Does Uber help drunk driving statistics?
The rise of Uber and other alternatives to traditional taxicab services have led to claims that such services have been responsible for a drop in the national drunk driving incident rate. This claim has been promulgated by Uber itself who claim, “Services like Uber—where passengers push a button and get a ride in minutes—are helping to curb drunk driving.”
However, the American Journal of Epidemiology (“AJE”) believes the real story is a little more complicated. The AJE conducted a survey that was notable for examining the effect Uber has on different cities as opposed to the more conventional academic approach of compiling and analyzing statistics nationally.
So, did the AJE find that Uber and other rideshare services have helped deter drunk-driving incidents. The answer is complicated.
Uber Does Help, Sometimes
The tempting assertion to hail Uber as a hero in the struggle against drunk driving is tantalizing. Uber, seemingly, would give potential inebriated drivers access to convenient, low-cost transportation.
Why would someone drink and drive when given the readily-available alternative presented by ridesharing companies? Well, these assumptions are based on a few false premises. To begin, the argument that Uber presents a low-cost alternative to driving drunk is unsubstantiated.
As the AJE puts it, “because drivers are unlikely to get caught drinking and driving, paying for a rideshare service may still be far more costly than driving drunk for many individuals.”
Drunk-drivers are motivated to drive home inebriated because they believe they will not be caught. This means just because uber is inexpensive does not mean that it will deter people from drunk-driving.
Drunk-drivers are motivated to drive home inebriated because they believe they will not be caught. This means just because uber is inexpensive does not mean that it will deter people from drunk-driving.
When an inebriated person makes the decision to drive drunk, they might be doing so to avoid Uber costs all-together. In other words, Ubers might be relatively cheap, but more often than not they are not cheaper than just taking your car home.
The Assumption of Rationality
It is fair to assume that most drunk-drivers make the decision to drive under the influence of alcohol when already inebriated. While under the influence of alcohol, decision-making prowess and rational thought can be compromised.
Therefore, it cannot be assumed that most drunk-drivers are operating under the same level of rationality as they would while sober. This loss of rationality makes it unreasonable to assume people will make the smart decision and call an Uber.
Ubers are Substitutes for Taxis, but Not for Drunk-Driving
Another presumption made by those who believe Uber to be lowering drunk-driving rates is that Uber will be used as an alternative to drunk driving. It was mentioned above that Uber’s convenience is what may make it a plausible alternative to driving home under the influence. This presumption is unsubstantiated.
Uber is not a substitute for drunk-driving and is merely a substitute for public transportation, walking, or taxis. A potential drunk driver often does not see Uber as a viable option for a few reasons. One of the biggest reasons, is the inconvenience of leaving their car where it is rather than taking it home.
Uber is not a substitute for drunk-driving and is merely a substitute for public transportation, walking, or taxis. A potential drunk driver often does not see Uber as a viable option for a few reasons. One of the biggest reasons, is the inconvenience of leaving their car where it is rather than taking it home.
It is inconvenient for a drunk person, who used their car to get to the area in which they now seek to leave, to leave it there overnight because they feel they are under the influence. Therefore, more often than not, Uber does not eliminate the inconvenience of leaving your car somewhere far from where you want it.
How the AJE Conducted Its Experiment
Now that some presumptions have been challenged, it is time to delve into the experiment itself and its results. The AJE conducted this experiment in Las Vegas, Portland, Reno, and San Antonio. These cities were picked because they are urban environments and Uber had launched, ended, and then resumed operations there at some point.
The study wanted to test the claim made by Uber asserting drunk-driving had been curbed by their company. It is clear immediately one of the biggest limitations this test suffers from. They do not represent and do not purport to represent anything other than urban environments.
The researchers sought to analyze the data from the first five years of Uber’s presence in the city and come up with evidence that either supports or disagrees with the claims made by Uber.
What are the Results?
As mentioned above, the results are complicated. It seems for now Uber is partially correct in their assertion, but not entirely. Uber has helped curb drunk driving in some places, but not others. Thus, it is an oversimplification to claim that Uber curbs obesity.
To start, crashes involving alcohol lessened as Uber resumed its presence in Portland and San Antonio. Reno does not show any less car crashes as a result of drunk-driving. Las Vegas showed more positive numbers as a result of Uber’s presence than Reno, but the prevalence of Uber use in
Las Vegas is much higher due to the constant influx of tourists. In sum, Uber does help curb drunk driving in the right circumstances.
What Circumstances Does Uber Lower Drunk-Driving
In urban environments, there can be many factors that allow Uber success in deterring drunk driving. As mentioned above, high influxes of tourists normally indicate greater usage of ridesharing services like Uber. Cities that have less tourism seem to have not been affected by Uber’s presence as the majority of people simply use their vehicles to get around resulting in more instances of drunk driving.
Other unique variables exist such as topography and availability of public transportation. Traffic and population density are big indications of whether Uber will have success in curbing drunk-driving, as people are more inclined to travel by Uber in high-density areas.
Thus, Uber’s claim that they help lower drunk-driving rates is not exactly correct and not exactly wrong. Certainly, other factors exist outside of Uber’s control and thus those looking to deter drunk-driving should look to what other successful cities have that they do not have.
