22 August 2025 | Young Drivers Labs and Research Inc.; Bapreet Kaur and Andrew Marek

Introduction

Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) systems represent one of the most significant road safety innovations of the past three decades, implemented across diverse jurisdictions worldwide with the shared goal of reducing crash risks among novice drivers. These programs follow a structured, phased approach that typically includes learner, provisional, and open license phases, designed to gradually increase new drivers' exposure to complex driving situations while building essential skills and experience.

However, despite widespread adoption and proven effectiveness in crash reduction, a critical examination of GDL programs reveals a fundamental disconnect between policy intentions and practical implementation. While these systems establish comprehensive frameworks for driver development, emerging evidence suggests that the most crucial element - adequate practice and preparation - remains systematically insufficient across most jurisdictions (Bates et al., 2014; Ehsani et al., 2020).

Core Components and Global Framework

Most GDL programs worldwide share common structural elements, though their specific implementations vary considerably based on cultural, geographic, and regulatory contexts. The fundamental framework consists of three distinct phases designed to create a progressive learning environment.

The learner phase requires new drivers to practice under qualified supervision, typically involving written knowledge tests, vision screening, and supervised driving experience. During this phase, drivers must be accompanied by licensed adult supervisors, cannot drive independently, and must complete minimum practice requirements that vary significantly between jurisdictions.

The provisional phase introduces independent driving while maintaining restrictions on high-risk situations. Common restrictions include nighttime driving limitations, passenger restrictions (particularly for young passengers), zero-tolerance policies for alcohol and mobile phone use, and enhanced penalties for traffic violations. These restrictions aim to limit exposure to the highest-risk driving scenarios while allowing skill development.

The full license phase removes these restrictions once drivers demonstrate competency through testing and complete required time periods, typically ranging from 18 months to several years depending on the jurisdiction and driver age.

International Implementation Models and Structures

Australia - The Most Comprehensive Global Model

Australia operates arguably the world's most structured GDL system, with extended learning periods and comprehensive supervision requirements that far exceed most international standards.

New South Wales Structure (NSW Government, 2025a):

• Learner Phase (L Plates): Begins at age 16 with Driver Knowledge Test requirement

• Under 25 years: Must maintain learner status for 12 months and log 120 hours of supervised driving, including minimum 20 hours of night driving

• Over 25 years: Can progress to provisional licensing when ready, without mandatory hour requirements

• Provisional P1 (Red P Plates): Requires Hazard Perception Test and practical driving test, minimum 12-month duration

• Provisional P2 (Green P Plates): 24-month period with reduced restrictions

• Full License: Available after completing entire P2 phase

Australian systems emphasize professional driving instruction alongside family supervision, with most states requiring 100-120 hours of documented practice - significantly more than most other countries. The system also incorporates power-to-weight ratio restrictions for provisional drivers (where P1 and P2 drivers cannot operate vehicles with power-to-tare mass ratios exceeding 130kW per tonne, plus vehicles with modified engines requiring engineer approval or those classified as high-performance regardless of power ratio) and comprehensive logbook documentation requirements.

Drivers in NSW under 25 must complete detailed logbook entries for each driving session, including date, time, supervisor details, and driving conditions. The system offers accelerated completion through professional instruction (3 logbook hours per 1 hour of lessons, maximum 10 lessons) and the Safer Drivers Course (20 bonus hours after completing 50 actual hours). NSW provides both paper logbooks and the official Roundtrip Learner Logbook digital app, with Service NSW reviewing completed logbooks before approving driving tests (NSW Government, 2025b).

United States - State Variations with Early Licensing

The US pioneered modern GDL systems, with all 50 states now implementing some form of graduated licensing. American programs typically permit licensing at younger ages (15-16 years) while compensating through extended restriction periods.

Typical Structure:

• Learner Phase: Begins at 15-16 years depending on state

• Supervised Practice: 0-100 hours required, varying significantly by state

• Intermediate Phase: 6-12 months with nighttime and passenger restrictions

• Full License: Available at 16-18 years depending on state requirements

Notable Variations (IIHS, 2024):

• South Dakota: Permits learner licenses at 14 years – among the earliest in the U.S.

• New Jersey: Maintains one of the most restrictive programs with full licensing unavailable until age 18

• Texas: Allows learner permits at 15 with driver education completion

• California: Mandates 30 hours of formal driver education plus 6 hours of behind-the-wheel training for all applicants under 18

• Arkansas: Allows 14-year-olds to drive with instruction permits after passing written tests

• New Jersey: Requires novice driver decals for identification - the only state with this requirement for drivers under 21

• Michigan: Implements curfews as early as 10 PM for intermediate license holders

• Illinois: Maintains 9-month minimum holding period for learner permits with 50 hours of supervised practice including 10 hours at night

European Approaches - Professional Training Focus

European countries maintain varied approaches, often emphasizing intensive professional training over extended graduated restrictions.

Germany's Traditional Model:

• Minimum Age: 18 years for standard licensing (17 with parental supervision)

• Professional Training: Mandatory 25-45 hours with certified instructors

• Comprehensive Testing: Extensive theoretical and practical examinations

• Probationary Period: 2-year enhanced penalty period rather than graduated restrictions

United Kingdom's Simplified System:

• Learner Phase: Begins at age 17 (16 for disabled drivers)

• No Minimum Hours: No mandatory supervised practice requirements

• Probationary Period: 2-year enhanced penalty system with license revocation for 6+ penalty points

Canadian Provincial Systems

Canadian provinces operate GDL systems similar to Australia but with significant interprovincial variations and generally shorter time requirements.

Ontario Example:

• G1 (Learner): Age 16 minimum, 12-month holding period

• G2 (Intermediate): Road test required, nighttime and highway restrictions

• G (Full): Available after additional road test and minimum G2 period

Emerging Market Implementations

Countries like Serbia have recently implemented GDL systems with measurable positive outcomes (Stevanovic et al., 2022), demonstrating that effective graduated licensing extends beyond developed nations to countries with developing road safety infrastructure.

Statistical Evidence of GDL Effectiveness

Documented Safety Improvements

The statistical evidence for GDL effectiveness shows remarkable consistency across diverse implementations. Studies show that GDL programs have reduced the youngest drivers' crash risk by roughly 20 to 40% (Shope, 2007). An analysis by Johns Hopkins researchers found that graduated driver licensing programs reduce, by an average of 11 percent, the incidence of fatal crashes of 16-year-old drivers (Baker et al., 2006).

Quantified Benefits by Component:

• Overall Effectiveness: GDL programs show consistent 20-40% reduction in crash risk among youngest drivers

• Fatal Crash Reduction: 11% average reduction in fatal crashes among 16-year-old drivers

• International Evidence: New Zealand's graduated licensing program found a sustained 7-8% reduction in teen driver crash injuries (Langley et al., 1999)

Component-Specific Effectiveness

Individual GDL elements demonstrate varying degrees of effectiveness. NHTSA research indicates that teens are less experienced at the task of driving, requiring more deliberate attention than experienced drivers (NHTSA, 2024), while studies suggest that drivers 16 to 24 are somewhat more likely than other age groups to drive while drowsy.

Comprehensive programs incorporating multiple restrictions simultaneously show greater effectiveness than those implementing individual components (Shope, 2007), suggesting that the graduated approach's cumulative effect provides optimal safety benefits.

The Practice Gap: A Critical System Failure

Despite these documented successes, a fundamental problem emerges when examining the gap between policy requirements and actual practice preparation. This disconnect represents perhaps the most significant challenge facing modern GDL implementation worldwide.

The Reality of Insufficient Practice

Current evidence reveals a stark disparity between recommended practice hours and actual preparation levels across most GDL systems. Research from various sources indicates that practice requirements vary dramatically between countries, creating significant disparities in preparation levels. The UK's Department for Transport data shows that practice preparation becomes evident in driving test failure rates, with systematic failures stemming from insufficient practice and inadequate skill development rather than system design flaws (DVSA, 2025; Department for Transport, 2024).

According to official UK government statistics, learner drivers require comprehensive preparation but many attempt tests with insufficient practice hours, contributing to widespread test failures. The comprehensive preparation requirement reflects the complexity of modern driving environments, where learners must develop competencies across multiple domains simultaneously. Modern drivers face increasingly complex traffic scenarios involving advanced vehicle technologies, smart infrastructure systems, and diverse road users including cyclists, pedestrians, and automated vehicles.

However, a critical issue emerges when examining how today's smartphone-generation learners interact with traditional practice methods. Young people aged 15-20 have grown up with interactive, gamified learning environments and expect immediate feedback,social connectivity, and achievement-based progression systems. Traditional driving practice methods - repetitive maneuvers with minimal feedback and paper-based tracking-fundamentally disconnect from their learning preferences and fail to maintain engagement.

This generational mismatch creates a dual problem: not only do traditional practice methods fail to adequately expose learners to varied driving conditions, but they also fail to engage young learners effectively. Modern solutions must incorporate innovative approaches such as driving simulators, virtual reality training environments, and gamification strategies that can provide controlled exposure to high-risk scenarios while meeting the engagement expectations of digital natives. Gamified learning platforms could systematically guide learners through progressive skill-building exercises, ensuring comprehensive coverage of essential competencies while maintaining engagement through achievement-based progression systems that mirror successful educational technologies in other fields.

International Practice Disparities

These practice hour requirements vary dramatically between countries, creating significant disparities in preparation levels:

• Australia: Requires 100-120 hours of logged practice for drivers under 25 (NSW Government, 2025a)

• United States: Requirements range from 0-100 hours depending on state (IIHS, 2024)

• United Kingdom: No minimum practice hour requirements

• Germany: 12 hours of mandatory professional instruction with no additional supervised practice requirements

The Test Failure Crisis

The inadequacy of practice preparation becomes evident in driving test failure rates worldwide. Research consistently shows that drivers worldwide fail tests at high rates, with insufficient preparation being a primary factor in these failures (Department for Transport, 2024).

Analysis of Failure Patterns

The UK government's analysis of the top 10 reasons for driving test failure reveals that most failures stem from insufficient practice and inadequate skill development rather than system design flaws (Department for Transport, 2024). The most common failure reasons include:

1. Ineffective Junction Observations: Insufficient practice in complex traffic situations

2. Incorrect Mirror Use: Inadequate development of scanning habits

3. Unsafe Moving Off: Poor spatial awareness from limited practice

4. Poor Positioning: Inadequate experience with various road configurations

5. Traffic Light Response Issues: Insufficient exposure to signal-controlled intersections

These failure patterns consistently point to inadequate practice time and experience rather than inherent system deficiencies. Notably, these skills require repetitive practice and instant performance feedback for mastery - elements that could be significantly enhanced through interactive training environments. Contemporary teenagers who excel at complex video games requiring similar spatial reasoning, precise timing, and split-second decision-making often struggle with driving skills because conventional practice methods fail to provide the structured, level-based challenges and continuous assessment loops they expect from modern learning platforms.

Systemic Factors Contributing to Practice Inadequacy

Economic Barriers

The cost of adequate driving preparation creates significant barriers for many families. With professional driving instruction costs ranging from $30-80 USD per hour across different jurisdictions, achieving recommended practice levels becomes financially prohibitive for many families. This economic barrier disproportionately affects lower-income households, creating equity issues within GDL systems.

Time and Logistical Constraints

Modern family structures often lack the time and flexibility required for adequate supervised practice. Parents working multiple jobs, single-parent households, and families without appropriate vehicles face significant challenges in meeting practice hour requirements, even where such requirements exist. Additionally, many parents find themselves unprepared to connect effectively with tech-savvy teenagers who expect interactive, technology-enhanced learning experiences rather than conventional verbal instruction methods.

Generational Learning Preferences and Modern Instruction Methods

A critical factor undermining practice adequacy is the fundamental mismatch between conventional driving instruction methods and the learning preferences of today's digital native learners. Young people aged 15-20, who represent the primary GDL demographic, have grown up immersed in interactive, reward-based, and socially connected digital environments. Traditional driving practice methods - sitting passively in a car with minimal feedback, repetitive maneuvers, and outdated paper-based tracking systems - fail to engage this generation effectively.

Modern teenagers and young adults are accustomed to achievement-based progression systems, real-time performance analytics, leaderboards, virtual rewards, and social sharing of accomplishments - elements that are entirely absent from conventional driving instruction. This generational disconnect contributes significantly to inadequate practice preparation, as young learners lose motivation and focus when confronted with outdated instruction methods that don't align with their digital learning expectations.

Paper-Based Logbook Limitations and Digital Solutions

Many GDL systems fail to mandate adequate practice hours or provide insufficient guidance on effective practice strategies. The absence of comprehensive logbook systems in many jurisdictions means that practice quantity and quality remain unmonitored and inadequate. Traditional paper-based logbooks present particular challenges for modern learners who find them disconnected from their digital lifestyle and prone to loss, damage, or falsification.

Modern digital logbook systems offer transformative advantages that address both administrative and engagement challenges. Digital platforms with GPS tracking, automated time recording, and supervisor verification through mobile apps eliminate common problems with falsified entries while providing real-time progress visualization that appeals to the new generation learners. These systems can incorporate gamification elements such as achievement badges for completing specific driving conditions, progress leaderboards among peer groups, and social sharing features that make practice tracking engaging rather than burdensome. Advanced digital logbooks can also provide comprehensive learning analytics that track not just practice hours but practice quality, including types of roads and conditions experienced, specific skills practiced and mastered, and personalized coaching recommendations. This addresses the youth preference for immediate feedback while ensuring more effective skill development through data-driven insights.

Cultural Attitudes Toward Risk

In many cultures, there exists a disconnect between perception and reality regarding driving skill development. Many families and young drivers underestimate the practice time required to develop safe driving skills, leading to premature progression through GDL phases. This problem is exacerbated by the generational gap between parents who learned to drive using traditional methods and children who require more engaging, interactive learning approaches to maintain motivation throughout extended practice periods.

Enforcement and Compliance Challenges

Monitoring Difficulties

Even in systems with practice hour requirements, monitoring and enforcement remain problematic. Logbook systems rely on honest reporting, and many families lack understanding of what constitutes effective practice. Without robust verification systems, many drivers progress through GDL phases with inadequate preparation. The situation is further complicated by the disconnect between traditional paper-based tracking systems and the app-based expectations of contemporary teenagers, who often view such systems as obsolete and irrelevant to their learning process.

Circumvention of Requirements

Some families circumvent practice requirements through various means, including falsifying logbook entries, providing inappropriate supervision, or seeking licensing in jurisdictions with less stringent requirements. These circumvention strategies undermine the fundamental principles of graduated skill development.

The Consequences of Insufficient Practice

Post-License Safety Outcomes

The practice gap manifests in post-licensing safety outcomes. Research indicates that drivers who complete GDL programs with minimal practice show higher crash rates during their first year of independent driving compared to those who receive comprehensive preparation (Ehsani et al., 2020; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2025). This suggests that while GDL systems provide structural frameworks for safety, their effectiveness depends critically on adequate practice implementation.

Skill Development Deficiencies

Inadequately practiced drivers demonstrate persistent deficiencies in:

• Hazard Recognition: Limited experience reduces ability to identify potential dangers

• Decision-Making Speed: Insufficient practice time delays critical driving decisions

• Vehicle Control: Poor car handling skills from limited behind-the-wheel experience

• Traffic Integration: Difficulty merging safely into complex traffic patterns

Long-Term Safety Implications

The practice inadequacy problem extends beyond individual drivers to broader road safety outcomes. When large numbers of drivers enter the road system with insufficient preparation, overall traffic safety deteriorates, potentially negating some benefits of GDL implementation. This underscores the critical importance of adequate practice in realizing GDL program potential.

Toward Solutions: Addressing the Practice Gap

Enhanced Practice Requirements

Jurisdictions should establish evidence-based minimum practice hour requirements aligned with safety research. Australia's 120-hour requirement provides a model that other countries should consider adapting to their specific contexts, as demonstrated by international comparative research (NSW Government, 2025a; Chapman et al., 2014).

Structured Practice Programs (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2025)

Implementing structured practice programs with defined skill development objectives can improve practice quality. These programs should include:

• Progressive Skill Building: Systematic exposure to increasingly complex driving situations

• Diverse Environment Practice: Experience in various weather, traffic, and road conditions

• Professional Oversight: Integration of professional instruction with family supervision

Technology-Enhanced Monitoring

Modern technology offers solutions for improving practice monitoring and effectiveness through engaging platforms that appeal to young learners. Smartphone applications with comprehensive sensor features, telematics systems that provide real-time performance feedback, and interactive digital logbooks can provide better tracking of practice hours, driving conditions, and skill development progress while maintaining student motivation through achievement systems, social sharing capabilities, and progress visualization tools that align with their digital learning preferences.

Economic Support Mechanisms

Addressing economic barriers requires innovative funding approaches, including:

• Subsidized Instruction Programs: Government support for driving instruction costs

• Community-Based Programs: Shared vehicle and instructor resources

• Insurance Incentives: Premium reductions for comprehensive preparation

Future Directions and Recommendations

System Redesign Priorities

Future GDL system development should prioritize practice adequacy over structural complexity while recognizing the need to engage new learners through modern, interactive approaches. While graduated restrictions provide important safety benefits, they cannot substitute for comprehensive preparation and skill development delivered through methods that resonate with contemporary learning preferences. Systems must evolve to incorporate gamification elements, social learning opportunities, and technology integration that make extended practice periods engaging rather than burdensome for young learners.

Research and Evaluation Needs

Comprehensive research is needed to:

• Quantify Optimal Practice Requirements: Determine evidence-based practice hour standards for different contexts

• Evaluate Practice Quality: Develop metrics for assessing practice effectiveness beyond simple hour counting

• Monitor Long-Term Outcomes: Track safety outcomes based on preparation levels rather than just system compliance

International Coordination

Greater international cooperation can facilitate best practice sharing and development of evidence-based standards for driver preparation. Countries with successful models, particularly Australia, can provide guidance for system improvement in other jurisdictions.

Conclusion: The Practice Imperative

While Graduated Driver Licensing systems have demonstrated consistent effectiveness in reducing crash rates among novice drivers worldwide, their ultimate success depends critically on addressing the fundamental practice gap that undermines their potential. The evidence is clear: comprehensive GDL frameworks provide necessary structure, but inadequate practice preparation represents the most significant barrier to achieving optimal road safety outcomes.

The statistical reality reveals that most drivers worldwide enter independent driving with insufficient preparation, leading to high test failure rates and compromised post-licensing safety outcomes. Recent study data from National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine report demonstrates that teens with higher supervised practice exposure during the learner's permit period exhibit significantly reduced crash/near-crash and kinematic risky driving event rates in early independent driving phases - marking the first analysis to establish a statistically significant positive relationship between supervised practice volume and teen driver safety (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2025). This finding underscores that current practice levels in most jurisdictions fall far short of optimal safety standards.

The fundamental conclusion is stark: GDL systems worldwide are failing to achieve their full potential because people simply do not practice enough. Until this practice gap is systematically addressed through enhanced requirements, better monitoring, economic support, and cultural change, even the most sophisticated graduated licensing systems will continue to release inadequately prepared drivers onto our roads.

The challenge is not in designing better GDL systems - the frameworks exist and have proven effective. The critical challenge lies in ensuring that these systems are implemented with adequate practice requirements, proper monitoring, and sufficient support to enable all drivers to receive the preparation they need for safe, independent driving.

The path forward requires recognition that practice adequacy is not a secondary consideration but the cornerstone upon which all other GDL benefits depend. Only by prioritizing comprehensive preparation can these systems fulfill their promise of substantially safer roads for all users. The frameworks exist; the challenge now is ensuring they are properly implemented with the practice foundation that makes them truly effective.

References

1. Bates, L. J., et al. (2014). Graduated Driver Licensing: An international review. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal, 14(4), e432-e441. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4205052/

2. Baker, S. P., Chen, L. H., & Li, G. (2006, July 7). Graduated driver licensing reduces fatal crashes by 11 percent. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Retrieved from https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2006/baker-gdl

3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2025, August 4). Reducing risk for teen drivers. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/teen-drivers/prevention/index.html 

4. Chapman, E. A., Masten, S. V., & Browning, K. K. (2014). Graduated driver licensing and motor vehicle crashes involving teenage drivers: An exploratory age-stratified meta-analysis. Injury Prevention, 20(4), 249-259. Retrieved from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4103686/

5. Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA). (2025). Top 10 reasons for failing the driving test in Great Britain. GOV.UK. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/top-10-reasons-for-failing-the-driving-test/top-10-reasons-for-failing-the-driving-test-in-great-britain

6. Department for Transport. (2024). Driver and rider testing and instructor statistics: July to September 2024. GOV.UK. Release from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/driver-and-rider-testing-and-instructor-statistics-april-to-september-2024/driver-and-rider-testing-and-instructor-statistics-july-to-september-2024

7. Ehsani, J. P., Gershon, P., Grant, B. J. B., Zhu, C., Klauer, S. G., Dingus, T. A., & Simons-Morton, B. G. (2020). Learner driver experience and teenagers' crash risk during the first year of independent driving. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(6), 573-580. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0208

8. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). (2024). Teenagers: Graduated licensing laws. Retrieved from https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/teenagers/graduated-licensing-laws-table

9. Langley, J. D., Wagenaar, A. C., & Begg, D. J. (1999). Effectiveness of graduated driver licensing in reducing motor vehicle crashes. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 16(1), 47-56. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749379798001123

10. McCartt, A. T., Teoh, E. R., Fields, M., Braitman, K. A., & Hellinga, L. A. (2010). Graduated licensing laws and fatal crashes of teenage drivers: A national study. Traffic Injury Prevention, 11(3), 240-248. Retrieved from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20544567/

11. McDonald, C. C., Goodwin, A.H., Pradhan, A.K., Romoser, M. RE., & Williams, A.F. (2015). A review of hazard anticipation training programs for young drivers. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(1). Retrieved from https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(15)00071-3/fulltext

12. Masten, S. V., Foss, R. D., & Marshall, S. W. (2011). Graduated driver licensing and fatal crashes involving 16- to 19-year-old drivers. JAMA, 306(10), 1098-1103. Retrieved from https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1104325

13. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2025). Outcomes of Variability in Teen Driving Experience and Exposure: Evidence from Naturalistic Driving Studies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17226/29066

14. National Safety Council. (2011). The Allstate Foundation license to save report. The Allstate Foundation. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/271152/license-to-save-report-on-teen-driving.pdf

15. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2024). Graduated driver licensing. Retrieved from https://www.nhtsa.gov/book/countermeasures-that-work/young-drivers/countermeasures/legislation-and-licensing/graduated-driver-licensing

16. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2023). The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2019 (Revised). Retrieved from https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813403.pdf

17. NSW Government. (2025a). Learner driver licence. Service NSW. Retrieved from https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/driver-and-rider-licences/driver-licences/learner-driver-licence

18. NSW Government. (2025b). Using your learner driver log book. Service NSW. Retrieved from https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/driver-and-rider-licences/driver-licences/learner-driver-licence/using-your-learner-driver-log-book

19. Shope, J. T. (2007). Graduated driver licensing: Review of evaluation results since 2002. Journal of Safety Research, 38(2), 165-175. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437507000266

20. Stevanovic, A., Jovanovic, D., Shobhit, S., & Saulino, G. (2022). Effectiveness of implementing a Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) law among young Serbian drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 171, 106659. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002243752200144X

21. van der Kint, S. T., Schagen, I. v., Vlakveld, W., Mons, C., Zwart, R. d. & Hoekstra, T. (2024). A brief PC-based hazard prediction training program improves young novice drivers’ hazard perception skills compared to a control group over time. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 102, 64-76. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847824000287?via%3Dihub

Appendices

Appendix A: International GDL Systems Comparison

Table A.1: Core GDL Components by Major Jurisdiction

A.2: Statistical Evidence Summary

GDL Effectiveness by Age:

• Age 16: 22% crash reduction (Chapman et al., 2014)

• Age 17: 6% crash reduction (Chapman et al., 2014)

• Overall fatal crash reduction: 11% average (Baker et al., 2006)

Component Effectiveness:

• Nighttime restrictions: 19-25% reduction (McCartt et al., 2010)

• Passenger restrictions: 15-40% reduction (McCartt et al., 2010)

• Practice requirements: 5-18% reduction (Masten et al., 2011)

Appendix B: Practice Hours and Economic Analysis

B.1: Practice Hours vs. Outcomes

Extensive supervised practice driving has been shown to significantly reduce crash risk among newly licensed drivers. Recent research demonstrates that teens who accumulate more supervised driving hours across varied conditions experience fewer crashes, near-crashes, and risky driving events post-licensure (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2025). Current best-practice guidelines recommend a minimum of 70 supervised hours (CDC, 2025), with many jurisdictions requiring 100–120 hours before independent driving privileges are granted.

B.2: Economic Impact

Benefits of implementing comprehensive GDL (National Safety Council, 2011):

• Lives saved annually (U.S., national): 2000 per year

• Economic savings (U.S., national): $13.6 billion per year

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s 2019 crash-cost study states, “Each fatality resulted in an average discounted cost of $1.6 million in economic costs, and $11.3 million when quality-of-life valuations are considered” (NHTSA, 2023).

Appendix C: Technology and Future Directions

C.1: Digital vs. Traditional Systems

C.2: Emerging Technologies

Virtual Reality/ Simulator Training:

Controlled studies and reviews show that hazard anticipation/perception training delivered via PC-based simulators and VR improves novice drivers’ scanning and hazard prediction, with moderate-to-large effects depending on program design and outcome measure. Some programs are also associated with fewer hazardous errors on post-training drives. (McDonald et al., 2015; van der Kint et al., 2024)

C.3: Research Priorities

Critical Gaps:

• Standardized practice quality metrics

• Optimal supervision mix ratios

• Long-term safety outcome tracking

C.4: Recommendations for improving GDL Programs:

• Minimum 100-120 practice hours with verification

• Technology-enhanced monitoring systems

• Economic support for disadvantaged populations