IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-98-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Overcoming Public Aversion to Congestion Pricing

Author

Listed:
  • Krupnick, Alan

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Harrington, Winston

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Alberini, Anna

Abstract

Transportation authorities have consistently failed to employ economic incentives on major roadways--i.e. time-of-day pricing or "congestion fees"--to internalize the costs of congestion. In principle at least, such tolls can easily be shown to increase social welfare by making motorists pay something closer to the full social costs of their driving decisions. In addition, recent advances in electronics make it possible to implement such fees fairly cheaply and non-intrusively. While these same authorities generally understand and acknowledge the case for using congestion fees, they also claim that their use is politically infeasible because too many motorists would suffer large increases in commuting costs. This is the puzzle: If congestion tolls truly do advance social welfare, why is it so difficult to find a way to implement them? Two common explanations for this difficulty are the following: (i) The public perceives, or politicians fear that they would perceive, such fees simply as tax increases. If so, they might be responsive to an explicit promise to return the money in some way. (ii) Motorists dislike congestion fees because they find them coercive, in that they often have few if any practical alternatives to paying the fee. If so, then a policy option that offers motorists a choice of toll lanes and the more customary free lanes may be more attractive than a policy that policy of tolls on all lanes. We have completed a survey of Southern California residents designed to test these hypotheses. Unlike most opinion surveys on congestion pricing, our survey was quite explicit about the fate of the collected revenues. For example, we presented respondents with policies that returned a substantial portion of the revenues to the public, either in the form of cash (through reductions in sales taxes and vehicle registration fees or through income tax credits) or in the form of coupons to be used for vehicle emissions equipment repair, transit, and the like. In the past, most surveys have not been explicit about the revenues, or they have stated that revenue use was to be for improved highways, transit, or other public purposes. We find that a promise to offset the imposition of congestion fees by other taxes can result in a 7 percentage point increase in support for congestion pricing policies, and the restriction of congestion pricing to a single lane on a freeway attracts from 9 to 17 percentage points of additional support.

Suggested Citation

  • Krupnick, Alan & Harrington, Winston & Alberini, Anna, 1998. "Overcoming Public Aversion to Congestion Pricing," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-27, Resources for the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-98-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-98-27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kraus, Marvin, 1989. "The welfare gains from pricing road congestion using automatic vehicle identification and on-vehicle meters," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 261-281, May.
    2. Nevin, Michael & Abbie, Les, 1993. "What price roads? : Practical issues in the introduction of road-user charges in historic cities in the UK," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 68-73, October.
    3. Calfee, John & Winston, Clifford, 1998. "The value of automobile travel time: implications for congestion policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 83-102, July.
    4. Small, Kenneth A., 1992. "Using the Revenues from Congestion Pricing," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt32p9m3mm, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Hau, Timothy D., 1992. "Congestion charging mechanisms for roads : an evaluation of current practice," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1071, The World Bank.
    6. repec:bla:econom:v:44:y:1977:i:175:p:297-304 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Kraus, Marvin & Mohring, Herbert & Pinfold, Thomas P, 1976. "The Welfare Costs of Nonoptimum Pricing and Investment Policies for Freeway Transportation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 532-547, September.
    8. Krupnick, Alan J. & Harrington, Winston & Alberini, Anna, 1996. "Public Support for Pollution Fee Policies for Motor Vehicles: Survey Results," Discussion Papers 10469, Resources for the Future.
    9. Segal, David & Steinmeier, Thomas L., 1980. "The incidence of congestion and congestion tolls," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 42-62, January.
    10. Keeler, Theodore E & Small, Kenneth A, 1977. "Optimal Peak-Load Pricing, Investment, and Service Levels on Urban Expressways," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(1), pages 1-25, February.
    11. Krupnick, Alan & Harrington, Winston & Alberini, Anna, 1996. "Public Support for Pollution Fee Policies for Motor Vehicles: Survey Results," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-13, Resources for the Future.
    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. Harrington, Winston & Krupnick, Alan J. & Alberini, Anna, 1998. "Overcoming Public Aversion to Congestion Pricing," Discussion Papers 10730, Resources for the Future.
    2. De Borger, Bruno & Van Dender, Kurt, 2003. "Transport tax reform, commuting, and endogenous values of time," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 510-530, May.
    3. Anas, Alex & Rhee, Hyok-Joo, 2006. "Curbing excess sprawl with congestion tolls and urban boundaries," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 510-541, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Button, Kenneth, 2004. "1. The Rationale For Road Pricing: Standard Theory And Latest Advances," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 3-25, January.
    6. Georgina Santos & Erik Verhoef, 2011. "Road Congestion Pricing," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 23, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. De Borger, Bruno & Wouters, Sandra, 1998. "Transport externalities and optimal pricing and supply decisions in urban transportation: a simulation analysis for Belgium," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 163-197, March.
    8. De Borger, Bruno & Mayeres, Inge, 2007. "Optimal taxation of car ownership, car use and public transport: Insights derived from a discrete choice numerical optimization model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 1177-1204, July.
    9. Small, Kenneth A., 1997. "Economics and urban transportation policy in the United States," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 671-691, November.
    10. Lei Zhang & David Levinson & Shanjiang Zhu, 2007. "Agent-Based Model of Price Competition and Product Differentiation on Congested Networks," Working Papers 200809, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
    11. Erik Verhoef & Mark Lijesen, 1998. "The Economic Effects of Road Pricing in the Randstad Area," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-078/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Johnston, Robert, 1997. "A Comparative Systems-level Analysis: Automated Freeways, Hov Lanes, Transit Expansion, Pricing Policies And Land Use Intensification," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6mt9f54w, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    13. De Borger, Bruno & Wuyts, Bart, 2011. "The structure of the labor market, telecommuting, and optimal peak period congestion tolls: A numerical optimization model," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 426-438, September.
    14. King, David & Manville, Michael & Shoup, Donald, 2007. "The political calculus of congestion pricing," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt9js9z8gz, University of California Transportation Center.
    15. J Berechman, 1984. "Highway-Capacity Utilization and Investment in Transportation Corridors," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 16(11), pages 1475-1488, November.
    16. King, David & Manville, Michael & Shoup, Donald, 2007. "The political calculus of congestion pricing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 111-123, March.
    17. Johnston, Robert A. & Ceerla, Raju, 1993. "A Continuing Systems-level Evaluation Of Automated Urban Freeways: Year Three," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0gv0s4x4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    18. Daniel, Joseph I. & Bekka, Khalid, 2000. "The Environmental Impact of Highway Congestion Pricing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 180-215, March.
    19. Glavic, Drazenko & Milos, Mladenovic & Luttinen, Tapio & Cicevic, Svetlana & Trifunovic, Aleksandar, 2017. "Road to price: User perspectives on road pricing in transition country," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 79-94.
    20. Richard Arnott, 1994. "Alleviating Traffic Congestion: Alternatives to Road Pricing," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 282., Boston College Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-98-27. 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: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .

    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.