Physical Environment Environmental Quality Built Environment Search Policies & Programs

Display All Policies & Programs Contribute Content

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs

Health Factors: Environmental Quality
Decision Makers: Government - State, Government - Federal
Evidence Rating: Scientifically Supported
Population Reach: 20-49% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: Likely to increase disparities

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs are federally mandated under the Clean Air Act. Such programs require emission testing of vehicles in 8-hour ozone nonattainment regions.

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Lower ambient ozone levels
Reduction of carbon monoxide & VOC (hydrocarbon) emissions

Evidence of Effectiveness

Dehart-Davis 2002 review finds multiple evaluations documenting reductions in emissions from enhanced I/M programs. Harrington 2000 finds enhanced I/M inspection reduces emissions, but overall costs are higher than anticipated.

Implementation Examples

United States

All states with regions that exhibit excessive ozone and VOC levels must have this program implemented within those areas. Massachusetts is the only state that requires emissions testing throughout the state.

Wisconsin

Currently seven southeastern Wisconsin counties require testing every two years, with license plate registration renewal. If a car fails any part of the test, the owner must repair the car in order to bring emissions within approved limits, or cannot renew the car's registration. Emission standards are set by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

Citations - Evidence

Dehart-Davis 2002* - Dehart-Davis L, Corley E, Rodgers MO. Evaluating vehicle inspection/maintenance programs using on-road emissions data: The Atlanta reference method. Evaluation Review. 2002;26(2):111-46. Accessed on June 18, 2012
Webpage: http://erx.sagepub.com/content/26/2/111.abstract
Harrington 2000* - Harrington W, McConnell V, Ando A. Are vehicle emission inspection programs living up to expectations? Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2000;5(3):153-72. Accessed on June 23, 2012
Webpage: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920999000292

* Journal subscription may be required for access.

Comments from Users about this Policy/Program (Cost, Feasibility, Lessons Learned)

No comments

X
 

Health Factors

Health Behaviors
Tobacco Use
Diet & Exercise
Alcohol Use
Sexual Activity
 Clinical Care
Access to Care
Quality of Care
 Social & Economic Factors
Education
Employment
Income
Family & Social Support
Community Safety
 Physical Environment
Environmental Quality
Built Environment

Decision Makers

Businesses & Employers
Community Organizations
Government - Local
Government - State
Government - Federal
Healthcare Organizations
Individuals
Schools

Evidence Rating

Level of effectiveness based on a scan of academic literature and key recommendations of leading organizations.

  • Scientifically Supported Numerous studies or systematic review(s) with positive results
  • Some Evidence Research suggests positive impacts; further study may be warranted
  • Expert Opinion Recommended by credible groups*; research evidence limited
  • Insufficient Evidence Evidence limited or unavailable; further study warranted
  • Mixed Evidence Evidence mixed; further study warranted
  • Evidence of Ineffectiveness Research consistently shows program is detrimental or has no effect

Although many policies and programs are recommended by credible groups, we apply the rating ‘expert opinion’ only when policies are recommended but limited scientific evidence of effectiveness is available.

* The American Heritage Dictionary defines credible as 'capable of being believed; plausible.' and 'worthy of confidence; reliable.' To be considered an 'expert recommendation,' policies and programs must be recommended by one or more organizations that are recognized for their impartial expertise in the area of interest and have limited evidence available.

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Population Reach

Portion of Wisconsin's population likely to be reached by a policy or program if implemented statewide, based on its characteristics (e.g., target population(s), geographic limitations, and potential implementers).

<1%   20-49%
1-9%   50-99%
10-19%   100%

Potential Impact on Health Disparities

Likely impact of a given policy or program on racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, geographic or other disparities in Wisconsin based on its characteristics (e.g., target audience, mode of delivery, etc.) and best available evidence related to disparities.

  • Likely to decrease disparities
  • No impact on disparities likely
  • Likely to increase disparities