Effects of E-Enforcement in the Netherlands Effects of E

EffectsEffects ofof E-EnforcementE-Enforcement inin thethe NetherlandsNetherlands

MARIEKE KOOPMANS-VAN BERLO AND HANS DE BRUIJN

©PHOTODISC

ecent decades have It seems likely that governments This article is based on our seen the emergence of worldwide will increasingly adopt research into the effects of two “e-enforcement” – the forms of e-enforcement. According- forms of second generation e- use of electronic tools ly, we considered research that cen- enforcement: the digital tacho- in law enforcement. ters on the impact and effects of such graph and ‘Weigh in Motion’ RIn some sectors, such tools have been measures to be of great importance. (WIM). The digital tachograph common for some time, as in the use Much is already known about the replaces the analog tachograph in of cameras to prevent red light run- functioning of the first generation of all heavy goods vehicles within the ning and speed violations. e-enforcement. Various studies con- European Union. The equipment These traditional forms of e- clude that, while there is some oppo- registers drivers’ driving and rest enforcement (“automated enforce- sition on the part of motorists, the e- times. Weigh in Motion with Video ment,” “photo enforcement”) have a enforcement measures have (WIM-Vid) is a system involving limited function: to produce photo- generally been well received and are sensors in the road and cameras, graphic evidence of relatively sim- considered successful. However, lit- which detect and register overload- ple offenses. Recently, however, tle is yet known about second gener- ing of heavy goods vehicles. The several new initiatives have been ation e-enforcement. Therefore we WIM-Vid system was developed developed, which we shall term focus here on e-enforcement’s func- and implemented in the Nether- “second generation e-enforcement.” tioning and effects. In particular, we lands and is currently attracting The prime characteristic of these address the question of how e- international attention. We shall new measures is that they go further enforcement affects the relationship compare the situation prior to the than merely recording the offense, between the regulating authority introduction of these e-enforce- and can be used to address more (i.e., the enforcement official) and ment measures to the situation after complex violations. the regulatee. the introduction of e-enforcement.

38 | 0278-0079/06/$20.00©2006IEEE IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 E-Enforcement: First and explain how to avoid prosecution each of the vehicle’s axles should be Second Generations resulting from an offense detected considered. The axle load is a com- E-enforcement, or electronic by automated enforcement mea- plicated measurement, affected by enforcement, is the use of electronic sures. The sites also publish the cur- the speed of the vehicle. The method tools in law enforcement [19]. We rent locations of mobile automated of calculating whether an offense shall distinguish between the first enforcement units and advertise has been committed differs accord- and second generations of e- devices that claim to prevent a cam- ing to the type of goods vehicle and enforcement. era from clearly photographing a the applicable regulations. In the The first generation of e-enforce- license plate [10]. E-enforcement case of driving times regulations, the ment tools provided means of “auto- has the potential to allow a “zero calculation relies on the combination mated enforcement.” The three most tolerance” approach to be adopted of driving time, rest time, and the common forms of automated [24]. In the words of Bovens and type of activities conducted when enforcement [10] involve the use of Zouridis [6]: “Information and stationary. This calculation is a com- cameras to enforce existing laws Communication Technology makes plex one: various configurations of against red light running [8], [10], it possible to perfect the legality of driving and rest times can constitute [16], [17], [19], [22] [24], speed the execution in the extreme.” a violation, while a deficit of rest violations [10], [23], and entering time within a certain period can be railway crossings when the gates are Notable Characteristics compensated in another. down [10], [15]. Other examples of What are the main characteristics of A second characteristic of first e-enforcement mentioned only the first generation of e-enforce- generation e-enforcement is that the briefly in the literature involve the ment, and what differences are to be systems record incidental viola- enforcement of laws against failure found in the second generation? tions, at one moment in time at one to pay tolls, high-occupancy vehicle Table I presents the most significant particular location. Second genera- lane violations, tailgating and differences. (The table and its sub- tion e-enforcement is concerned aggressive driving, electronic toll sequent notes are based on the two with structural, ongoing illegal collection systems, and remote forms of second generation e- behavior. The systems monitor the sensing of vehicle emissions [4], enforcement measures examined behavior of regulatees through time [5], [10], [21]. during the current research.) and at various locations and collate Automated enforcement is now The first notable characteristic of the observations. in large-scale use throughout the the first generation is that enforce- The WIM system comprises a world. Bochner [5] reports that ment takes place on the basis of a number of measuring points at vari- automated enforcement is in place single behavioral variable: has the ous locations. Each is connected to in over 75 countries. The literature regulatee jumped a red light or not? the others. Readings from the vari- on automated traffic enforcement, Has the regulatee exceeded the ous locations, taken at various mainly concerning red light running speed limit or not? The conclusion moments in time, are combined to and speeding, shows a positive pic- automatically follows from the mea- produce an integrated picture for ture for enforcement possibilities. surement. The second generation each regulatee. Similarly, the digital Automated traffic enforcement has concerns a combination of behav- tachograph is permanently installed proven very effective in reducing ioral variables, whereupon a conclu- in the vehicle, and is thus able to violations and accidents [8], [15], sion can be drawn only after analy- register the driver’s behavior on an [16], [17], [19], [24]. When sis and calculations. The situations ongoing basis. Wissinger, Hummer et al. [24] are more complex. Thirdly, the first generation asked focus groups to name positive In the case of Weigh in Motion, records “first order information,” aspects of automated camera for example, not only the weight of which serves only to record the enforcement, responses included the total load, but also the load on specific violation. Enforcement is personnel savings, constant moni- toring, and the ability to help control crime and violations. Red light Table I cameras are strongly supported by Comparison Of First And Second Generation E-Enforcement Measures public opinion [24]. However, there First generation e-enforcement Second generation e-enforcement are exceptions. Some authors state that motorists oppose the introduc- One dimensional Multi-dimensional tion of automated traffic enforce- Incidental Structural ment and have attempted to influ- Geared towards individual offenses: Geared towards patterns: second order ence politicians [4], [21]. Various first order information information web sites exist on which opponents

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 | 39 confined to the individual offender enforcement official and regula- adopt the behavior concerned, and the individual offense. Second tee. Sometimes this process is nec- avoiding controls, complying with generation e-enforcement tools are essary because the regulatee is the letter but not with the spirit of the able to aggregate data, whereupon ignorant of the law. Sometimes, it law and so on [9], [13]. attention shifts from enforcement is necessary because the regulatee As stated earlier, research into at the individual level to that at the is in a position of power and the the first generation of e-enforcement measures reveals a degree of opposition. Regulatees develop Automated enforcement strategies to elude prosecution; is now in large-scale use they avoid known locations of automated enforcement units, or throughout the world. use devices to prevent a camera clearly photographing their vehi- collective level. The “second order relationship between enforcement cle’s license plate. Nevertheless, information” can be used to assess official and regulatee is therefore the first generation of e-enforce- risks, set priorities, identify pat- interdependent. ment is regarded as having been terns, and plan capacity. In the sanction style, informa- successful and effective. To our The digital tachograph links data tion is crucial. Provided the knowledge, current research has relating to the driving and rest times enforcement official has correct not yet explored the success of sec- to the individual driver, and records information concerning the regula- ond generation e-enforcement. We background information that will tee’s behavior, he can take the address the specific question of enable the relevant authority to appropriate action. E-enforcement what influence second generation establish, say, the context of an acci- is attractive in this situation, in that e-enforcement measures have on dent. Information such as the speed it provides more, and better, infor- regulatees’ strategic behavior. and distance traveled in the past 24 mation about behavior than the tra- The method adopted in this hours, all card entries, and any ditional forms of observation. research is that of qualitative case attempts at fraud will be recorded. The second generation of e- study. We opted for this method for The WIM system establishes con- enforcement tools appear promising two main reasons. Firstly, scientific nections between types of violation, in this regard. They involve not only research into e-enforcement is still in types of vehicle, load, haulage oper- the enforcement of a single behav- its infancy. Secondly, because empir- ators, the country of origin of those ioral variable, with an automation ical research provides a matter-of- operators, and points in time. and standardization of observations fact picture of the actual pros and at the individual level as in the first cons of e-enforcement. We confined Theory, Research generation, but the enforcement of our research to only two case studies Questions, and Method several behavioral variables, inte- because the number of available case The literature frequently distinguish- grated in time and place. In combi- studies that satisfied the selection cri- es between two styles of enforce- nation, they provide aggregated teria was limited. These criteria ment [9], [20]. The first is that of information. One interesting ques- were: the presence of empiric mater- “sanction,” “compulsion,” “coer- tion is therefore whether second ial, the scope of technology in the cion,” and “penalization.” In this generation e-enforcement will pro- enforcement process, and societal paper, we refer to this as the “sanc- vide the enforcement official with relevance. Moreover, we wished to tion style.” It is based on the central better information as the basis for obtain a full and detailed picture of notion that violation of the regula- better enforcement strategies. each case study. The focus of our tions must be penalized to ensure that The compromise style relies on research is the second generation of regulatee observes the regulations in the interaction between enforcement e-enforcement. We do not set out to the future. Unremitting enforcement official and regulatee, who negotiate compare the first and second genera- of legislation “to the letter” is the key with each other. In the literature con- tions with each other. Rather, we concern: there is less attention for the cerning the relationship between compare the situation with the sec- interaction with the regulatee. these two parties, we see consider- ond generation in place to that before The second style relies on key- able attention devoted to the strate- the introduction of e-enforcement. words such as “compliance,” gic behavior, or “game playing” of The case studies were conducted “conciliation,” “compromise” and regulatees. They attempt to defer between January and August 2003 “remedialism.” We shall use the enforcement, citing the unreason- with the assistance of the Dutch term “compromise style.” Here, able nature of the rules, presenting Transport and Water Management enforcement is a process of con- excuses and “cover stories,” claim- Enforcement agency. The method sultation and negotiation between ing to have had no option but to entailed an average of ten semi-

40 | IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 structured in-depth interviews per squads halted heavy goods vehicles Center for Transportation Research , case study. Respondents were repre- and led them to a parking space at at the University of Texas at Austin sentatives of the regulating authori- the side of the road. The vehicles (see, for example, [12], [14]). An ties, regulates, and e-enforcement were selected by appearance: trail- innovative application based on the system developers. These inter- ers with a large bulge on top or WIM system has recently been views were complemented by a with sagging axles stood a good developed in the Netherlands, by desk study of internal documents chance of being stopped and linking the WIM itself with cameras provided by the respondent organi- weighed, as did vehicles from (WIM-Vid, video) and registration zations, the Internet, and the exist- haulage companies with a bad rep- databases (Fig. 1). ing literature. A full account of the utation, or vehicles carrying a spe- Induction loops are placed in the case studies and research methodol- cific type of freight known to have road to register the passage of travel- ogy is to be found in [25]. a tendency towards overloading. ing vehicles, along with sensors that Once a driver had been led to the record the axle configuration and the Two Case Studies side of the road, he was required to axle loads. The axle configuration drive his vehicle slowly onto a indicates the type of vehicle, thereby Weigh in Motion with Video weighing platform and to stop at specifying the norms that apply to it. Overloading of heavy goods vehicles each axle. The weighing platform Cameras above and beside the road can take two forms: the vehicle as a determined the load on the axles. If photograph the registration number, whole can be overloaded or there can overloading was discovered, an time of violation, any hazardous be an excessive load on one of the official report was produced. substances sign displayed, and the axles. Both types of overloading vehicle as a whole. An infrared cam- cause damage to roads and danger- E-Enforcement era is also in place for night-time ous situations. As overloading repre- A definition of Weigh in Motion is photographs. All passing heavy sents a form of unfair competition, “the process of estimating the total goods vehicles are monitored 24 both types of overloading are liable weight of a moving vehicle and the hours a day. The measuring points to penalties as an economic offense. part of that weight carried by each are indicated by road signs. wheel, each axle or axle group or a Enforcement officers can watch Original Enforcement combination thereof, by measuring images of overloaded heavy goods Before any electronic enforcement and analysing the dynamic tyre vehicles in real time, either on the system was available, enforcement forces of the vehicle” [11]. Much of spot or from a remote location. The officials and police conducted inci- the technological development of the data from the WIM-Vid system is dental roadside checks. Motorcycle WIM system has been done at the automatically linked to the registra-

Roadside System Central System WIM - Sensors Camera + LED Server and Database

Printer

Computer

Roadside Computer ISDN-Router ISDN-Router

Datacommunication

ISDN-2 ISDN-2 ISDN

Fig. 1. Weigh in motion with video system.

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 | 41 tion data held by the Dutch Road Original Enforcement E-Enforcement Transport Directorate (RDW) Cen- A tachograph is a mandatory piece In 1997 the European Union Trans- tre for Vehicle Technology and of equipment in heavy goods vehi- port Council ordered the mandatory Information, thereby linking the cles. It records the driving and rest introduction of the digital tacho- information about the violation times of the driver. From 1975 graph. Technical specifications have with the name of the company until the present day, the tacho- been published and arrangements which owns or operates the offend- graph has been analog, i.e., for enforcing with the digital tacho- ing vehicle. WIM-Vid is used to mechanical. When using an analog graph have been made. The digital tachograph is a piece of equipment that is now to be E-enforcement has the potential installed in every heavy goods vehi- to allow a “zero tolerance” cle or bus. As with the analog tachograph, the basis is a “motion sensor” approach to be adopted. in the gearbox. Like its analog counterpart, the digital tachograph registers speed and distance and links select violators, who are subse- tachograph, drivers are required to these to date and time (Fig. 2). quently checked for overloading insert a paper disc into the In order to link the data to a per- using a weighing platform. Viola- machine during their shift. A sen- son, the driver carries a personal tors found to be in violation of the sor in the gearbox measures the “smartcard.” When a driver changes regulations must remedy the situa- speed of the vehicle and the dis- vehicle, he takes the smartcard with tion on the spot and will always tance traveled, and a stylus traces him and inserts it into the tacho- receive a penalty. these details on the wax layer of graph of the next vehicle. The the paper disc. The driver takes his tachograph writes to the driver’s Legal Aspects and paper disc with him when he smart card and to its own memory. Privacy Concerns changes vehicle, and is required to If a driver should operate the vehicle National law in the Netherlands carry the discs for the last eight without inserting a smartcard, the does not allow for sanctioning based days with him during working tachograph will still register the data on the Weigh-in-Motion data. hours. The relevant operator com- in its own memory, but without link- Therefore, the system can only be pany is required to keep all dri- ing it to a name. The data is stored used for “preventive” applications. vers’ discs on file for one year. on the driver’s smartcard for 28 days In order to sanction overloading, The Transport and Water Man- and in the tachograph’s memory for enforcement officials must still agement Enforcement agency con- one year. Each enforcement official operate the measuring points and ducts inspections on the roads and also carries a smartcard. When he direct supposedly overloaded trucks at company premises. During road- inserts this into the tachograph dur- to a static weighing platform on a side checks, the enforcing officer ing a roadside inspection, he can nearby parking lot. asks the driver to produce his tacho- download all the data from the The weigh-in-motion data is graph discs and he reads whether tachograph’s memory. transported only in encrypted form. that driver has taken enough breaks The company has special compa- Once the WIM-vid data is linked to and sufficient rest. A company visit ny smartcards. These allow the data the company identities, the data is is only carried out if violations are from all the vehicles’ hard disks to only accessible to the enforcement suspected, for example on the basis be downloaded to its computer. agency. Pictures of trucks are only of roadside inspections. As stated Companies are obliged to store all kept in case of a violation. Because above, companies are required to data in a central file for one year. of these precautions and because of store their drivers’ tachograph discs During a company visit, the enforce- the absence of direct sanctioning, for one year. During a company vis- ment official can view the entire privacy concerns were limited. it, the enforcement official takes database. In the future, the Transport away with him the pile of tacho- and Water Management Enforce- Digital Tachograph graph discs from the previous year. ment agency would like to see the Tired drivers drive less safely; this The discs are inspected by scanning companies submit their data on a is the reason underlying the exis- them one by one into a computer mandatory basis. Finally, there are tence of legislation governing dri- program which is able to detect vio- also workshop smartcards. Each ving and rest times for the drivers lations. Companies are sometimes workshop authorized to install digi- of buses and heavy goods vehi- asked to submit their paper discs to tal tachographs has a smartcard that cles. Violating these rules is an the enforcement agency on a volun- allows full access to the tachograph economic offense. tary basis. and its settings [1], [2].

42 | IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 Workshop Components in the Vehicle Authorities

Authorities Software Software

Driver Data Card Interface Control Card

Workshop Card Roadside Check

Fleet Operator Office Service Systems Company Check

Software Company Certificate Fleet Card Management Analysis Storage Software

Fig. 2. Digital tachograph system [7].

Legal Aspects E-Enforcement have operated this vehicle in the and Privacy Concerns and Information past year. Similarly, while the driver The European law that prescribes was required to retain analog discs the introduction of the digital tacho- More first-order information for eight working days, his smart- graph, does not provide enough con- facilitates operational card records the data for the past 28 ditions for effective enforcement. enforcement. working days. The digital tacho- Mandatory downloading and storing In both case studies, e-enforcement graph also serves to reduce the time of tachograph data on a company appears to result in a greater quanti- required to conduct an inspection on level is therefore prescribed addi- ty of first order information that can company premises. Enforcement tionally by Dutch national law. Pri- be used in operational enforcement. officials used to have to read a vast vacy concerns are not a central issue, Previously, enforcement of over- stack of individual discs. Now, they probably because the digital tacho- loading regulations relied on inci- receive all data in one digital file. graph succeeds the analog tacho- dental spot-checks. Weigh in Motion This improved efficiency enables graph, which in principle has quite monitors 24 hours a day at six mea- the same number of enforcement the same impact on drivers and suring points. While enforcement officials to control a larger number transport companies. officials used to have information of operators. about only those vehicles that were Observations pulled over, they now have data More second-order information We shall present observations relating to all passing vehicles. and pattern recognition leads to drawn from the case studies in The discs from analog tacho- new strategies at the collective line with the two research ques- graphs provided information about level. tions. First, we consider the one particular driver only. The digi- In both case studies, e-enforcement impact of e-enforcement on the tal tachograph provides two sources may be seen to result in a greater provision of information and of information: the driver’s smart- quantity of second-order informa- related procedures, before going card and the memory of the device tion, more opportunities for pattern on to consider the impact on the itself. An enforcement official who recognition, and possibilities for interaction between enforcement downloads information from the new enforcement strategies at the official and regulatee, to include device in the vehicle gains all infor- supra-individual (collective) level. aspects of strategic behavior. mation pertaining to all drivers who It is likely that companies will

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 | 43 eventually be required to submit all have led to new enforcement Strategic behavior reduced at the tachograph data “on line” to the strategies: level of the instruments. enforcement agency. The onus of In the original enforcement prac- responsibility therefore shifts from ■ Targeted weight controls. tices addressing overloading, the enforcement official to the regu- Previously, roadside inspections enforcement officials experienced latee. The enforcement official can were rather random in nature, and considerable strategic behavior or achieve greater efficiency in valuable manpower was wasted on “game playing” on the part of reg- enforcement, and can extend the inspecting vehicles that were within ulatees. The earlier systems of scope of control. the prescribed limits. Weigh in enforcement addressing both over- The original enforcement of Motion enables offenders to be sin- loading and driving/rest times gave overloading regulations focused on gled out for roadside inspections. rise to much strategic behavior. the individual vehicle. A violation Types of vehicles that were previ- Every driver knew how to manipu- would be detected and penalized, ously not inspected because compli- late the analog tachograph. A sim- whereupon the enforcement process ance was “assumed” are now sub- ple paperclip attached to the essen- was at an end. The new Weigh in ject to targeted controls. tial moving parts was enough to Motion system records license make the device record an extend- plates and hence establishes a direct ■ Company visits. ed rest period. Special cables could link between violations and the Enforcement officials now visit the be used to stop the device, or fuses company responsible. This enables ten “worst offenders” and confront could be removed. Other tried and enforcement officials to identify fre- the management of those companies tested methods included “clock- quent offenders. with the facts: they have hard evi- ing” (turning the clock and vehicle odometer back) or entering a false entry signal. Some “do-it-yourself The full and unremitting (DIY) enthusiasts” went so far as to modify the quartz crystals of the application of the rules in a clock in such a way as to enable time itself to be slowed down or sanction style could lead to a loss speeded up [1], [2]. Fraud with the of legitimacy. analog tachograph formed one of the prime reasons for introducing its digital counterpart. What The WIM system also enables dence of all offenses committed by opportunities for similar strategic patterns to be distilled from the the drivers employed by that compa- behavior exist with WIM and the violations recorded. For example, ny and demand that measures be tak- digital tachograph? 70 percent of overloading offenses en. Enforcement officials are not The digital tachograph has been were shown to relate to the over- able to impose sanctions or penalties deliberately designed to preclude loading of only one axle, rather during these visits, but can threaten tampering. Security is “state of the than the vehicle as a whole. In most more intensive roadside controls for art.” The connections with the cases, the axle concerned was that the company concerned. motion sensor in the gearbox are at the very front of the vehicle. sealed. The device has far fewer con- Enforcement officials have discov- ■ Information to the industry. nections than its analog predecessor. ered that, in most cases, it is not the Another approach involves, consul- There is no means of entering infor- actual weight of the load that leads tation with selected companies mation, other than from the motion to a violation, but improper distrib- regarding loading practices and sensor itself. All components are ution of that load on the vehicle. technological solutions that will molded into the tachograph body, Another significant new finding reduce axle load or improve the dis- which cannot be disassembled. The has been made. Some types of tribution of load on the vehicle. device will record all manipulation transport used to be subject to attempts with a special code, which extremely infrequent inspection E-Enforcement it then presents to the enforcement because enforcement officials and Strategic Behavior official during an inspection. believed that overloading of these What influence does e-enforcement The Weigh in Motion system types was unlikely. However, have on the strategic behavior of records every instance of overload- Weigh in Motion proved them to be regulatees? How do WIM and the ing. Drivers can attempt to mislead high-risk groups. digital tachograph affect the interac- the measuring points, but the design The identification of frequent tion between enforcement official of the system automatically pre- offenders and pattern recognition and regulatee? cludes success in doing so. Drivers

44 | IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 who change lanes to avoid the sen- nical: for some types of vehi- ■ Companies may, for example, sors will be photographed, besides cle, it is simply not possible refuse to cooperate with on- which the detection loops cover the to find a technical solution to site inspections, devising entire breadth of the road, includ- prevent single-axle overload- countless strategies to frus- ing lanes that may not be used by ing. Before the introduction trate the enforcement offi- heavy goods vehicles. Tampering of WIM the overloading of cials’ work. They may refuse with license plates is similarly one axle was hardly enforced. entry to their premises, they fruitless. Where the system cannot ■ Driving times and rest times could withhold all but the automatically recognize the num- are established by European minimum required informa- ber, it will be read from a photo- legislation. Enforcement offi- tion, they could ensure that graph later. Driving over the sensors cials can penalize drivers for a the vehicles and drivers are all in groups will also prove ineffective, violation committed some time elsewhere at the time of the since cameras are positioned on in the past, and in another inspection, and so forth. both sides of the road, whereupon country. It appears that the the license plate can never be con- manner in which enforcement It would be a step further if cealed. The conclusion must be that officials interpret the regula- companies or sections of the the opportunities for “game play- tions varies from country to industry were to attempt to frus- ing” at the level of the instruments country, as do the penalties trate the use of the instruments are far more limited than was previ- they can, or choose to, impose. themselves. ously the case. The introduction of Transport companies believe e-enforcement has created an inten- that the introduction of the dig- ■ A significant risk attaching to sive and practically watertight sys- ital tachograph will exacerbate the digital tachograph is the tem of control. the problem of inequality of use of the “workshop smart- treatment, since it enables card,” which enables work- Strong incentives to strategic enforcement officials to con- shop mechanics to change the behavior at collective level. sider driving and rest times settings of the device. Experi- The interaction between enforce- over a very much longer period ence with the analog tacho- ment official and regulatee is very than was previously the case. graph reveals instances in much reliant on the degree to which which workshop staff have the regulatee regards the rules and The strength of second-genera- been bribed to tamper with their enforcement to be legitimate. tion e-enforcement thus becomes its the equipment. Bribery or Here, we see a remarkable phenom- weakness. It enables full enforce- unchecked circulation of enon. Now that the intensity of ment on a larger scale, but given the workshop smartcards could enforcement has been greatly complexity of the behavior that open the way to large-scale increased by e-enforcement meth- enforcement must address, there fraud with the digital tacho- ods, the legitimacy of the rules and could well be some loss of legitima- graph. Indeed, Anderson [1], their enforcement is more likely to cy. Where the legitimacy of the reg- [2] predicts just this. It also be questioned by the regulatees. ulations or their enforcement is con- seems tempting to manipulate Two examples: tentious, there will be major the downloaded data for all incentives to adopt strategic behav- drivers while on the compa- ■ The majority of overloading ior. If there is absolutely no oppor- ny’s computer. This is the violations relate to the over- tunity for such behavior at the oper- data that enforcement offi- loading of only one axle, due ational level (the system is, as we cials check during a company to improper distribution of the have seen, watertight), then it may visit. Although rigid security load as a whole. Regulatees manifest itself at other levels. It measures are in place, we are therefore not overloaded could, for example, shift from the must consider the possibility as such, since the weight of individual level (the driver) to the that the fraudsters will even- the vehicle is within the pre- collective level of the company, or tually prove smarter than the scribed limits. They are mere- even the industry as a whole. When technology. If they succeed in ly too heavy on one axle. a company or a large section of the cracking the security, the risk Many consider the strict industry indulges in strategic behav- of widespread fraud involving enforcement of the overload- ior, the potential impact will be digital tachographs is even ing rules on the basis of just many times greater than that of greater than that involving the one axle as unjustified. After strategic behavior at the individual analog version. all, the cause of the overload- level. Some examples of collective ■ Strategic behavior at a collec- ing is not economic but tech- strategic behavior are: tive level is also visible with

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 | 45 regard to WIM. Thirty min- ■ Second generation e-enforce- enforcement of behaviors that are utes after a measuring point is ment offers opportunities for more complex than those addressed staffed, the number of over- intensive, information-based by the first generation. At the same loaded vehicles falls dramati- controls and inspections. time, the full and unremitting appli- cally. After two hours, there Strategic behavior remains in cation of the rules in a sanction style are practically no overloaded place even after the introduc- could lead to a loss of legitimacy vehicles at all. The enforce- tion of e-enforcement. These (see also [3]). Ideally, enforcement ment officials assume that observations are in line with officials who use the second genera- drivers are communicating the familiar insights with tion e-enforcement tools should with each other and either regard to the first generation enjoy greater discretion in applying the rules more flexibly. Literature on law enforcement shows that in In complex and ambiguous complex and ambiguous situations law enforcement should be accom- situations, law enforcement should panied by discretion in order to be effective [3], [18], [20]. We argue be accompanied by discretion in that in our case more elements of a order to be effective. compromise style should be intro- duced. This means that second generation e-enforcement brings with it stop or select an alternative of e-enforcement measures. a difficult task. While it enhances route when they know that a ■ Second generation e-enforce- the opportunities for effective and measuring point is in opera- ment enables pattern recogni- efficient enforcement, it must be tion. These opportunities for tion at the supra-individual used with due moderation in order strategic behavior also cast a level, e.g., at that of the com- to prevent loss of legitimacy and the different light on another pany or (sections of) the trans- adoption of collective strategic finding: companies that have port industry. The case studies behavior. been visited by the enforce- show that this pattern recogni- This task prompts an important ment officials do not appear tion opens the way to new recommendation with regard to the in subsequent statistics. This enforcement strategies, per- introduction of second generation e- may be because they then haps targeting companies that enforcement, namely that it should observe the rules. However, are known frequent violators be accompanied by a strengthening given the possibilities for of the regulations. of the professional autonomy of the strategic behavior, it may also ■ Because controls can now be enforcement official, for at least be because they avoid all more intensive and are practi- three reasons: measuring points thereafter. cally watertight, there can be some contention regarding the ■ The enforcement official It must therefore be concluded legitimacy of the rules and the must be able to weigh the that opportunities for strategic behav- manner in which they are likely effect of full enforce- ior do exist. The question of whether applied. ment against the possible loss this behavior is being adopted in ■ There are now very few oppor- of legitimacy. If the loss of practice is more difficult to answer by tunities for strategic behavior legitimacy is seen as too means of research. After all, it is in at the individual level. Howev- great, he must be able to exer- the regulatees’own interests to ensure er, there are stronger incen- cise discretion. that strategic behavior remains invisi- tives to adopt strategic behav- ■ The enforcement official ble. Nevertheless, we may state that ior at the collective level, must be able to weigh the there are now marked incentives to partly because the legitimacy likely effect of full enforce- adopt strategic behavior on the col- of the regulations and their ment against the likelihood lective level, and that there are also application is now contested. of encouraging strategic various (technical) possibilities for behavior at the collective strategic behavior at this level. Paradoxical Picture level. If the costs of counter- A somewhat paradoxical picture ing strategic behavior are Implications therefore develops around the sec- greater than the gains of Based on the analysis of the two ond generation e-enforcement mea- strict enforcement, the bal- instruments, the following conclu- sures. They offer many possibilities ance will tip in favor of a sions can be drawn: for more effective and efficient more moderate approach.

46 | IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 ■ While enforcement at the that if a violation is beyond a Belgium; Ertico, 2002; www.ertico.com. individual level will no longer certain point in history, offi- [8] W.D. Glauz, “Using automated enforcement to reduce speeding,” ITE J, vol. 68, no. 6, require the enforcement officials refrain from certain p. 22, 1998. cial to exercise any significant forms of sanctioning. [9] K. Hawkins,Environment and Enforce- degree of discretion, the ment, Regulation and the Social Definition of Pollution. Oxford, U.K. Clarendon, 1984. activities at collective level These recommendations arise [10] Institute of Transportation Engineers, (e.g., company visits) will from the paradoxical situation cited Automated Enforcement in Transportation, indeed do so. Enforcement at above, and may be regarded as an Informational Report of the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Washington D.C., the collective level cannot be somewhat counter-intuitive. After Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1999. readily standardized, and all, second generation e-enforce- [11] A.J. Katz and A.H. Rakha, “Weigh-in- therefore demands appropri- ment renders enforcement activities motion evaluation; field and modeling frame- work and case study of truck weigh station ate professional autonomy. watertight, whereupon it should operation,” Tech Transportation Institute, become a self-executing process Blacksburg, VA, 2002. The following are examples of how demanding no professional autono- [12] C.E. Lee, B. Izadmehr, and R.B. Machemehl, “Demonstration of weigh-in- discretion and professional autonomy my whatsoever on the part of the motion systems for data collection and can be exercised in our cases: enforcement official. However, the enforcement,” Center for Transportation risk of legitimacy loss, the risk of Research, University of Texas at Austin, ■ Austin, TX, Res. Rep. 557-1F, Dec. 1985. Enforcement officials could collective strategic behavior being [13] D. McBarnet and C. Whelan, “Challeng- make a distinction between encouraged, and the gains to be ing the regulators: Strategies for resisting con- overloading on one axle and made by shifting enforcement onto trol,” in Regulation and Deregulation - Policy and Practice in the Utilities and Financial Ser- overloading of the whole the supra-individual level render vices Industries. C. McCrudden, Ed. Oxford, vehicle. As overloading on such autonomy absolutely essential. U.K.: Clarendon, 1999, p. 450. one axle is mainly a techno- [14] R.B. Machemehl, C.M. Walton, and C.E. Lee, “Acquiring traffic data by in-motion logical problem, enforcement Author Information weighing,” Transportation Engineering J.,vol. officials could offer their Marieke Koopmans-van Berlo is a 101, no. 4, pp. 681-689, 1975. expertise to transport compa- Ph.D. student, and Hans de Bruijn is [15] L.J. Meadow, “Automated enforcement at highway grade crossings,” ITE J., vol. 68, no. nies, to find solutions. If a a full Professor, at the Department 6, p. 24, 1998. transport company is in the of Organization and Management at [16] J.P. Perone, “Automated enforcement: An process of adapting the vehi- the Faculty of Technology, Policy, Australian perspective,” ITE J., vol. 68, no. 6, p. 25, 1998. cles, officials could refrain and Management, Delft University [17] D.E. Ruby and A.G. Hobeika, “Assess- from sanctioning until the of Technology, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 ment of red light running cameras in Fairfax problem is solved. It could be GA, Delft, the Netherlands. Hans de County, Virginia,” Transportation Quart., vol. 57, no. 3, pp.33-48, 2003. decided in general that com- Bruijn is also Program Leader and [18] J.T. Scholz, “Discretion and enforcement panies are offered a transition- former Associate Dean at the efficiency: Problems of complexity, contin- al arrangement for a certain Netherlands’ School of Public gency and corruption,” in Administrative Dis- cretion and Public Policy Implementation,K. period of time, in order to Administration. Email: j.a.debrui- Hibbeln and D. Shumavon, Eds. New York, invest in more robust vehicles. [email protected]. NY: Praeger, 1986, pp. 145-156. ■ Concerning the digital tacho- [19] D.M. Smith, J. McFadden, et al., “Auto- graph, enforcement officials mated enforcement of red light running tech- References nology and programs - A review,” Transporta- could cooperate with trans- [1] R. Anderson, “On the security of digital tion Res. Record, vol. 1734, pp. 29-37, 2000. port companies in order to tachographs,” Computer Security ESORICS98. [20] M.K. Sparrow, The Regulatory Craft, establish an enforcement lev- vol. 1485, pp. 111-125, 1998. Controlling Risks, Solving Problems and Man- [2] R. Anderson, Security Engineering, A aging Compliance. Washington DC: Brook- el playing field. If regulations Guide to Building Dependable Distributed Sys- ings, 2000. are interpreted differently in tems. New York, NY: Wiley, 2001. [21] S. Turner and A.E. Polk, “Overview of other countries, enforcement [3] E. Bardach and R. A. Kagan, Going by the automated enforcement in transportation,” ITE Book: the Problem of Regulatory Unreason- J., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 20-29, 1998. officials could consult the ableness. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. [22] E.E. Walter, “The case for red light cam- transport associations about Press, 1982. eras,” ITE J., vol. 68, no. 6, p.26, 1998. their views on the different [4] R. Bartoskewitz, P. Carson et al., “Council [23] C.G. Wilmot and M. Khanal, “Effect of report summary: Automated enforcement in trans- speed limits on speed and safety: A review,” interpretations. portation,” ITE J., vol. 69, no. 11, p. 47, 1999. Transport Rev., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 315-329, 1999. ■ The tachograph enables [5] B.S. Bochner, “Automated enforcement [24] L.M. Wissinger, J.E. Hummer et al., enforcement officials to con- reduces crashes,” ITE J., vol. 68, no. 6, p. 12, “Using focus groups to investigate issues of red 1998. light running,” Transportation Res. Record, sider driving and rest times [6] M. Bovens and S. Zouridis, “From street- vol. 1734, pp.38-45, 2000. over a much longer period level to system-level bureaucracies; How ICT [25] M. Koopmans-van Berton, E-Enforce- than was the case with the is transforming administrative discretion and ment: Research on Law Enforcement and the constitutional control,” Public Admin. Rev., Use of ICT at the Transport and Water Man- analog tachograph. The use vol. 62, no. 2. pp. 174-184, 2002. agement Inspectorate. Delft, the Netherlands: of discretion could imply [7] Ertico, The Digital Tachograph. Brussels, Delft Univ. Technology, 2003 (in Dutch).

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE | SPRING 2006 | 47