Effects of temporal characteristics and weather conditions on speeding sanction rates in automatic traffic enforcement
| Author | Mikko Aaltonen,Mika Sutela |
| Date | 01 December 2021 |
| Published date | 01 December 2021 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X20977024 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
2021, Vol. 94(4) 590 –615
Article
Effects of temporal
characteristics and weather
conditions on speeding
sanction rates in automatic
traffic enforcement
Mika Sutela
Police Traffic Safety Centre, Helsinki Police Department, Helsinki,
Finland; University of Eastern Finland Law School, Joensuu, Finland
Mikko Aaltonen
Institute of Criminology and Legal Policy, University of Helsinki, Helsinki,
Finland
Abstract
Speedingis dangerous and contributes significantly to traffic safety.Despite that, speeding is
not perceivedas serious crime, andhas been a relatively neglectedtopic in criminology.The
purpose of this study is to analyse the effects of different temporal characteristics and
weather conditions on speeding sanction rates in automatic traffic enforcement. The
analysis focuses on two major highwaysin Finland. Generalized additivemodels are used to
analyse factors influencing the sanction rates. The findings indicatee.g., that high tempera-
tures are associated with higher rates of speeding, and the converse is true for rainfall.
Keywords
Speeding, automatic traffic enforcement, traffic safety, police
Introduction
Despite improvements in car safety techno logy, the relationship between speed and
traffic safety remains strong (Elvik et al., 2019; Holocher and Holte, 2019). There is
Corresponding author:
Mika Sutela, Police Traffic Safety Centre, Helsinki Police Department, Viljatie 2, FI-00700 Helsinki, Finland; UEF
Law School, PO Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland.
Email: mika.sutela@poliisi.fi
The Police Journal:
Theory, Practice and Principles
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0032258X20977024
journals.sagepub.com/home/pjx
Sutela and Aaltonen 591
clear evidence (e.g., Elvik, 2014; Kallberg et al., 2014) that speeding is dangerous, but
little acceptance of this fact among drivers (Cunningham, 2008). Unlike the dangers of
driving under the influence and the benefits of seat belts, about which there is a near-
consensus, people’s perceptions of the relationship between speed and crashes are quite
varied (Shinar, 2017: 238). Although the relationship between speeding and traffic safety
is very complex (see Shinar, 2017: 238–239), excessive speed has been found to con-
tribute to a substantial number of crashes (Wilson et al., 2010). According to the Finnish
Crash Data Institute OTI (2020), some human risk factor influenced 94 per cent of all
fatal motor-vehicle crashes studied by the road accident investigation teams in Finland in
2018. A risk factor related to the condition of the driver, such as alcohol, illness, fatigue
or state of mind, was involved in 73 per cent of the crashes. Risk factors related to driving
speed (e.g., speeding) were present in 37 per cent of the crashes.
Criminology has failed to engage thoroughly with road policing/offending, despite
the fact that road policing constitutes the most common police-initiated contact with
citizens (Corbett, 2008; Wells, 2017: 7–8). Speeding is relatively commonplace (Glen-
don, 2007) and is associated with a general social acceptability, particularly when it is
perceived to not be excessive (Fleiter et al., 2010; Hatfield and Job, 2006). Many people
do not see speeding as a ‘real’ crime (Corbett et al., 1998; see also Henni et al., 2017;
Hutson, 2020). People drive deliberately at excessive speed out of habit (De Pelsmacker
and Janssens, 2007). In the survey of the ESRA (E-Survey of Road users’ Attitudes)
(Holocher and Holte, 2019), less than one-thirds of respondents indicate that they do
accept driving faster than the speed limit. However, as declared by the European Com-
mission (2018), nearly half of drivers drive faster than the speed limi t and 10–20%
exceed the speed limit by more than 10 km/h.
In the ESRA survey (Holocher and Holte, 2019) up to two-thirds of respondents in the
European countries reported speed violations. Finnish respondents reported the highest
speed violation rates. In the survey, when respondents were asked whether they person-
ally accept driving faster than the speed limit outside built-up areas (but not on motor-
ways/freeways), in the European region, the proportion of those who find it acceptable
was one of the highest in Finland. The percentage rates were also high in Finland when
respondents were asked to report how often they drove faster than the speed limit in
different areas in the last 30 days. Over half (57%) of drivers who responded to the
survey by the Finnish Road Safety Council (Liikenneturva, 2020) told that slight excess
of speed limits has become a habit. Three quarters of the respondents felt that people who
drive below the speed limit are annoying. On the other hand, every other respondent felt
that other traffic often forces them to drive faster than they would like to drive. Driving
with the rhythm of traffic was considered important. Nearly 60%of the respondents
agreed that it is safer to keep up with other traffic than to comply with speed limits
(Liikenneturva, 2020).
The aim of automatic traffic enforcement is to promote compliance with speed limits
and, through decreasing both average driving speeds and variability of speeds, to reduce
the number of traffic crashes and mitigate their consequences, and thus improve traffic
safety (Reimi, 2018: 11). Research indicates that traffic safety cameras have positive
impact on traffic safety, i.e. to the extent that they reduce the number of serious crashes
(see De Pauw et al., 2014a). Automatic speed cameras (or traffic safety cameras) are
2The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles XX(X)
To continue reading
Request your trial