IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v42y2008i8p1117-1128.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability of single and combined transport policy measures: The importance of environmental and policy specific beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Eriksson, Louise
  • Garvill, Jörgen
  • Nordlund, Annika M.

Abstract

In this study, the acceptability of different transport policy measures was examined. Three measures were assessed individually and as packages combining one push measure (a raised tax on fossil fuel) and one pull measure (in Package 1 improved public transport and in Package 2 a subsidy of renewable fuel). To analyze factors important for the acceptability, we proposed a model where the value-belief-norm theory combined with policy specific beliefs (perceived fairness and perceived effectiveness) predicted acceptability. Furthermore, we examined whether problem awareness or personal norm was more important for acceptability. In a questionnaire study conducted in Sweden, a sample of car users (NÂ =Â 616) assessed the transport policy measures. Results showed that while the pull measures were perceived to be effective, fair, and acceptable, the push measure and the packages were perceived to be rather ineffective, unfair, and unacceptable. The proposed model was supported for the measures and problem awareness was found to have a direct effect on acceptability for the pull measures while personal norm was found to have a direct effect on acceptability for the push measure and the two policy packages. In addition, perceived fairness and effectiveness were found to be particularly important for acceptability.

Suggested Citation

  • Eriksson, Louise & Garvill, Jörgen & Nordlund, Annika M., 2008. "Acceptability of single and combined transport policy measures: The importance of environmental and policy specific beliefs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1117-1128, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:42:y:2008:i:8:p:1117-1128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965-8564(08)00082-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. May, Anthony D. & Kelly, Charlotte & Shepherd, Simon, 2006. "The principles of integration in urban transport strategies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 319-327, July.
    2. S. Jaensirisak & M. Wardman & A. D. May, 2005. "Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 39(2), pages 127-154, May.
    3. Jakobsson, C. & Fujii, S. & Gärling, T., 2000. "Determinants of private car users' acceptance of road pricing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 153-158, April.
    4. Odeck, James & Bråthen, Svein, 2008. "Travel demand elasticities and users attitudes: A case study of Norwegian toll projects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 77-94, January.
    5. Thøgersen, John, 2006. "Understanding repetitive travel mode choices in a stable context: A panel study approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 621-638, October.
    6. May, A. D. & Roberts, M, 1995. "The design of integrated transport strategies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 97-105, April.
    7. Samuelson, Charles D., 1993. "A Multiattribute Evaluation Approach to Structural Change in Resource Dilemmas," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 298-324, July.
    8. Vieira, João & Moura, Filipe & Manuel Viegas, José, 2007. "Transport policy and environmental impacts: The importance of multi-instrumentality in policy integration," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 421-432, September.
    9. Meyer, Michael D., 1999. "Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 575-599.
    10. Thorpe, Neil & Hills, Peter & Jaensirisak, Sittha, 2000. "Public attitudes to TDM measures: a comparative study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 243-257, October.
    11. Odeck, James & Bråthen, Svein, 1997. "On public attitudes toward implementation of toll roads--the case of Oslo toll ring," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 73-83, April.
    12. Gatersleben, Birgitta & Appleton, Katherine M., 2007. "Contemplating cycling to work: Attitudes and perceptions in different stages of change," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 302-312, May.
    13. Shannon, Tya & Giles-Corti, Billie & Pikora, Terri & Bulsara, Max & Shilton, Trevor & Bull, Fiona, 2006. "Active commuting in a university setting: Assessing commuting habits and potential for modal change," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 240-253, May.
    14. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    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. Christophe Alaux, 2012. "Confiance, acceptabilité et comportement d’achat: la performance des politiques publiques environnementales," Post-Print hal-01824049, HAL.
    2. Habibian, Meeghat & Kermanshah, Mohammad, 2013. "Coping with congestion: Understanding the role of simultaneous transportation demand management policies on commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 229-237.
    3. Moeinaddini, Amin & Habibian, Meeghat, 2023. "Transportation demand management policy efficiency: An attempt to address the effectiveness and acceptability of policy packages," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 317-330.
    4. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    5. Romero, Fernando & Gomez, Juan & Paez, Antonio & Vassallo, José Manuel, 2020. "Toll roads vs. Public transportation: A study on the acceptance of congestion-calming measures in Madrid," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 319-342.
    6. Hrelja, Robert & Isaksson, Karolina & Richardson, Tim, 2013. "Choosing conflict on the road to sustainable mobility: A risky strategy for breaking path dependency in urban policy making," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 195-205.
    7. Lindholm, Maria & Behrends, Sönke, 2012. "Challenges in urban freight transport planning – a review in the Baltic Sea Region," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 129-136.
    8. Yacan Wang & Yu Wang & Luyao Xie & Huiyu Zhou, 2018. "Impact of Perceived Uncertainty on Public Acceptability of Congestion Charging: An Empirical Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Dieplinger, Maria & Fürst, Elmar, 2014. "The acceptability of road pricing: Evidence from two studies in Vienna and four other European cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 10-18.
    10. Li, Xintong & Han, Chunyang & Huang, Helai & Pervez, Amjad & Xu, Guangming & Hu, Cheng & Jiang, Qianshan & Wei, Yulu, 2023. "Pursuing higher acceptability and compliance for electric two-wheeler standardization policy in China: The importance of socio-demographic characteristics, psychological factors, and travel habits," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    11. Nordfjærn, Trond & Rundmo, Torbjørn, 2015. "Environmental norms, transport priorities and resistance to change associated with acceptance of push measures in transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-8.
    12. Odeck, James & Kjerkreit, Anne, 2010. "Evidence on users' attitudes towards road user charges--A cross-sectional survey of six Norwegian toll schemes," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 349-358, November.
    13. Elmar Fürst & Maria Dieplinger, 2014. "The acceptability of road pricing in Vienna: the preference patterns of car drivers," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 765-784, July.
    14. Sundo, Marloe B. & Fujii, Satoshi, 2005. "The effects of a compressed working week on commuters' daily activity patterns," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 835-848, December.
    15. Martin, Elliot & Shaheen, Susan & Lipman, Timothy & Camel, Madonna, 2014. "Evaluating the public perception of a feebate policy in California through the estimation and cross-validation of an ordinal regression model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 144-153.
    16. Dogterom, Nico & Ettema, Dick & Dijst, Martin, 2018. "Behavioural effects of a tradable driving credit scheme: Results of an online stated adaptation experiment in the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 52-64.
    17. Odeck, James, 2019. "Estimating and predicting the operational costs of road tolls: An econometric assessment using panel data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 466-478.
    18. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    19. Vigar, Geoff & Shaw, Andrew & Swann, Richard, 2011. "Selling sustainable mobility: The reporting of the Manchester Transport Innovation Fund bid in UK media," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 468-479, March.
    20. Rybarczyk, Greg & Gallagher, Laura, 2014. "Measuring the potential for bicycling and walking at a metropolitan commuter university," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-10.

    More about this item

    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:transa:v:42:y:2008:i:8:p:1117-1128. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.