As states consider implementing comprehensive graduated driver licensing systems to help reduce the unacceptably high rate of teen driver crashes, injuries and deaths there are relatively few objections. The approach makes good sense to most casual observers as well as to law enforcement officials, public health advocates and injury prevention researchers. However, there is often a concern among legislators representing more rural areas that some of the central elements of GDL may place an undue burden on residents who live outside urban areas. The critical provision that young beginning drivers must spend an initial period of at least six months driving only with an adult supervisor in the vehicle before they are allowed to drive on their own sometimes causes concern. Depending on the particular configuration of a GDL system, this provision can have the effect of delaying the age at which young persons can begin assisting with family farm work, although it often does not do so. Although exceptions for such driving are often included in GDL systems, the perception may persist that GDL represents a threat to the economic interests of living in more rural areas. A critical provision of the second stage in the graduated licensing process, which limits young drivers’ unsupervised night-time driving to the early evening hours, also sometimes produces greater concern among legislators representing more rural areas. Finally, provisions that prohibit inexperienced teen drivers from transporting teen passengers or young children until they have amassed several months unsupervised driving experience also produce concern. There appear to be three main reasons that these restrictions during the initial two phases of a comprehensive GDL system are met with less enthusiasm from rural legislators. In addition to beliefs about the need for young persons to begin driving early in order to contribute economically to families, there is the fact that in rural areas, teens have far fewer alternative modes of transportation than in suburban and urban areas. There is no mass transit, walking or bicycling is rarely feasible, and friends or other alternative drivers may live too far away to provide essential transportation. Hence, in rural areas it is felt that GDL may result in a greater inconvenience for teens and their families than is the case in areas with greater population densities. Either trips have to be foregone completely, or parents and other family members have to continue to transport their children to school, work, and other important activities. Finally, there is a widespread perception that rural roads are safer than those in more urbanised areas. This can give rise to a belief that GDL will force teens in rural areas to endure a more thorough and extensive licensing process that is mainly needed by teens driving in more heavily populated areas with more heavily travelled and more dangerous roads.This report addresses some of the concerns mentioned above, using data obtained as part of an evaluation of the North Carolina Graduated Driver Licensing System North Carolina is a largely rural state. Despite having a population of more than 7 million, a substantial proportion of North Carolinians live in small towns and rural areas. According to census data for July, 1999 less than half the population lives in one of the 191 municipalities with 2,500 residents or more. Only six municipalities have a population of 100,000 or more. This affords an ideal opportunity to examine the effects of the NC GDL program in areas that are heavily populated, those that are less so, and those that are quite rural (29 of the states’ 100 counties have fewer than 25,000 residents; 14 have fewer than 15,000). (A) http://www.hsrc.unc.edu/pubinfo/grad_main.htm
Abstract