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.

Recap

Probation outside Europe

Governance Oversight and Accountability Mechanisms in Probation and Parole: Compare and Contrast Europe and USA

19/09/2025

Confederation of European Probation (CEP) and American Probation and Parole Association (APPA) organized an insightful webinar that introduced the theme “Governance oversight and accountability mechanisms in Probation and Parole. Compare and contrast Europe and USA”. This event took place on Thursday, 18 September 2025.

Recap

CEP Events, Framework Decisions

Recap: Expert Workshop on Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA and 2009/829/JHA

16/09/2025

The Expert Workshop held on September 10–11, 2025, in Brussels, Belgium, brought together senior managers, probation practitioners, criminal justice professionals such as lawyers and prosecutors from across Europe as well as representatives of the European Commission, Academy of European Law and European Judicial Network to discuss the advancements in the implementation of Framework Decisions 2008/947/JHA and 2009/829/JHA. Hosted at the Houses of Justice, the CEP Expert Workshop served as a dynamic platform for mutual learning, collaboration, and strategic planning.

New

Probation in Europe

New Vodcast Episode: Katharina Heitz on the Ressources-Risk-Inventory in Probation

11/09/2025

The 14th episode of Division_Y features Katharina Heitz, Head of the Central Department for Social Work at the Public Probation and Parole Service Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

Recap

CEP Board, Probation in Europe

CEP at ESC 2025: Penal Policy Transfer and Ageing in Prison in Focus

08/09/2025

The Confederation of European Probation (CEP) had a strong presence at the 25th Annual Conference of the European Society of Criminology (EUROCRIM 2025), held in Athens from 3 to 6 September 2025. As one of Europe’s largest gatherings of criminologists, the ESC annual conference brings together researchers, practitioners, and policymakers from around the world to exchange knowledge on crime, justice, and social responses. This year’s theme was “Logos of Crime and Punishment,” inspired by classical Greek philosophy.

Probation in Europe, Technology

Have Your Say: EU Call for Evidence on the Digitalisation of Justice (2025–2030)

18/08/2025

The European Commission has opened a Call for Evidence on the Digitalisation of Justice: 2025–2030 European Judicial Training Strategy.

Reading corner

Criminal Justice

Parole Futures

18/08/2025

At a time when many parole systems are experiencing considerable strain, the aims of this collection are twofold: first, to encourage systematic and critical reflection on the rationalities, institutions and practices of parole. Second, to think big, and pose ambitious ‘what if’ questions about the possible futures of parole and prison release. Offering novel insights from Asia, Australia, Europe, North America and South America, this collection builds the case for, and then showcases, a ‘way of doing’ parole research that is global in outlook, interdisciplinary in approach and unapologetically normative in character.

Subscribe to our bi-monthly email newsletter!