, the ALLR impact on entrepreneurs may much less of that on labors, for the reason that they usually hired drivers. In the real situation, ALLR impacts on who were heavily rely on vehicle to earn a living or professional drivers most seriously.

2.1.3.3 The restriction on the right of existence

The right to work and the right of property are two bases of the right of existence. The impact of ALLR on the right of existence is similar to on the right to work, its impact on labor group is much more than on enterpriser group. The reason is that usually the ability of a labor using property to earn profit is much less than that of an enterpriser. Labors usually use their manpower to earn a living. Similarly, in the case of using transportation vehicles to make a living e.g. the ALLR offenders who applied for constitutional interpretation were small truck drivers who used their truck to make a living. Therefore, ALLR may represent a serious impact on the right or existence.

2.1.4 The constitution interpretations No. 284 and 531

The Constitutional Court in Taiwan to interpret the Constitution can be in many ways such as to judge whether constitution fits in with the aim, to distribute the power of the State, to confirm the Constitution and to implement the Constitution. Hence, the outcome of the constitutional interpretation cannot be simply determined whether it corresponds to or violates the Constitution. It also cannot to check only on the interpretation or the document of explanation, but on all the points of view (Hwang, 2000). The interpretation of the Constitutional Court usually cannot derive an objective and firmly believed result, but a trend or tendency. For the basic rights and legal profits that protected by the Constitution, the Constitution Court except to judge whether it corresponds to the Constitution, the more important thing is to interpret the relevant rights, the essence and content of legal profits. Meanwhile, according to the relations among the basic rights to set up principles and system,

to harmonize and balance personal rights and group rights, to protect human rights, and glorify a constitutional government.

Although both the interpretations of the opinion of the Road Traffic Safety Act 62 are on the aim of enhancing the road safety, protecting the others profit and maintaining the society order. And it doesn’t violate the Constitution. However, the interpretation on may, 2001 mentioned that: “in the cases of the drivers having improved their behaviors and having the ability to re-fit the society, the authority has to study whether it is needed to provide a chance for those drivers to rehabilitate their driver licenses.”

To compare the two interpretations, the latter obviously more conform to the spirit of protecting human’s right than the former. From the second paragraph of the latter interpretation, it seems that to revoke a person’s driver license forever and without rehabilitation during the rest of life is unreasonable.

2.2 Literature of license suspension/revocation

Many drivers, given a sentence of license S/R continue to drive, but at reduced levels (Hagen et al., 1980; Ross and Gonzales, 1988; Smith and Maisey, 1990). Ingraham and Waller (1971) found at least 30% of drivers given license S/R for drunk driving continued to operate a vehicle despite the licensing action. Williams et al. (1984) indicated that 65% of drivers confessed to operating a vehicle while under license S/R. Ross and Gonzales (1988) reported that 66% of suspended drivers were still driving on the road. DeYoung (1999) estimated that three-quarters of S/R drivers continued to drive, but they apparently drove less, and with more care. Malenfant et al. (2002) showed 57% of motorists were still driving while their licenses were suspended.

Although many S/R drivers continue to drive, many studies have explored the effectiveness of administrative license revocation (ALR) and support the view that it is a positive step in reducing subsequent alcohol-involved driving by offenders (Zador et al., 1989;

Henderson and Kedjidjian, 1992; Lund, 1993; Sweedler and Stewart, 1993; NHTSA, 1993). Most of these studies have demonstrated that this sanction is effective over a short term (Homel, 1981; McKnight and Voas, 1991; Mann et al., 1991; Peck, 1991; Siskind, 1996). However, ALR is usually no longer than a few years, and prior research has commonly focused on a relatively short-term license S/R. Very few studies have explored the effectiveness of ALR over the long term.

In addition, driving while under S/R is difficult to enforce. It can only be detected when the driver of a vehicle has been stopped by the police for committing another traffic offence (Voas and Deyoung, 2002); thus, offenders are likely to be encouraged by the belief that there is little danger of being caught (Knoebel and Ross, 1997).

2.3 Literature of methodology 2.3.1 Logistic regression model

Regression methods have become an integral component of any data analysis concerned with the relationship between an outcome variable and one or more explanatory variables. The most common regression method is conventional regression analysis, either linear or nonlinear, when the outcome variable is continuous (iid). However, when the outcome variable is discrete, conventional regression analysis is not appropriate. Moreover, there are primary assumptions are not satisfied when the outcome variable is categorical. One is the outcome variable in conventional regression analysis must be continuous, another is the outcome variable can take nonnegative values (Al-Ghamdi, 2002).

Statistical analyses are often based on general linear models that were developed to handle continuous independent data. A common example of the general linear model is ANOVA. The generalized linear model is an extension of the general linear model to handle both discrete and continuous data (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989). One of the most common types of the generalized linear model is logistic regression. The generalized linear model

transforms the data via a link function. In logistic regression the link function is the logit link function. An iterative process is used to solve for the parameter estimates. The coefficients represent the log-odds of an outcome being present when all other variables are held constant.

The logistic regression model is widely used analytical tool in traffic safety research. From a methodological viewpoint, a wide variety of approaches have been employed to study fatality risk. For example, Kim et al. (1995) use data on accidents in Hawaii to illustrate the use of a categorical log linear model to examine personal and behavioral predictors of crash and injury severity, while Shankar et al. (1996) describe the development of a nested procedure for the analysis of accident severity on rural freeways. In the UK, Jones and Bentham (1995) calculated Odds ratios to determine probabilities of fatality amongst traffic accident causalities according to a complex matrix of explanatory variables. However, despite this apparent diversity of methodologies, common to most investigations is the requirement for a statistical model, which will predict fatality risk for an individual based upon a range of explanatory variables. In line with this, the most frequently used technique is the generalized linear modeling (GLM) methodology of logistic regression (Menard, 1995).

The logistic regression model applies maximum likelihood estimation after transforming the categorical dependent variable into a logit variable. A logit is the log of the odds ratio. It does not assume equal distribution of the dependent variable for each level of the independent variable, nor necessarily a linear relationship between the independent and dependent variables. Moreover, the logistic regression model does not assume a normal distribution of the variables. As such, it is a particularly robust model for various traffic safety analyses (Kima, 2003). It is one form of statistical model called ‘generalized linear model’ with a logit (also called ‘log odds’, i.e. ln p/(1-p)) link function. This model has many advantages over ordinary least square regression models where the dependent variable is not continuous or normal in its distribution, and has constant variances. Logistic regression allows one to

predict a binary outcome from a set of explanatory variables that may be continuous, categorical, or a mixture of the two. The basic model form and statistical test method for logistic regression is introduced as followed.

The dependent variable in logistic regression is dichotomous; that is, it is assumed to follow a Bernoulli distribution. Therefore, it takes the value 1 with a probability p of an event occurred, and the value 0 with probability 1-p of an event not occurred.

The form of the logistic regression equation is:

( )

( )

where p (x) is the probability of an event occurred, which is a function of a set of factor vectors, x; α is the constant of the equation, and β_i is the coefficient of the ith factor.

The coefficients of the logistic model can be obtained by using the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) method. To test the statistical significance in the model of each coefficient,

i

β , a Wald test is usually used. The Wald test calculates a squared Z statistic, yielding a Wald statistic of asymptotic chi-square distribution with one degree of freedom, which is:

2 1 2 ~ ) ˆ ( ˆ χ β β ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ = i i SE Wald

where βˆ_i is the ith estimated coefficient and SE(βˆ_i) is the standard error of the ith estimated coefficient.

As for the overall test of the model, the likelihood-ratio test is widely used. This test employs the ratio of the maximized value of the likelihood function for the model with constant term only ( ) over the model, with a constant and estimated coefficient ( ). Using negative two times of log transformation of the likelihood-ratio yields an asymptotic p degree of freedom of the chi-squared statistic. The likelihood-ratio test statistic equals:

) (c

[

]

where log( ) and log( ) are respectively the values of the log likelihood function at its maximum, and p is the number of estimated coefficients.

) (c

L L(βˆ)

The goodness-of-fit measure, ρ2, was defined as followed:

)) ( log( ) ˆ ( log( 1 2 c L L β ρ = −

To interpret the model conveniently, logit (i.e. ln p/(1-p)) can be converted easily into a statement about odds ratio (O.R.) of the dependent variable simply by using the exponential function. For example, if the xi variable increases one unit while holding the remainder

variables constant, the O.R. of these two levels for xi will be exp ( ) and the 95% confidence

interval (C.I.) for O.R. will be exp ( ± Z

i βˆ i βˆ _{0.95*SE ( )).} i βˆ

Logistic regression is often used for analyzing motor vehicle crash data. In predicting accident frequency, Milton and Mannering (1997) state: “The use of linear regression models is inappropriate for making probabilistic statements about the occurrences of vehicle accidents on the road.” They showed that the negative binomial regression is a powerful predictive tool and one that should be increasingly applied in future accident frequency studies. Kim et al. (1996) developed a logistic model and used it to explain the likelihood of motorists being at fault in collisions with cyclists. Covariates that increase the likelihood of motorist fault include motorist age, cyclist age, cyclist alcohol use, cyclists making turning actions, and rural locations. Kim et al. (1994) attempted to explain the relationship between types of crashes and injuries sustained in motor vehicle accidents. By using techniques of categorical data analysis and comprehensive data on crashes in Hawaii during 1990, a model was built to relate the type of crash (e.g. rollover, head-on, sideswipe, rear-end, etc.). They also developed an “odds multiplier” that enabled comparison according to crash type of the odds of particular

levels of injury relative to non-injury. The effects of seatbelt use on injury level were also examined, and interactions among belt use, crash type, and injury level were considered. They discussed how log linear analysis, logit modeling, and estimation of ‘odds multipliers’ might contribute to traffic safety research.

Kim et al. (1995) built a structural model relating driver characteristics and behavior to type of crash and injury severity. They explained that the structural model helps to clarify the role of driver characteristics and behavior in the causal sequence leading to more severe injuries. They estimated the effects of various factors in terms of odds ultipliers, which is how much does each factor increase or decrease the odds of more severe crash types and injuries. Nassar et al. (1997) developed an integrated accident risk model (ARM) for policy decisions using risk factors affecting both accident occurrences on road sections and severity of injury to occupants involved in the accidents. Using negative binomial regression and a sequential binary logit formulation, they developed models that are practical and easy to use. Mercier et al. (1997) used logistic regression to determine whether either age or gender (or both) was a factor influencing severity of injuries suffered in head-on automobile collisions on rural highways. Hilakivi et al. (1989) also used logistic regression in predicting automobile accidents of young drivers. They examined the predictive values of the Cattel 16-factor personality test on the occurrence of automobile accidents among conscripts during 11-month military service in a transportation section of the Finnish Defense Forces. James and Kim (1996) developed a logistic regression model to describe the use of child safety seats for children involved in crashes in Hawaii from 1986 through 1991. The model reveals that children riding in automobiles are less likely to be restrained, drivers who use seat belts are far more likely to restrain their children, and 1- and 2-year-olds are less likely to be restrained.

2.3.2 Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) 2.3.2.1 The form of GEEs

McCullagh and Nelder (1989) introduced the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) for exponential family data with the form

fy (y, θ, φ) = exp｛f(yθ - b(θ))/a(φ) + c(y, φ)｝,

where a( ), b( ), and c( ) are given, θ is the canonical parameter, and φ is the dispersion parameter. The GLM is then given by

g(μ_i) = g(E[Y_i]) = 'β,

i

x

where x_i is a p x 1 vector of covariates for the ith subject, and β is a p x 1 vector of regression parameters. One of the attractive properties of the GLM is that it allows for linear as well as non-linear models under a single framework. It is possible to fit models where the underlying data are normal, inverse Gaussian, gamma, Poisson, binomial, geometric, and negative binomial by suitable choice of the link function g( ) (Hilbe, 1994).

Liang and Zeger (1986) and Zeger and Liang (1986) introduced generalized estimating equations (GEEs) to account for the correlation between observations in generalized linear regression models. One aspect of the approach builds upon previous methods of variance estimation developed to protect against inappropriate assumptions about the variance (Huber 1967; White 1980, 1982). The GEEs method is an extension of the generalized linear model, and is applicable in the analysis of correlated discrete outcome data (Liang and Zeger, 1986). The appeal of GEEs is the interpretation of the data is the same as when a model that assumes independence is used, yet it is a valid method for correlated data (Zeger and Liang, 1992). GEEs are often used when analyzing longitudinal or nested data. Several previous studies have examined the use of GEEs in the analysis of longitudinal injury-related and illness-related data. For example, Williamson et al. (1996) found when modeling longitudinal injury data under certain circumstances the use of GEEs resulted in different conclusions compared to logistic regression. While Williamson’s study addressed correlation of

in time. Diggle, Liang, and Zeger (1994) provided a detailed review of marginal models as well as other approaches, which including random effects models and transition models.

Let , i = 1,….., n; j = 1,……, t be the jth outcome for the ith subject, where we assume that observations on different subjects are independent, though we allow for association between outcomes observed on the same subject. In the GEEs setting, we are not assuming that is a member of the exponential family, but we are assuming that the mean and variance are characterized as in the GLM. We assume the marginal regression model

ij Y ij Y g(E[Y_ij]) = 'β, i x

where x_ij is a p x 1 vector of study variables (covariates) for the ith subject at the jth outcome,

β consists of the p regression parameters of interest and g( ) is the link function. Common choices for the link function might be g(a) = a for measured data (the identity link) g(a) = log(a) for count data (log link), or g(a) = log(a/(1-a)) for binary data (logit link). GEEs have been a popular approach to regression model fitting for this type of data. In the case of a binary data with the logit link, it will be that

log(E[Y_ij]/(1 - E[Y_ij])) = 'β,

i

x

which implies that

E[Y_ij] = μ_ij= exp( 'β)/(1 + exp( ) ,

ij

x 'β

ij

x

and if the outcomes are binary, it will be that var(Y_ij) =V_ij= exp(x_ij' )/(1 + exp(x_ij' )) 2,

In addition to this marginal mean model, it is needed to model the covariance structure of the correlated observations on a given subject. Assuming no missing data, the t x t covariance matrix of Y_i is modeled as

i