Economics of Road Network Ownership
This paper seeks to understand the economic impact of centralized and decentralized ownership structures and their corresponding pricing and investment strategies on transportation network performance and social welfare for travelers. In a decentralized network economic system, roads are owned by many agencies or companies that are responsible for pricing and investment strategies. The motivation of this study is two-fold. First, the question of which ownership structure, or industrial organization, is optimal for transportation networks has yet to be resolved. Despite several books devoted to this research issue, quantitative methods that translate ownership-related policy variables into short- and long-run network performance are lacking. Second, the U.S. and many other countries have recently seen a slowly but steadily increasing popularity of road pricing as an alternative to traditional fuel taxes. Not only is the private sector encouraged to finance new roads, this transition in revenue mechanism also makes it possible for lower-level government agencies and smaller jurisdictions to participate in network pricing and investment practice. The issue of optimal ownership is no longer a purely theoretical debate, but bears practical importance. This research adopts an agent-based simulator of network dynamics to explore the implications of centralized and decentralized ownership on mobility and social welfare, as well as potential financial issues and regulatory needs. Components of the simulator: the travel demand model, cost functions, and key variables of pricing and investment strategies, are empirically estimated and validated. Results suggest that road network is a market with imperfect competition. While there is a significant performance lag between the optimal strategy and the current network financing practice in the U.S. (characterized by centralized control, fuel taxes, and budget-balancing investment), a completely decentralized network suffers from issues such as higher-than-optimal tolls and over-investment. For the decentralized ownership structure, appropriate regulation on pricing and investment practices is necessary. Further analysis based on simulation comparisons suggests that with appropriate price regulation, a decentralized road economy consisting of profit-seeking road owners could outperform the existing centralized control, achieve net social benefits close to the theoretical optimum, and distribute a high percentage of welfare gains to travelers. Decentralized control is especially valuable in rapidly changing environments because it promptly responds to travel demand. These results seem to favor the idea of privatizing or decentralizing road ownership on congested networks. Further tests on real-world transportation networks are necessary and should make an interesting future study.
|Date of creation:||2006|
|Publication status:||Published in International Journal of Sustainable Transportation Sept. 2009 3(5) pp. 339-359.|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Dept. of Civil Engineering, 500 Pillsbury Drive SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455|
Phone: +01 (612) 625-6354
Fax: +01 (612) 626-7750
Web page: http://nexus.umn.edu
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- AndrÊ de Palma & Robin Lindsey, 2000. "Private toll roads: Competition under various ownership regimes," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(1), pages 13-35.
- Gene M. Grossman (ed.), 1996. "Economic Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 553, July.
- Lei Zhang & David Levinson, 2006. "The Economics of Transportation Network Growth," Working Papers 200710, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- Bar-Gera, Hillel & Boyce, David, 2003. "Origin-based algorithms for combined travel forecasting models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 405-422, June.
- Andrew Zimbalist (ed.), 2001. "The Economics of Sport," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 2128, July.
- Viton Philip A., 1995. "Private Roads," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 260-289, May.
- Safirova, Elena & Gillingham, Kenneth & Houde, Sébastien, 2007.
"Measuring marginal congestion costs of urban transportation: Do networks matter?,"
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice,
Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 734-749, October.
- Safirova, Elena & Gillingham, Kenneth, 2003. "Measuring Marginal Congestion Costs of Urban Transportation: Do Networks Matter?," Discussion Papers dp-03-56, Resources For the Future.
- Verhoef, Erik & Nijkamp, Peter & Rietveld, Piet, 1996. "Second-Best Congestion Pricing: The Case of an Untolled Alternative," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 279-302, November.
- Lei Zhang & David Levinson, 2004. "Pricing, Investment, and Network Equilibrium," Working Papers 000032, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- David Levinson & David Gillen, 1997. "The Full Cost of Intercity Highway Transportation," Working Papers 199704, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- Arnott, Richard & de Palma, Andre & Lindsey, Robin, 1992. "Route choice with heterogeneous drivers and group-specific congestion costs," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 71-102, March.
- Small, Kenneth A., 2001. "The Value of Pricing," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0rm449sx, University of California Transportation Center.
- David Levinson & Ramachandra Karamalaputi, 2003. "Induced Supply: A Model of Highway Network Expansion at the Microscopic Level," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 37(3), pages 297-318, September.
- David Levinson & Ramachandra Karamalaputi, 2003. "Induced Supply: A Model of Highway Network Expansion at the Microscopic Level," Working Papers 200304, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- Small, Kenneth A. & Yan, Jia, 2001. "The Value of "Value Pricing" of Roads: Second-Best Pricing and Product Differentiation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 310-336, March.
- Small, K.A. & Yan, J., 1999. "The Value of "Value Princing" of Roads: Second-Best Pricing and Product Differentiation," Papers 99-00-02, California Irvine - School of Social Sciences.
- Small, Kenneth A. & Yan, Jia, 2001. "The Value of "Value Pricing" of Roads: Second-Best Pricing and Product Differentiation," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9569k1sz, University of California Transportation Center.
- Small, Kenneth & Yan, Jia, 2000. "The Value of "Value Pricing" of Roads: Second-Best Pricing and Product Differentiation," Discussion Papers dp-00-08, Resources For the Future.
- David Levinson, 2000. "Revenue Choice on a Serial Network," Working Papers 200001, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
- repec:adr:anecst:y:1989:i:15-16:p:17 is not listed on IDEAS
- de Palma, Andre, 1992. "A Game-Theoretic Approach to the Analysis of Simple Congested Networks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 494-500, May.
- Yang, Hai & Tang, Wilson H. & Man Cheung, Wing & Meng, Qiang, 2002. "Profitability and welfare gain of private toll roads in a network with heterogeneous users," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 537-554, July. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)