Skip to content

News

“Road offenders” – literature review and the BRiSaR project

Lately I have seen many programs or interventions using visits to the morgue or hospitals to deter people from overspending or drive while intoxicated. In order to understand what is effective in reducing reoffending among those sentenced for road offences, we have run a comprehensive literature review of evidence and good practices at the international level.

An article written by professor Ioan Durnescu, University of Bucharest, Romania

 

Literature review

It was impressive to see the amount of the literature available on programs reducing the recidivism among those convicted for this type of offences (see Wundersitz and Hutchinson, 2006 – for DIP; Freeman, Schonfeld and Edmonston, 2006; Clark et al, 2015; Feiburger and Sheeran, 2019 and so on). However, with only a few exceptions (see Schulze, 2012), the impact of most programs was evaluated using one or two years follow up with no control groups. Therefore, although the evidence is out there, its replicability and robustness may be questioned.

What we can conclude so far is that multimodal and multidisciplinary approaches are more effective than the ones using only one type of intervention. In other words, programs based on education, rehabilitation, health and punishment seem to work better than the ones based on education only. Furthermore, programs that combine complex programs with urine testing, probation supervision and driving wheel control locker produce lower reoffending rates than those based only on urine testing or electronic monitoring. The latter proved to be quite effective during the action of those devices but this positive effect tends to disappear once the device is removed (Elder et al, 2011; Houwing, 2016).

Miller at al (2015) conducted an international systematic review on the interventions for men and women convicted for drive under influence (DUI). Their conclusions were that multicomponent programs which address a range of issues pertinent to this type of offending were found effective. However, they found that participants in scare straight or victim impact panels (as they are called in US) are as likely to re-offend as non-participants and sometimes more likely. These programs are based on confronting the authors of these crimes with the survivors of accidents caused by drunk drivers or expose them to shocking images with victims of accidents in the morgue.  These conclusions are in line also with another research conducted by Crew and Johnson (2010) and also with the general deterrence literature that suggests that punishment or the threat of punishment can have an impact for a moment but with no other changing pressure this memory will disappear allowing the past behavior to perform. Think of the speeding fines we receive sometimes. How effective are they in changing our driving style? Maybe they have an impact but only in combination with other factors – such as for example ageing, birth of a child or a cognitive behavior program.

 

BRiSaR project

This literature review will inform the creation of a new program/intervention for those sentenced for road offences under the Bringing Safety on the Roads (BriSaR) project funded by ERASMUS + and coordinated by European Strategies Consulting/Romania in partnership with Direcao-Geral de Reinsercao e Servicos Prisionais/Portugal, Aproximar/Portugal, Qualify Just/Portugal, Ankara Probation Service/Turkey and University Loyola Andalucia/ Spain.

 

Related News

Keep up to date with the latest developments, stories, and updates on probation from across Europe and beyond. Find relevant news and insights shaping the field today.

New

CEP

CEP annual report

07/04/2026

The Confederation of European Probation (CEP) has published its Annual Report 2025, showcasing a year marked by growth, cooperation, and continued commitment to strengthening probation across Europe.

Bringing together more than 100 member organisations across 42 countries and 59 jurisdictions, CEP continued to serve as a central platform for knowledge exchange, professional development, and collaboration within the European criminal justice field.

Uncategorized

ProtectEU: Commission presents new counterterrorism agenda

07/04/2026

On 26 February 2026, the European Commission presented ProtectEU, a renewed EU counterterrorism agenda aimed at strengthening the Union’s capacity to prevent, detect and respond to evolving terrorist threats.

New

Probation in Europe

New Vodcast Episode: Jana Spero Kamenjarin on the Confederation of European Probation (CEP)

07/04/2026

The 19th episode of Division_Y features Jana Spero Kamenjarin, Secretary General of the Confederation of European Probation (CEP), based in Utrecht, the Netherlands.

New

Electronic monitoring

Electronic Monitoring in Europe: Insights from the 13th Electronic Monitoring conference Questionnaire

30/03/2026

The 13th Electronic Monitoring (EM) conference Questionnaire has now been released, offering a comprehensive overview of how EM is applied across Europe today.ion.

New

CEP members

New CEP member: Guernsey Probation Service

25/03/2026

In recent weeks, CEP has interviewed individual members and representatives of the new member organisations that joined CEP at the beginning of 2026. In these interviews, the new member organisations or individual members will share information on why they decided to become members, how they would like to contribute to the development of CEP and many more.
Enjoy reading!

Recap

Probation outside Europe

Recap: CEP and APPA webinar

25/03/2026

Confederation of European Probation (CEP) and American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) hosted the second joint webinar on 24 March 2026, this time on “Integrity of Performance: Ensuring Meaningful and Ethical Outcomes”.

The overarching theme of integrity of performance was explored through two distinct perspectives on this fundamental concept.

 

 

 

Subscribe to our bi-monthly email newsletter!