Policies to enhance older driver safety: older adults' opinions

Abstract

Purpose of the study: A key issue of transportation in an aged society is the conflict between public safety and individual mobility. Policies regarding older adults’ driving affects older peoples’ mobility and the value it creates. Therefore, considering the perspectives of the stakeholders most affected by a policy is important in policy making. The purpose of this study is to find a policy model for older adults’ driving with high-acceptance by the stakeholders, while balancing public safety and individual mobility. This will be done by analyzing the opinions of older adults who are the main stakeholders of such policies. This model can later be adopted for a more comprehensive national-level policy.

Design and Methods: The data came from the third wave of “Survey on the Elderly: Focusing on the Elderly Issues in Seoul” (N=3,058

mean age=73.4

55.9% women). Participants were asked whether they think the regulatory and/or support policy intervention for older adults’ driving is needed. Those who agreed also reported their preference between more detailed policies: (a) improve traffic safety education, (b) car decals for older drivers, (c) stricter physical and cognition requirements, and (d) voluntary surrender of driver’s license. A series of logistic regressions were used to examine sociodemographic factors associated with needs of policy intervention or preference of policy options.

Results: Economic status (OR=1.26, p<.05) and primary transportation mode (OR1=1.28, OR2= 1.49, p<.05) were statistically significant in determining the needs of policy intervention. Older drivers do not always prefer compensatory policies over exclusionary policies, and factors influencing preference are various depending on the policy. In a logistic regression analysis of influences on the individual policy preference, primary transportation mode (OR=0.65, p<.05) on “improve traffic safety education”, economic status (OR=1.34, p<.05) on “car decals for older drivers”, driving status (OR=1.51, p<.05) on “stricter physical and cognition requirements”, and economic status (OR=1.49, p<.01) and driving status (OR=0.54, p<.01) on “voluntary surrender of driver’s license” were statistically significant.

Implications: Policies restricting older drivers’ mobility have not been strictly implemented due to the government’s anticipation of resistance, even though restricting policies have been shown to be effective in enhancing public safety. This study shows that a “stricter physical and cognition requirements” policy, a policy highly preferred by older drivers and older adults, can enhance public safety via an accelerated renewal policy. In addition, this study also suggests that a detailed description of the goals and potential effects of a policy should be provided before introduction. In addition, new policies must be considered if social stigmatization effects on older adults will arise or not.