IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ctswps/2012_003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Stockholm congestion charges – five years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt

Author

Listed:
  • Börjesson, Maria

    () (Royal Institute of Technology (KTH))

  • Eliasson, Jonas

    () (Royal Institute of Technology (KTH))

  • Hugosson, Muriel

    (Royal Institute of Technology (KTH))

  • Brundell-Freij, Karin

    (WSP Analysis & Strategy)

Abstract

Congestion charges were introduced in Stockholm in 2006, first as a trial followed by a referendum, then permanently from 2007. This paper discusses what conclusions can be drawn from the first five years of operation, until mid-2011. We show that the traffic reduction caused by the charges has increased slightly over time, once external factors are controlled for. Alternative-fuel vehicles were exempt from the charges through 2008, and we show that this substantially increased the sales of such vehicles. We discuss public and political acceptability, synthesizing recent research and Swedish experience. We conclude that objective and subjective effects on the traffic system, as well as general environmental and political attitudes, formed the basis of the strong public support, while institutional reforms and resolution of power issues were necessary to gain political support. Finally, we briefly discuss implications for the transport planning process in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Hugosson, Muriel & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2012. "The Stockholm congestion charges – five years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:3, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ctswps:2012_003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.transportportal.se/SWoPEc/CTS2012-3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Gudmundsson, Henrik & Ericsson, Eva & Hugosson, Muriel Beser & Rosqvist, Lena Smidfelt, 2009. "Framing the role of Decision Support in the case of Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 258-268, March.
    3. Isaksson, Karolina & Richardson, Tim, 2009. "Building legitimacy for risky policies: The cost of avoiding conflict in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 251-257, March.
    4. P.B. Goodwin, 1977. "Habit and Hysteresis in Mode Choice," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 14(1), pages 95-98, February.
    5. Vickrey, William S, 1969. "Congestion Theory and Transport Investment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 251-260, May.
    6. Eliasson, Jonas & Jonsson, Lina, 2011. "The unexpected "yes": Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 636-647, August.
    7. Small, Kenneth A., 1992. "Using the Revenues from Congestion Pricing," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt32p9m3mm, University of California Transportation Center.
    8. Schade, J. & Baum, M., 2007. "Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 41-48, January.
    9. Karlström, Anders & Franklin, Joel P., 2009. "Behavioral adjustments and equity effects of congestion pricing: Analysis of morning commutes during the Stockholm Trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 283-296, March.
    10. Richard Arnott & Andre de Palma & Robin Lindsey, 1993. "The Welfare Effects Of Congestion Tolls With Heterogeneous Commuters," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 231, Boston College Department of Economics.
    11. 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.
    12. Winslott-Hiselius, Lena & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Vagland, Asa & Byström, Camilla, 2009. "The development of public attitudes towards the Stockholm congestion trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 269-282, March.
    13. Arnott, Richard & de Palma, Andre & Lindsey, Robin, 1993. "A Structural Model of Peak-Period Congestion: A Traffic Bottleneck with Elastic Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 161-179, March.
    14. Georgina Santos, 2008. "The London Congestion Charging Scheme, 2003–2006," Chapters,in: Road Congestion Pricing in Europe, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Schade, Jens & Schlag, Bernhard, 2000. "Acceptability of Urban Transport Pricing," Research Reports 72, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    16. Daunfeldt, Sven-Olov & Rudholm, Niklas & Rämme, Ulf, 2009. "Congestion charges and retail revenues: Results from the Stockholm road pricing trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 306-309, March.
    17. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Congestion pricing; acceptability; evaluation; Stockholm;

    JEL classification:

    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R42 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government and Private Investment Analysis; Road Maintenance; Transportation Planning
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:ctswps:2012_003. 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: (CTS). General contact details of provider: http://www.cts.kth.se/ .

    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.