IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v11y2018i5p1126-d144256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transport Demand Management Policy Integration in Chinese Cities: A Proposed Analysis of Its Effects

Author

Listed:
  • Wei Yang

    (Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628BX Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Wijnand Veeneman

    (Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628BX Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Martin De Jong

    (Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628BX Delft, The Netherlands
    School of International Relations & Public Affairs, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China)

Abstract

Transport demand management (TDM) measures are widely regarded as essential tools to deal with traffic issues. Their effectiveness has been under scrutiny. Packaging of TDM measures has recently received much attention from researchers and governments because it can achieve more complex policy goals and resolve the negative effects of single TDM measures. Many studies have examined the concept of policy packaging, the ideal packaging process, and potential barriers at the theoretical level. However, the way TDM packaging as a concept works in a real-world context has received little attention. Additionally, there is little methodology to analyse its characteristics from a dynamic and historical perspective. Therefore, this study provides a methodology for analysing TDM packaging in four dimensions (i.e., density, classification, interaction, and time). These dimensions respectively reveal how many and what kind of TDM measures have been implemented, how they interact in a package, and how these characteristics change over time. We examine this methodology through comparative case studies based on policy document analysis in two Chinese cities, Dalian and Shenzhen, both of which adopt a large number of TDM measures. The results show that this methodology successfully reveals the characteristics of case cities: both tend to put more TDM measures into the transport policy package to deal with traffic issues, but the package in Shenzhen is more integrative than that in Dalian. We also find that with the integration of packaging increasing, transport systems are becoming more sustainable, and Shenzhen performs better in this regard than Dalian. This methodology can be used to analyse policy packaging in broader areas and to examine its influence on transport systems in more case studies in future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Wei Yang & Wijnand Veeneman & Martin De Jong, 2018. "Transport Demand Management Policy Integration in Chinese Cities: A Proposed Analysis of Its Effects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:5:p:1126-:d:144256
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/5/1126/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/11/5/1126/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justen, Andreas & Fearnley, Nils & Givoni, Moshe & Macmillen, James, 2014. "A process for designing policy packaging: Ideals and realities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 9-18.
    2. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Network-centric policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 317-338, June.
    3. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    4. Gilles Duranton & Matthew A. Turner, 2011. "The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US Cities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2616-2652, October.
    5. Michael Howlett & Pablo del Rio, 2015. "The parameters of policy portfolios: verticality and horizontality in design spaces and their consequences for policy mix formulation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1233-1245, October.
    6. Kingham, S. & Dickinson, J. & Copsey, S, 2001. "Travelling to work: will people move out of their cars," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 151-160, April.
    7. Geerlings, Harry & Stead, Dominic, 2003. "The integration of land use planning, transport and environment in European policy and research," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 187-196, July.
    8. Downs, Anthony, 2004. "Why Traffic Congestion is Here to Stay....and Will Get Worse," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3sh9003x, University of California Transportation Center.
    9. Graham-Rowe, Ella & Skippon, Stephen & Gardner, Benjamin & Abraham, Charles, 2011. "Can we reduce car use and, if so, how? A review of available evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 401-418, June.
    10. Santos, Georgina & Behrendt, Hannah & Teytelboym, Alexander, 2010. "Part II: Policy instruments for sustainable road transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 46-91.
    11. 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.
    12. Filipe, Luis N. & Macário, Rosário, 2014. "Policy packaging in BRT projects: A methodology for case study analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 152-158.
    13. 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.
    14. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    15. Moshe Givoni & James Macmillen & David Banister & Eran Feitelson, 2013. "From Policy Measures to Policy Packages," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Florian Kern & Michael Howlett, 2009. "Implementing transition management as policy reforms: a case study of the Dutch energy sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(4), pages 391-408, November.
    17. Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard & Isaksson, Karolina & Macmillen, James & Åkerman, Jonas & Kressler, Florian, 2014. "Strategies to manage barriers in policy formation and implementation of road pricing packages," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 40-52.
    18. Banister, David, 2008. "The sustainable mobility paradigm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 73-80, March.
    19. Stewart, Greg & Pringle, Rob, 1997. "Toronto's tentative approach to TDM," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(14-15), pages 1203-1212, December.
    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. Yang, Wei & Veeneman, Wijnand & de Jong, Martin & Song, Yun, 2020. "Integrated transport management: Lessons from a Chinese city," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    2. Moeinaddini, Amin & Habibian, Meeghat, 2024. "Acceptability of transportation demand management policy packages considering interactions and socio-economic heterogeneity," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Moeinaddini, Amin & Habibian, Meeghat, 2024. "Acceptability of transportation demand management policy packages considering interactions and socio-economic heterogeneity," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    3. Yang, Wei & Veeneman, Wijnand & de Jong, Martin & Song, Yun, 2020. "Integrated transport management: Lessons from a Chinese city," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    4. Wang, Yacan & Geng, Kexin & May, Anthony D. & Zhou, Huiyu, 2022. "The impact of traffic demand management policy mix on commuter travel choices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 74-87.
    5. Lisa Schmieder & Dirk Scheer & Chiara Iurato, 2021. "Streams Analysis for Better Air Quality: The German Lead City Program Assessed by the Policy Package Approach and the Multiple Streams Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Nihit Goyal & Michael Howlett, 2018. "Technology and Instrument Constituencies as Agents of Innovation: Sustainability Transitions and the Governance of Urban Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, May.
    8. Li, Lili & Taeihagh, Araz, 2020. "An in-depth analysis of the evolution of the policy mix for the sustainable energy transition in China from 1981 to 2020," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    9. Jun Guan Neoh & Maxwell Chipulu & Alasdair Marshall, 2017. "What encourages people to carpool? An evaluation of factors with meta-analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 423-447, March.
    10. Anders Tønnesen & Oddrun Helen Hagen & Aud Tennøy, 2021. "Use of public information for road-capacity reductions: a study of mediating strategies during tunnel rehabilitations in Oslo," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2263-2286, October.
    11. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    12. Feitelson, Eran & Cohen-Blankshtain, Galit, 2018. "Public transport planning in a spatially segmented city: The case of Jerusalem," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 65-74.
    13. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    14. Chu, Singfat, 2015. "Car restraint policies and mileage in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 404-412.
    15. Marc Dijk & Eric Iversen & Antje Klitkou & René Kemp & Simon Bolwig & Mads Borup & Peter Møllgaard, 2020. "Forks in the Road to E-Mobility: An Evaluation of Instrument Interaction in National Policy Mixes in Northwest Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    16. Marc Dijk & Moshe Givoni & Karen Diederiks, 2018. "Piling up or Packaging Policies? An Ex-Post Analysis of Modal Shift in Four Cities," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-20, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Xue Wang & Suwei Feng & Tianyi Tang, 2023. "Acceptability toward Policy Mix: Impact of Low-Carbon Travel Intention, Fairness, and Effectiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-22, October.
    19. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Network-centric policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 317-338, June.
    20. Francesco Mantino & Francesco Vanni, 2019. "Policy Mixes as a Strategy to Provide More Effective Social and Environmental Benefits: Evidence from Six Rural Areas in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-17, November.

    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:gam:jeners:v:11:y:2018:i:5:p:1126-:d:144256. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.