Role of Poverty in California Teenagers’ Fatal Traffic Crash Risk

Mike Males

doi:10.32398/cjhp.v7i1.1316

Abstract

Teenagers’ high rates of motor vehicle crashes, accounting for 40% of external deaths among 16-19 yearolds, have been ascribed largely to inherent “adolescent risk-taking” and developmental hazards. However, the fact that compared to adults 25 and older, teenagers are twice as likely to live in poverty and low-income areas, risk factors for many types of violent death, has not been assessed. This paper uses Fatality Analysis Reporting System data on 65,173 fatal motor vehicle crashes by drivers in California’s 35 most populous counties for 1994-2007 to analyze fatal crash involvements per 100 million miles driven by driver age, county, poverty status, and 15 other traffic safety-related variables. Fatal crash rates were substantially higher for every driver age group in poorer counties than in richer ones. Multivariate regression found socioeconomic factors, led by the low levels of licensing and high unemployment rates prevalent in low-income areas, were associated with nearly 60% of the variance in motor vehicle crash risks, compared to 3% associated with driver age. The strong association between fatal crash risk and poverty, especially for young drivers who are concentrated in high-poverty brackets and low-income areas, suggests that factors related to poorer environments constitute a major traffic safety risk requiring serious attention.

Highlights

Motor vehicle fatalities, comprising 41% of California teenagers’ external deaths compared to 24% for adults, represent the widest gap between adolescents’ and adults’ non-natural mortality (EPICenter, 2008)
The present study examines the associations between motor vehicle fatalities, socioeconomic status and related environmental variables among teenagers and adults in California for the purpose of testing the hypothesis that higher levels of poverty more efficiently explains the variance between teenage and adult motor vehicle fatality rates than does innate “adolescent risk-taking.”
Teens were nearly twice as likely to occupy highpoverty brackets; were driving vehicles that averaged one year older, were substantially smaller, and contained more occupants (Table 1); and were considerably more likely to live in low-income counties (Table 2)

Summary

Introduction

Motor vehicle fatalities, comprising 41% of California teenagers’ external deaths compared to 24% for adults, represent the widest gap between adolescents’ and adults’ non-natural mortality (EPICenter, 2008). Researchers typically ascribe teenagers’ high rates of traffic casualty to factors allegedly innate to adolescence: developmental immaturity, peer influences, and biologically-impelled risk-taking (Steinberg, 2007; National Research Council, 2006; Hedlund, Shults, & Compton, 2003; Blum, Beuhring, & Rinehart, 2000; Ulmer, Williams, & Preusser, 1997; Chen et al, 2000; Simpson, 2003). Another review attributed “adolescents’ inclination to engage in risky behavior” to “the temporal gap between puberty, which impels adolescents to thrillseeking, and the slow maturation of the cognitive control system, which regulates these impulses” Why do young drivers have such poor driving performance? Three factors work together to make the teen years so deadly for young drivers:

Methods

Results

Conclusion