Police performance management framework in New Zealand

To encourage and promote good quality service delivery and to maximise the effect of enforcement on meeting the 2010 road safety targets New Zealand Police work within a performance management framework.

The performance framework considers both outcomes (aims and objectives) and outputs (enforcement) and has been put in place to promote the effectiveness and efficiency of the enforcement delivered in order to maximise the effect on the desired outcomes.

Outcomes include road deaths, serious injuries and crashes as well as other intermediate outcomes relating to driver behaviour. Some examples of the behavioural outcomes that might be influenced by enforcement include mean speeds and the percentage of offenders driving in excess of 10 kph above the limit. These outcomes often relate to 2010 road safety targets.

Outputs include strategic offences per hour delivered (for speed, drink driving, restraints and visible road safety) and these are generally referred to as productivity measures and intended to maximise the efficiency of enforcement. Other quality-focused outputs are intended to maximise the effectiveness of Police enforcement by targeting particular behaviours. These outputs include the percentage of tickets issued in the lowest speed band above the 10 kph tolerance and the percentage of visible road safety offences that relate to manner of driving and driver duties and obligations (eg crossing the centre line, failing to give way).

Source: Jones, 2005

Reducing drinking and driving in Finland

In the early 1990s, the Finnish police initiated regular and systematic campaigns using about 1,000 person-years annually for traffic enforcement. Publicity was combined with one-week intensive enforcement activity that was organised every second month. Around 40% of drivers were tested every year. Over the years, the share of visible enforcement increased and has now reached 70% of all excess alcohol enforcement. Indicators have shown substantial reductions in drinking and driving in roadside surveys and in crashes.

The most important causes for an improvement of this magnitude in the drink-driving safety situation were the concentrated long-term efforts of various authorities, legislation giving the police power to effectively monitor drunk driving and strict legal limits, establishing high objective and subjective risks of detection, and governmental and non-governmental publicity. Specifically this comprised:

• The adoption of legal limits for excess alcohol(0.5 per mille and 1.5 per mille for aggravated drunk driving) in 1977.
• The police were empowered to carry out random breath tests, and every patrol car was equipped with a breathalyser.
• Drink-driving enforcement including the number of breath tests was substantially increased (more than 800 000 breath tests already in 1985).
• The police initiated data-led operations in terms of time and site, including quantitatively set targets and selective enforcement.
• Information and education activities were markedly increased (nationwide campaigns).
• The public heard an appeal from the President for improved traffic safety.

Sources: Veijalainen, T. (2000), ETSC (1999)