IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juecon/v62y2007i2p294-316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic investment and pricing decisions in a congested transport corridor

Author

Listed:
  • De Borger, B.
  • Dunkerley, F.
  • Proost, S.

Abstract

This paper studies pricing and investment decisions on a congested transport corridor where the elements of the corridor are controlled by different governments. A corridor can be an interstate highway or railway line, or an inter-modal connection. We model the simplest corridor: two transport links in series, where each of the links is controlled by a different government. Each link is used by transit as well as by local traffic; both links are subject to congestion. We consider a two stage non-cooperative game where both governments strategically set capacity in the first stage and play a pricing game in the second stage. Three pricing regimes are distinguished: (i) differentiated tolls between local and transit transport, (ii) one uniform toll on local and transit traffic, and (iii) only the local users can be tolled. Numerical analysis illustrates all theoretical insights. A number of interesting results are obtained. First, transit tolls on the network will be inefficiently high. If only local traffic can be tolled, however, the Nash equilibrium tolls are inefficiently low. Second, raising the toll on transit through a given country by one euro raises the toll on the whole trajectory by less than one euro. Third, higher capacity investment in a given region not only reduces optimal tolls in this region under all pricing regimes but it also increases the transit tolls on the other link of the corridor. Fourth, capacities in the different regions are strategic complements: when one country on the corridor increases transport capacity, it forces the other country to do the same. Fifth, we find interesting interactions between optimal capacities and the set of pricing instruments used: capacity with differentiated tolls is substantially higher than in the case of uniform tolls but overall welfare is lower. Finally, if transit is sufficiently important, it may be welfare improving not to allow any tolling at all, or to only allow the tolling of locals.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • De Borger, B. & Dunkerley, F. & Proost, S., 2007. "Strategic investment and pricing decisions in a congested transport corridor," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 294-316, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:juecon:v:62:y:2007:i:2:p:294-316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094-1190(07)00006-X
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. De Borger, B. & Proost, S. & Van Dender, K., 2005. "Congestion and tax competition in a parallel network," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(8), pages 2013-2040, November.
    2. Bev Dahlby, 1996. "Fiscal externalities and the design of intergovernmental grants," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 3(3), pages 397-412, July.
    3. Kurt Van Dender, 2005. "Duopoly prices under congested access," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 343-362, May.
    4. Verhoef, Erik & Nijkamp, Peter & Rietveld, Piet, 1996. "Second-Best Congestion Pricing: The Case of an Untolled Alternative," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 279-302, November.
    5. Bruno De Borger & Kurt Van Dender, 2005. "Prices, capacities and service quality in a congestible Bertrand duopoly," ERSA conference papers ersa05p221, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Van Dender, Kurt, 2005. "Duopoly Prices Under Congested Access," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt7xw8c3fn, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. David Levinson, 2001. "Why States Toll: An Empirical Model of Finance Choice," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 35(2), pages 223-237, May.
    8. Chris Nash, 2005. "Rail Infrastructure Charges in Europe," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 39(3), pages 259-278, September.
    9. Arnott, Richard & Grieson, Ronald E., 1981. "Optimal fiscal policy for a state or local government," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 23-48, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. De Borger, Bruno & Proost, Stef, 2012. "Transport policy competition between governments: A selective survey of the literature," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 35-48.
    2. Grahn-Voorneveld, Sofia, 2011. "Sharing profit in parallel and serial transport networks," Working papers in Transport Economics 2011:7, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    3. Bruno de Borger & Stef Proost, 2004. "Vertical and horizontal tax competition in the transport sector," Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 45-64.
    4. Astrid Gühnemann & Andrew Koh & Simon Shepherd, 2016. "Optimal Charging Strategies under Conflicting Objectives for the Protection of Sensitive Areas: A Case Study of the Trans-Pennine Corridor," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 199-226, March.
    5. de Palma, André & Kilani, Moez & Lindsey, Robin, 2007. "Maintenance, service quality and congestion pricing with competing roads," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 573-591, June.
    6. Ubbels, Barry & Verhoef, Erik T., 2008. "Governmental competition in road charging and capacity choice," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 174-190, March.
    7. Watling, D.P. & Shepherd, S.P. & Koh, A., 2015. "Cordon toll competition in a network of two cities: Formulation and sensitivity to traveller route and demand responses," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 93-116.
    8. Proost, Stef & Sen, Ahksaya, 2006. "Urban transport pricing reform with two levels of government: A case study of Brussels," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 127-139, March.
    9. Sen, Akshaya Kumar & Tiwari, Geetam & Upadhyay, Vrajaindra, 2013. "Strategies of state and local government in management of urban transport problems – A case of Delhi," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 11-21.
    10. Westin, Jonas & Franklin, Joel P. & Proost, Stef & Basck, Pierre & Raux, Charles, 2016. "Achieving political acceptability for new transport infrastructure in congested urban regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 286-303.
    11. van den Berg, Vincent A.C., 2012. "Auctions for private congestible infrastructures," MPRA Paper 40103, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Shao, Jing & Yang, Hangjun & Xing, Xiaoqiang & Yang, Liu, 2016. "E-commerce and traffic congestion: An economic and policy analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 91-103.
    13. Pierre Basck & Charles Raux & Jonas Westin & Joel P. Franklin & Stef Proost, 2012. "CoAccept. Coordination politique et acceptabilité des péages routiers. Rapport final," Working Papers halshs-01707861, HAL.
    14. De Borger, Bruno & Van Dender, Kurt, 2006. "Prices, capacities and service levels in a congestible Bertrand duopoly," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 264-283, September.
    15. de Palma, Andre & Proost, Stef, 2006. "Imperfect competition and congestion in the City," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 185-209, September.
    16. De Borger, B. & Proost, S. & Van Dender, K., 2005. "Congestion and tax competition in a parallel network," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(8), pages 2013-2040, November.
    17. Basso, Leonardo J. & Zhang, Anming, 2007. "Congestible facility rivalry in vertical structures," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 218-237, March.
    18. Braid, Ralph M., 2013. "State and local tax competition in a spatial model with sales taxes and residential property taxes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-67.
    19. Randrianarisoa, Laingo M. & Zhang, Anming, 2019. "Adaptation to climate change effects and competition between ports: Invest now or later?," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 279-322.
    20. Min Ju Bae & Ek Peng Chew & Loo Hay Lee & Anming Zhang, 2013. "Container transshipment and port competition," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 479-494, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:juecon:v:62:y:2007:i:2:p:294-316. 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: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622905 .

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622905 .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.