Social Norms and Improving HOV Lane Violation Rates

-- By BrandonGe - 26 Feb 2010

Introduction

HOV lanes were created in the 1960s and 1970s in response to rising foreign oil prices and the consequent desirability of lowering gas consumption. Creation of the lanes became popular among cities to encourage carpooling, thereby increasing person throughput and road capacity, and improving air quality. Some have criticized HOV lanes as actually lowering road capacity and increasing overall congestion. Proponents point to the development of "slugging," an organized system of taking advantage of HOV lanes, as evidence of effectiveness.

Although it appears that HOV lanes can potentially be very beneficial, much of this benefit has not been realized because of the difficulty in enforcing lawful use. Violation rates are high throughout the country and problems inhere in human enforcers trying to distinguish violators from innocent carpoolers in moving vehicles travelling on high-traffic highways. Because enforcement is difficult and costly, I propose that cities should focus more on creating social norms and stigmatizing cheating in achieving higher compliance with HOV lane rules (a theory that has also been described by Professor Strahilevitz)

Enforcement Methods

A commonly proposed solution is devoting more patrol time to enforcement. This fails as a long-term solution. It can be difficult to see whether a particular vehicle is in compliance with HOV lane rules. Occupants such as babies and sleeping passengers are hard to see with the naked eye, especially when they are inside a fast-moving vehicle. Further complicating matters, some states, such as Arizona, have allowed owners of certain hybrid vehicles to apply for special license plates that let them use HOV lanes regardless of occupancy. Devoting more police officer time to enforcement can also be counterproductive. The draw of HOV lanes for potential carpoolers lies in their faster transit times, but police officers often slow traffic because many drivers slow down when they see a police car ahead. Lastly, many object to devoting valuable resources to enforcing relatively innocuous HOV lane violations.

Many also propose increasing fines and making sure drivers know of the high fines in an effort to deter violators.

Most alternatives are flawed. Barriers between HOV and unrestricted lanes can increase the effectiveness of police officer enforcement, but may lead to slower transit times in the HOV lane, as the effect of one slow driver is amplified. Also, the lower number of exits and entries for the HOV lane would discourage use even by carpoolers. Video and photographic surveillance is fraught with inaccuracies since it often cannot detect children and sleeping people.

Success of the FasTrak Program

One successful solution has been the creation of a high occupancy toll (HOT) lane by allowing solo commuters the option to buy their way into the HOV lane. San Diego did this with their FasTrak program, launched in 1996, and it has resulted in an increased number of carpoolers and decreased violation rate. Although patrol presence increased with the launch of the program, this cannot fully explain these successful results since historically, violation rates had not fallen and risen with the level of enforcement. What explains these results?

Social Norms

Social norms can be an effective, low-maintenance way of encouraging people to act in certain ways. In class discussion and in the literature, it has been suggested that social norms play a role in homeowners continuing payments even when it is advantageous to walk away. There is a social stigma attached to foreclosure. We have also seen this with seat belt laws. It was only a few decades ago when few people wore seat belts. But because of seat belt laws, use of seat belts became so widespread that now many people buckle up upon sitting in a car without thinking twice. Other examples of social norms people generally adhere to without enforcement include not cursing in front of children, recycling, and leaving a tip after a meal in a restaurant.

There is already a social deterrent from violating HOV lane rules in areas that have not implemented a program similar to FasTrak. Violators frequently get dirty looks and honks from carpoolers. This, coupled with the volume of people a violator drives past during a traffic jam, can be a powerful deterrent for some (this is the main deterrent that I consider when driving solo). However, given the unpopularity and emptiness of many HOV lanes, there is still a high rate of violators who believe they are doing a social good in violating what they consider a stupid law.

The FasTrak program has created a social norm against cheating. The popularity of the program, the stupidity of violation and risking hefty fines, and the availability of meaningful alternatives have helped create a community-wide stigma against violation. As violation rates decrease further, it becomes internalized that cheating is socially unacceptable, eventually reaching a point where people adhere to the rules voluntarily and with little enforcement. Guilt becomes the deterrent.

HOV lane enforcement is costly and ineffective. Thus, creation of a social norm that produces guilt in violators will be the main factor in improving nationwide compliance with HOV lane rules.