IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v70y2014icp117-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach

Author

Listed:
  • Zheng, Zuduo
  • Liu, Zhiyuan
  • Liu, Chuanli
  • Shiwakoti, Nirajan

Abstract

Public acceptance is consistently listed as having an enormous impact on the implementation and success of a congestion charge scheme. This paper investigates public acceptance of such a scheme in Australia. Surveys were conducted in Brisbane and Melbourne, the two fastest growing Australian cities. Using an ordered logit modeling approach, the survey data including stated preferences were analyzed to pinpoint the important factors influencing people’s attitudes to a congestion charge and, in turn, to their transport mode choices. To accommodate the nature of, and to account for the resulting heterogeneity of the panel data, random effects were considered in the models. As expected, this study found that the amount of the congestion charge and the financial benefits of implementing it have a significant influence on respondents’ support for the charge and on the likelihood of their taking a bus to city areas. However, respondents’ current primary transport mode for travelling to the city areas has a more pronounced impact. Meanwhile, respondents’ perceptions of the congestion charge’s role in protecting the environment by reducing vehicle emissions, and of the extent to which the charge would mean that they travelled less frequently to the city for shopping or entertainment, also have a significant impact on their level of support for its implementation. We also found and explained notable differences across two cities. Finally, findings from this study have been fully discussed in relation to the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Zheng, Zuduo & Liu, Zhiyuan & Liu, Chuanli & Shiwakoti, Nirajan, 2014. "Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 117-134.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:70:y:2014:i:c:p:117-134
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.10.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414002584
    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. Eliasson, Jonas, 2009. "A cost-benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 468-480, May.
    2. Harsman, Bjorn & Quigley, John M., 2010. "Political and Public Acceptability of Congestion Pricing: Ideology and Self Interest," Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy, Working Paper Series qt77b5243v, Berkeley Program on Housing and Urban Policy.
    3. Kim, Junghwa & Schmöcker, Jan-Dirk & Fujii, Satoshi & Noland, Robert B., 2013. "Attitudes towards road pricing and environmental taxation among US and UK students," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 50-62.
    4. Joseph E. Aldy & Alan J. Krupnick & Richard G. Newell & Ian W. H. Parry & William A. Pizer, 2010. "Designing Climate Mitigation Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 903-934, December.
    5. Björn Hårsman & John M. Quigley, 2010. "Political and public acceptability of congestion pricing: Ideology and self-interest," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 854-874.
    6. Schaller, Bruce, 2010. "New York City's congestion pricing experience and implications for road pricing acceptance in the United States," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 266-273, August.
    7. Jonathan Leape, 2006. "The London Congestion Charge," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 157-176, Fall.
    8. Schuitema, Geertje & Steg, Linda & Forward, Sonja, 2010. "Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 99-109, February.
    9. Eliasson, Jonas & Hultkrantz, Lars & Nerhagen, Lena & Rosqvist, Lena Smidfelt, 2009. "The Stockholm congestion - charging trial 2006: Overview of effects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 240-250, March.
    10. Francke, Angela & Kaniok, Denise, 2013. "Responses to differentiated road pricing schemes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 25-30.
    11. Tertoolen, Gerard & van Kreveld, Dik & Verstraten, Ben, 1998. "Psychological resistance against attempts to reduce private car use," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 171-181, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Bristow, Abigail L. & Wardman, Mark & Zanni, Alberto M. & Chintakayala, Phani K., 2010. "Public acceptability of personal carbon trading and carbon tax," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1824-1837, July.
    14. Eliasson, Jonas & Mattsson, Lars-Göran, 2006. "Equity effects of congestion pricing: Quantitative methodology and a case study for Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 602-620, August.
    15. Xenias, Dimitrios & Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2013. "Dimensions and determinants of expert and public attitudes to sustainable transport policies and technologies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 75-85.
    16. Satoshi Fujii & Tommy Gärling & Cecilia Jakobsson & Rong-Chang Jou, 2004. "A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of car owners' acceptance of road pricing," Transportation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 285-295, August.
    17. Dresner, Simon & Dunne, Louise & Clinch, Peter & Beuermann, Christiane, 2006. "Social and political responses to ecological tax reform in Europe: an introduction to the special issue," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 895-904, May.
    18. Hensher, David A. & Rose, John M., 2007. "Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: A case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 428-443, June.
    19. Schwanen, Tim & Banister, David & Anable, Jillian, 2011. "Scientific research about climate change mitigation in transport: A critical review," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 993-1006.
    20. 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.
    21. Georgina Santos, 2008. "The London Congestion Charging Scheme, 2003–2006," Chapters,in: Road Congestion Pricing in Europe, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Small, Kenneth A. & Gomez-Ilbanez, Jose A., 1998. "Road Pricing for Congestion Management: The Transition from Theory to Policy," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8kk909p1, University of California Transportation Center.
    23. Tommy Gärling & Cecilia Jakobsson & Peter Loukopoulos & Satoshi Fujii, 2008. "Acceptability of Road Pricing," Chapters,in: Pricing in Road Transport, chapter 10 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:transa:v:103:y:2017:i:c:p:36-53 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Zheng, Zuduo & Washington, Simon & Hyland, Paul & Sloan, Keith & Liu, Yulin, 2016. "Preference heterogeneity in mode choice based on a nationwide survey with a focus on urban rail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 178-194.
    3. repec:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1579-:d:111692 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:70:y:2014:i:c:p:117-134. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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 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.

    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.