IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v179y2026ics0967070x26000193.html

Exploring community public budget preferences for transport electrification: Evidence from a contingent budget allocation study in New South Wales, Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Pellegrini, Andrea
  • Rose, John M.
  • Hensher, David A.

Abstract

The allocation of funds across government functions often reflects political priorities that do not align with public expectations. This paper employs a contingent allocation method in which respondents are required to distribute a fixed budget across 12 different potential project types. The main goal of this research is to elicit community priorities for public spending with a specific focus on transport electrification. Based on a sample of 727 residents from the state of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, our findings indicate that transport electrification is not regarded as a majority priority relative to initiatives aimed at improving healthcare, utilities, roads and education. Further, we find that the prioritisation of decarbonising transport services is heavily influenced by households' financial circumstances: individuals experiencing financial distress are less inclined to allocate substantial public resources to curbing transport-related emissions. These results suggest that policy actions should be designed to ensure that climate transition measures do not disproportionately burden financially vulnerable communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Pellegrini, Andrea & Rose, John M. & Hensher, David A., 2026. "Exploring community public budget preferences for transport electrification: Evidence from a contingent budget allocation study in New South Wales, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:179:y:2026:i:c:s0967070x26000193
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2026.104009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X26000193
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2026.104009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mouter, Niek & van Cranenburgh, Sander & van Wee, Bert, 2017. "An empirical assessment of Dutch citizens' preferences for spatial equality in the context of a national transport investment plan," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 217-230.
    2. Collewet, Marion & Koster, Paul, 2023. "Preference estimation from point allocation experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    3. Chorus, Caspar G. & Pudāne, Baiba & Mouter, Niek & Campbell, Danny, 2018. "Taboo trade-off aversion: A discrete choice model and empirical analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 37-49.
    4. Dekker, Thijs & Koster, Paul & Mouter, Niek, 2024. "A micro-econometric framework for Participatory Value Evaluation," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. Yun, Hyunsoo & Lee, Eun Hak, 2025. "Party politics in transport policy with a large language model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 487-496.
    7. Mouter, Niek & van Cranenburgh, Sander & van Wee, Bert, 2017. "Do individuals have different preferences as consumer and citizen? The trade-off between travel time and safety," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 333-349.
    8. Nils Soguel & Eugenio Caperchione & Sandra Cohen, 2020. "Allocating government budgets according to citizen preferences: a cross-national survey," Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 32(3), pages 487-504, June.
    9. Lee, Eun Hak, 2024. "eXplainable DEA approach for evaluating performance of public transport origin-destination pairs," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    10. Ho, Chinh Q. & Hensher, David A. & Mulley, Corinne & Wong, Yale Z., 2018. "Potential uptake and willingness-to-pay for Mobility as a Service (MaaS): A stated choice study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 302-318.
    11. Mouter, Niek & Koster, Paul & Dekker, Thijs, 2021. "Contrasting the recommendations of participatory value evaluation and cost-benefit analysis in the context of urban mobility investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 54-73.
    12. Carlos Smaniotto Costa & Juan A. García-Esparza & Kinga Kimic, 2024. "Participatory Budgeting and Placemaking: Concepts, Methods, and Practices," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9.
    13. Yves Sintomer & Carsten Herzberg & Anja Röcke, 2008. "Participatory Budgeting in Europe: Potentials and Challenges," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 164-178, March.
    14. Bahamonde-Birke, Francisco J. & Geigenmüller, Iris M. & Mouter, Niek & van Lierop, Dea S. & Ettema, Dick F., 2024. "How do I want the city council to spend our budget? Conceiving MaaS from a citizen's perspective … (as well as biking infrastructure and public transport)," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 96-104.
    15. Bondonio, Piervincenzo & Marchese, Carla, 1994. "Equilibrium in Fiscal Choices: Evidence from a Budget Game," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 78(3-4), pages 205-218, March.
    16. Ardanaz, Martin & Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos, 2023. "Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    17. Lee, Eun Hak & Prozzi, Jolanda & Lewis, P. Grace Tee & Draper, Maia & Kim, Bumsik, 2025. "From scores to strategy: Performance-based transportation planning in Texas," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Camila Balbontin & David A. Hensher & Chinh Ho & Corinne Mulley, 2020. "Do preferences for BRT and LRT change as a voter, citizen, tax payer, or self-interested resident?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 2981-3030, December.
    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. Boxebeld, Sander & Mouter, Niek & Exel, Job van, 2025. "Trade-offs in long-term care for older people in an ageing society: A constrained portfolio choice experiment," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    2. Chen, Tiantian & Fu, Xiaowen & Hensher, David A. & Li, Zhi-Chun & Sze, N.N., 2022. "Air travel choice, online meeting and passenger heterogeneity – An international study on travellers’ preference during a pandemic," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 439-453.
    3. de Vries, Martijn Olivier & Hernández, José Ignacio & Mouter, Niek, 2025. "The value of accessibility, health, safety, inclusion and sustainability: a public willingness to pay experiment," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Mouter, Niek & Cabral, Manuel Ojeda & Dekker, Thijs & van Cranenburgh, Sander, 2019. "The value of travel time, noise pollution, recreation and biodiversity: A social choice valuation perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Mouter, Niek & Mulder, Jetske & de Vries, Martijn Olivier, 2025. "How do citizens prioritize the accessibility goals of the Dutch national government against other transport goals? Results of a Participatory Value Evaluation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    6. Bondemark, Anders & Andersson, Henrik & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2022. "Public preferences for distribution in the context of transport investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 160-184.
    7. Bondemark, Anders & Andersson, Henrik & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2023. "Do the distributional preferences of national infrastructure planners diverge from those of the public?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    8. Kim, Seheon & Rasouli, Soora, 2022. "The influence of latent lifestyle on acceptance of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): A hierarchical latent variable and latent class approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 304-319.
    9. Hasselwander, Marc & Bigotte, Joao F. & Antunes, Antonio P. & Sigua, Ricardo G., 2022. "Towards sustainable transport in developing countries: Preliminary findings on the demand for mobility-as-a-service (MaaS) in Metro Manila," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 501-518.
    10. Kim, Sung Hoo & Mokhtarian, Patricia L., 2023. "Finite mixture (or latent class) modeling in transportation: Trends, usage, potential, and future directions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 134-173.
    11. Hung Tran & Tien Mai, 2023. "Network-based Representations and Dynamic Discrete Choice Models for Multiple Discrete Choice Analysis," Papers 2306.04606, arXiv.org.
    12. Mabit, Stefan E., 2026. "Mixed logit applications in travel behaviour research," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    13. Caspar Chorus & Erlend Dancke Sandorf & Niek Mouter, 2020. "Diabolical dilemmas of COVID-19: An empirical study into Dutch society’s trade-offs between health impacts and other effects of the lockdown," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
    14. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    15. Zhao, Ying & Hu, Yan & Feng, Tao & Zhang, Anming, 2025. "Assessment of passengers’ safety and risk attitudes on integrated urban air mobility and airline services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    16. Katarzyna Groszek & Marek Furmankiewicz & Magdalena Kalisiak-Mędelska & Magdalena Błasik, 2025. "Land Use Patterns and Small Investment Project Preferences in Participatory Budgeting: Insights from a City in Poland," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, August.
    17. de Ruijter, Annamarie & Tuit, Charlotte & Mouter, Niek, 2025. "Beyond face Validity: Assessment of a participatory value evaluation for an institutionalized transport conflict," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 114-127.
    18. Guidon, Sergio & Wicki, Michael & Bernauer, Thomas & Axhausen, Kay, 2020. "Transportation service bundling – For whose benefit? Consumer valuation of pure bundling in the passenger transportation market," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 91-106.
    19. Lee, Hye-Jeong & Yoo, Seung-Hoon & Lim, Sesil & Huh, Sung-Yoon, 2023. "External benefits of a road transportation system with vehicle-to-everything communications," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 128-138.
    20. Kriswardhana, Willy & Esztergár-Kiss, Domokos, 2025. "Generational differences in the preferences for MaaS bundles," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:trapol:v:179:y:2026:i:c:s0967070x26000193. 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/30473/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.