Acceptability of road pricing and revenue use in the Netherlands
AbstractThis paper presents the empirical results of a questionnaire among Dutch commuters regularly experiencing congestion, asking for their opinion (in terms of acceptance) on road pricing measures and revenue use targets. We find that road pricing is in general not very acceptable and that revenue use is important for the explanation of the level of acceptance. Road pricing is more acceptable when revenues are used to replace existing car taxation or to lower fuel taxes. Moreover, personal characteristics of the respondent have an impact on support levels. Higher educated people, as well as respondents with a higher value of time and with higher perceived effectiveness of the measure, seem to find road pricing measures more acceptable than other people. When we ask directly for the acceptability of different types of revenue use (not part of a road pricing measure), again abolition of existing car (ownership) taxes receives most support whereas the general budget is not acceptable.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration in its journal European Transport / Trasporti Europei.
Volume (Year): (2006)
Issue (Month): 32 ()
Contact details of provider:
More information through EDIRC
Road pricing; Revenue use; Public acceptance;
Other versions of this item:
- Barry Ubbels & Erik T. Verhoef, 2005. "Acceptability of road pricing and revenue use in the Netherlands," ERSA conference papers ersa05p120, European Regional Science Association.
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.:
- Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119.
- Parry, Ian & Bento, Antonio, 1999.
"Revenue Recycling and the Welfare Effects of Road Pricing,"
dp-99-45, Resources For the Future.
- Parry, Ian W H & Bento, Antonio, 2001. " Revenue Recycling and the Welfare Effects of Road Pricing," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(4), pages 645-71, December.
- Parry, Ian W.H. & Bento, Antonio Miguel R., 1999. "Revenue recycling and the welfare effects of road pricing," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2253, The World Bank.
- Inge Mayeres & Stef Proost, 1998.
"Marginal Tax Reform, Externalities and Income Distribution,"
Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers
ces9832, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
- Mayeres, Inge & Proost, Stef, 2001. "Marginal tax reform, externalities and income distribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 343-363, February.
- Verhoef Erik T., 1997. "Externalities," Serie Research Memoranda 0031, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
- Jens Schade & Bernhard Schlag, 2000. "Acceptability of Urban Transport Pricing," Research Reports 72, Government Institute for Economic Research Finland (VATT).
- Hensher, David A. & Li, Zheng, 2013. "Referendum voting in road pricing reform: A review of the evidence," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 186-197.
- Robin Lindsey, 2007. "Congestion Relief: Assessing the Case for Road Tolls in Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 248, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Romeo Danielis).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.