Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Reducing road congestion: a reality check


Author Info

  • Stopher, Peter R.
Registered author(s):


    For some little while now, transport policy seems to be focused on massive relative increases in public transport ridership and reduction of car use, resulting in a hoped-for reduction in road congestion. Starting with concerns with vehicle emissions as far back as the mid-1980s, and moving now into more of a focus on greenhouse gases and congestion, current transport policies are aimed at reducing two perceived externalities of increasing car use--vehicular emissions and congestion. This paper seeks to check the reality of these policy directions and question whether these are desirable, let alone achievable end states. The paper starts by looking at congestion and questions whether or not it is intrinsically bad. The negative and positive aspects of congestion are explored. The concepts of accessibility and mobility are discussed, particularly in relation to congestion and capacity increases, with the idea of trying to understand better what capacity increases or increasing congestion do to these two measures. The expectation must be that congestion levels are likely to continue to increase into the future, both as a result of increasing population and also increasing real wealth and changes in preferences. This section of the paper concludes that it is within the power of the market place to offset some of the negatives of congestion. In the next section of the paper, the potentials to increase public transport ridership are examined. An illustration is provided of the likely impacts of achieving a doubling in public transport ridership in a hypothetical city. It is found that the effects of such an achievement would be relatively small on the overall congestion of the road system, and that these effects would also be likely to be fairly short-lived. At the same time, the investments that would be necessary in the public transport system are enormous, and there is relatively little likelihood that one could achieve such an increase in ridership within current development patterns. The paper also addresses the potential of congestion pricing or road user charges to impact congestion. It is concluded that charging motorists a politically acceptable amount will probably still not make significant impact on overall system congestion, while the potential for serious impacts on the economy become large if the charges are made sufficiently high or the area covered is made sufficiently large. In the final section of the paper, a number of policy directions are put forward as suggestions for how to deal with the issue of congestion, capacity, and the declining share of market of public transport. These policy directions are not generally the ones that are being pursued today. The issue of congestion pricing is revisited, and a case is made for a kilometrage charge on road users to replace most current licensing schemes.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Transport Policy.

    Volume (Year): 11 (2004)
    Issue (Month): 2 (April)
    Pages: 117-131

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:11:y:2004:i:2:p:117-131

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page:

    Order Information:

    Related research



    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Hyman, Geoffrey & Mayhew, Les, 2002. "Optimizing the benefits of urban road user charging," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 189-207, July.
    2. Stradling, S. G. & Meadows, M. L. & Beatty, S., 2000. "Helping drivers out of their cars Integrating transport policy and social psychology for sustainable change," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 207-215, July.
    3. Lothlorien Redmond & Patricia Mokhtarian, 2001. "The positive utility of the commute: modeling ideal commute time and relative desired commute amount," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 179-205, May.
    4. Bonsall, Peter, 2000. "Legislating for modal shift: background to the UK's new transport act," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 179-184, July.
    5. Burris, Mark W. & Pendyala, Ram M., 2002. "Discrete choice models of traveler participation in differential time of day pricing programs," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 241-251, July.
    6. Levine, Jonathan & Garb, Yaakov, 2002. "Congestion pricing's conditional promise: promotion of accessibility or mobility?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 179-188, July.
    7. Jakobsson, C. & Fujii, S. & Gärling, T., 2000. "Determinants of private car users' acceptance of road pricing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 153-158, April.
    8. Schafer, Andreas, 1998. "The global demand for motorized mobility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 455-477, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Taylor, Brian D., 2004. "The politics of congestion mitigation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 299-302, July.
    2. Jan-Dirk Schmöcker & Tsuyoshi Hatori & David Watling, 2014. "Dynamic process model of mass effects on travel demand," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 279-304, March.
    3. Sebastian Bamberg & Guido Möser, 2007. "Why are work travel plans effective? Comparing conclusions from narrative and meta-analytical research synthesis," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 647-666, November.
    4. Zhang, Yun & Stopher, Peter & Halling, Belinda, 2013. "Evaluation of south-Australia's TravelSmart project: Changes in community's attitudes to travel," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 15-22.
    5. Bamberg, Sebastian & Fujii, Satoshi & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy, 2011. "Behaviour theory and soft transport policy measures," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 228-235, January.
    6. Choo, Sangho & Mokhtarian, Patricia L, 2008. "How do people respond to congestion mitigation policies? A multivariate probit model of the individual consideration of three travel-related strategy bundles," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt53s553tn, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. Takama, Takeshi & Preston, John, 2008. "Forecasting the effects of road user charge by stochastic agent-based modelling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 738-749, May.
    8. Michael L. Anderson, 2013. "Subways, Strikes, and Slowdowns: The Impacts of Public Transit on Traffic Congestion," NBER Working Papers 18757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Schmöcker, Jan-Dirk & Fonzone, Achille & Quddus, Mohammed & Bell, Michael G.H., 2006. "Changes in the frequency of shopping trips in response to a congestion charge," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 217-228, May.
    10. Catherine Althaus & Lindsay M. Tedds & Allen McAvoy, 2011. "The Feasibility of Implementing a Congestion Charge on the Halifax Peninsula: Filling the "Missing Link" of Implementation," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, University of Toronto Press, vol. 37(4), pages 541-561, December.
    11. Margareta Friman & Lina Larhult & Tommy Gärling, 2013. "An analysis of soft transport policy measures implemented in Sweden to reduce private car use," Transportation, Springer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 109-129, January.
    12. Muthukrishnan, Subhashini, 2010. "Vehicle ownership and usage charges," Transport Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 398-408, November.


    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:11:y:2004:i:2:p:117-131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.