本研究利用民國96年至109年「A1、A2類交通事故調查表」、「交通部酒駕取締資料」與民國94年至106年「法務部判決資料」，並使用Logit模型進行分析，探討民國100年至108年間，四次酒駕相關法令之修訂，對於所有酒駕者與酒駕再犯者之酒駕再犯行為的影響。四次酒駕相關法令修訂之時間點分別為民國100年12月、民國102年3月、民國102年6月及民國108年7月。
實證結果顯示，民國108年7月《刑法185條之3》以及《道路交通管理處罰條例第35條》之法令修訂，對於所有酒駕者以及酒駕再犯者之未來酒駕再犯行為，皆有明顯遏阻效果。另外，本研究也發現，騎乘機車之酒駕者或無照駕駛之酒駕者，其未來酒駕之再犯率明顯高於其他車種的酒駕者。且酒駕政策之修訂，對於低酒測值者有一定程度的影響，但對於高酒測值者以及酒駕再犯者的影響效果有限。

The purpose of this research was to analysis the effect of our law amendments on drunk-driving recidivism from 2011 to 2019. The amended date of drunk-driving law were December 2011, March 2013, June 2013 and July 2019 respectively. This study utilized The Roadway Accident Investigation Form of National Policy Agency, drunk-driving enforcement data of Ministry of Transportation from 2007 to 2020 and the court judgement of drunk- driving from 2005 to 2017 and the logit model was applied.
The empirical result indicated that the amendment of §185-3 Criminal Code and §35 Traffic Regulation in 2019 had decreased the probability of drunk-driving recidivism of all drunk-drivers and drunk-driving recidivists significantly. In addition, this study also found out that the motorcyclist drunk-driving and unlicensed drunk-driving had notable probability of drink-driving recidivism than other drivers. Moreover, the revision of the drink-driving policies had remarkable impacts on drivers with low alcohol test scores while had limited effects on those with high alcohol test scores and drunk-driving recidivists.

中文文獻
1. 法務部統計處 (2019)，「酒駕案件統計分析」，法務部統計處《刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊》，第20期，52 – 59。
2. 張可澔 (2017) 估計酒駕罰則加重的政策效果，國立臺灣大學，經濟學研究所碩士論文。
3. 黃珮瑜 (2018) 酒駕政策對降低駕駛人飲酒上路、酒駕事故比例及死傷的關聯，國立中央大學，產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
4. 鄒啟勳、陳玉書、林健陽 (2020) 單純酒後駕車刑罰政策之德菲調查研究，法務部矯正署《矯政期刊》，第9卷第2期，3 – 35。
5. 蔡佩芳、董抒雲、林重昌、黃國璋、饒依萍、李黛苹、劉文勝 (2014) 肇事者血液酒精濃度與交通事故特性相關分析，《北市醫學雜誌》，第11卷第4期，74 – 83。
6. 劉庭華 (2021) 酒駕再犯風險特徵分析：以臺灣地方法院裁判書為例，國立臺灣大學，商學研究所碩士論文。
7. 蔡偉德 (2019) 酒駕罰則是否有效抑制酒駕？中斷點迴歸設計的應用，經濟論文叢刊，第47卷第1期，75 – 126。
8. 鍾怡婷 (2019) 酒駕政策對酒駕累犯之懲罰效果評量，國立中央大學，產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
9. 蘇信義 (2019) 臺灣酒駕政策與酒駕者再犯行為之關聯性分析，國立中央大學，產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
英文文獻
1. Chan, Y. S., Chen, C. S., Huang, L., & Peng, Y. I. (2017). Sanction changes and drunk-driving injuries/deaths in Taiwan. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 107, 102-109.
2. Chang, H., Chang, K., & Fan, E. (2019). The Intended and Unintended Effects of Drunk Driving Policies. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 82 (1), 23-49.
3. Chen, T. Y., & Jou, R. C. (2018). Estimating factors of individual and regional characteristics affecting the drink driving recidivism. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 119, 16-22.
4. Choi, Y. Y., Kho, S. Y., Kim, D. K., & Park, B. J. (2019). Analysis of the duration of compliance between recidivism of drunk driving and reinstatement of license after suspension or revocation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 124, 120-126.
5. Deyoung DJ. (1997). An evaluation of the effectiveness of alcohol treatment, driver license actions and jail terms in reducing drunk driving recidivism in California. Addiction, 92 (8),989-997.
6. Fei, G., Li, X., Sun, Q., Qian, Y., Stallones, L., Xiang, H., & Zhang, X. (2020). Effectiveness of implementing the criminal administrative punishment law of drunk driving in China: An interrupted time series analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 144.
7. Fell, J. C., & Voas, R. B. (2014). The effectiveness of a 0.05 blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limit for driving in the United States. Addiction, 109(6), 869-874.
8. García-Echalar, A., Rau, T. (2020). The Effects of Increasing Penalties in Drunk Driving Laws － Evidence from Chile. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8103.
9. Grant, D. (2016). A structural analysis of U.S. drunk driving policy. International Review of Law and Economics, 45 (C), 14-22.
10. Hansen, B. (2015). Punishment and Deterrence: Evidence from Drunk Driving. American Economic Review, 105(4), 1581-1617.
11. Jia, K., King, M., Fleiter, J. J., Sheehan, M., Ma, W., Lei, J., & Zhang, J. (2016). Drunk driving offenders’ knowledge and behaviour in relation to alcohol-involved driving in Yinchuan and a comparison with Guangzhou, China. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 38, 182-193.
12. Mills, K., Hodge, W., Johansson, K., & Conigrave, K. (2008). An outcome evaluation of the New South Wales Sober Driver Programme: a remedial programme for recidivist drink drivers. Drug and Alcohol Review, 27 (1), 65-74.
13. Møller, M., Haustein, S., & Prato, C. G. (2015). Profiling drunk driving recidivists in Denmark. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 83, 125-31.
14. Moore, K.A., Harrison, M., Young, M. S., Ochshorn, E. (2008). A cognitive therapy treatment program for repeat DUI offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, (6), 539-545.
15. Stringer, R. J. (2019). Policing the Drunk Driving Problem: A Longitudinal Examination of DUI Enforcement and Alcohol Related Crashes in the U.S. (1985–2015). American Journal of Criminal Justice, 44 (3), 474-498.
16. Robertson, A. A., Gardner, S., Xu, X., & Costello, H. (2009). The impact of remedial intervention on 3-year recidivism among first-time DUI offenders in Mississippi. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 41 (5), 1080-1086.
17. Shults, R. A., Elder, R. W., Sleet, D. A., Nichols, J. L., Alao, M. O., Carande-Kulis, V. G., Zaza, S., Sosin, D. M., & Thompson, R. S. (2001). Reviews of evidence regarding interventions to reduce alcohol-impaired driving. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 21(4 Suppl), 66-88.
18. Wiliszowski, C. H., Fell, J. C., McKnight, A. S., Tippetts, A. S., & Ciccel, J. D. (2010). An evaluation of Three intensive supervision programs for serious DWI offenders. Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference, 54, 375–387.
19. Yu, J., & Williford, W. R. (1995). Drunk-driving recidivism: predicting factors from arrest context and case disposition. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 56(1), 60-66.