Road pricing

Road pricing (also road user charges) are direct charges levied for the use of roads, including road tolls, distance or time-based fees, congestion charges and charges designed to discourage the use of certain classes of vehicle, fuel sources or more polluting vehicles.[1][2] These charges may be used primarily for revenue generation, usually for road infrastructure financing, or as a transportation demand management tool to reduce peak hour travel and the associated traffic congestion or other social and environmental negative externalities associated with road travel such as air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, visual intrusion, noise pollution and road traffic collisions.[3]

For the more specific concept of congestion charges to curb urban traffic demand, see congestion pricing.

A toll plaza in the United Kingdom
Part of a series on
Economics
Branches and classifications
Concepts, theory and techniques
By application
Notable economists
Lists
Part of a series on
Taxation
An aspect of fiscal policy
Policies
Economics
General Theory
Distribution of Tax
Collection
Noncompliance
General
Corporate
Locations
Major examples
Types
International
Trade
Research
Academic
Advocacy groups
Religious
By country
All Countries
Individual Countries

In most countries toll roads, toll bridges and toll tunnels are often used primarily for revenue generation to repay long-term debt issued to finance the toll facility, or to finance capacity expansion, operations, and maintenance of the facility itself, or simply as general tax funds.[1] Road congestion pricing for entering an urban area, or pollution charges levied on vehicles with higher tailpipe emissions are typical schemes implemented to price externalities. The application of congestion charges is currently limited to a small number of cities and urban roads, and the notable schemes include the Electronic Road Pricing in Singapore, the London congestion charge, the Stockholm congestion tax, the Milan Area C, and high-occupancy toll lanes in the United States.[4][5] Examples of pollution pricing schemes include the London low emission zone and the discontinued Ecopass in Milan. In some European countries there is a period-based charge for the use of motorways and expressways, based on a vignette or sticker attached to a vehicle, and in a few countries vignettes are required for the use of any road. Mileage-based usage fees (MBUF) or distance-based charging has been implemented for heavy vehicles based on truck weight and distance traveled in New Zealand (called RUC), Switzerland (LSVA), Germany (LKW-Maut), Austria (Go-Maut), Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, and in four U.S. states: Oregon, New York, Kentucky, and New Mexico.[6]

Many recent road pricing schemes have proved controversial, with a number of high-profile schemes in the US and the UK being cancelled, delayed, or scaled back in response to opposition and protest. The tendency seems to reverse, however, when the system is already in place, with the popularity of existing systems often increasing while merely discussed systems face an uphill battle in public opinion. A 2006 survey of the economic literature on the subject finds that most economists agree that some form of road pricing to reduce congestion is economically viable and overall beneficial, although there is disagreement on what form road pricing should take. Economists disagree over how to set tolls, how to cover common costs, and what to do with any "excess" revenues (i.e., Revenues that exceed direct costs of road construction and maintenance, but which may still not cover external costs fully), whether and how "losers" from tolling previously free roads should be compensated, and whether to privatize highways.[7]

Terminology

Road pricing is a general term that may be used for any system where the driver pays directly for use of a particular roadway or road network in a particular city, region, or nation. Road pricing also includes congestion charging, which are charges levied on qualifying road users to reduce peak demand, and thereby reduce traffic congestion[1][2][8][9][10][11] and also to place a charge on road users for other negative externalities, including traffic accidents, noise, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.[3]

History

The first published reference to 'road pricing' was possibly in 1949 when the RAND Corporation proposed "use of direct road pricing to make freight journeys more expensive on congested routes or to influence the time of day at which freight traffic operates".[12] Nobel-laureate William Vickrey then built on the ideas of the economist Arthur Pigou, outlining a theoretical case for road pricing in a major work on the subject of 1955[13] proposing in 1959 that drivers should be charged by electronic means for use of busy urban roads.[14] Arthur Pigou had previously developed the concept of economic externalities in a publication of 1920[15] in which he proposed that what is now referred to as a Pigouvian tax equal to the negative externality should be used to bring the outcome within a market economy back to economic efficiency.[13]

In 1963 Vickery published a paper 'Pricing in urban and suburban transport' in the American Economic Review[16] and Gabriel Joseph Roth, John Michael Thomson of the Department of Applied Economics at the University of Cambridge published a short paper titled "Road pricing, a cure for congestion?"[17] The Smeed Report, 'Road Pricing: The Economic and Technical Possibilities', which had been commissioned in 1962 by the United Kingdom Ministry of Transport, was published in 1964.[18] Road pricing was then developed by Maurice Allais and Gabriel Roth in a paper titled "The Economics of Road User Charges" published by the World Bank in 1968.[19]

The first successful implementation of a congestion charge was with the Singapore Area Licensing Scheme in 1976. The Electronic Road Pricing (Hong Kong) scheme operated as a trial between 1983 and 1985 but was not continued permanently due to public opposition. A number of road tolling schemes were then introduced in Norway between 1986 and 1991 in Bergen, Oslo, and the Trondheim Toll Scheme.[20] It was noticed that the Oslo scheme had the unintended effect of reducing traffic by around 5%. The Singapore scheme was expanded in 1995 and converted to use a new electronic tolling system in 1998 and renamed Electronic Road Pricing. The first use of a road toll for access by low-occupancy vehicles to high-occupancy vehicle lane was introduced in the U.S. on California State Route 91 in 1995. Since 2000, other schemes have been introduced, although the New York congestion pricing proposal and a number of UK proposals were not progressed due to public opposition. In France road pricing came about as an unintended consequence of the way highways are built and financed as most are built by for-profit companies which earn back their expense through tolls. Some other European countries also have similar schemes either on parts of their highway network or only on particularly expensive roads such as tunnels, bridges, or mountain range crossings.

Impact

A study of congestion pricing in Stockholm between 2006 and 2010 found that in the absence of congestion pricing Stockholm's "air would have been five to ten percent more polluted between 2006 and 2010, and young children would have suffered 45 percent more asthma attacks".[21][22]

A 2013 study found that after congestion pricing was implemented in Seattle, drivers reported greater satisfaction with the routes covered by congestion pricing and reported lower stress.[23][24]

A 2016 study found that more people used public transportation due to the implementation of congestion pricing in Singapore.[25] A 2016 study found that real estate prices dropped by 19% within the cordoned-off areas of Singapore where congestion pricing was in place relative to the areas outside of the area.[26]

Research from 2019 provides a set of tools to enable analysis and measurement of the impacts of toll pricing, toll payment, toll collection technology, and other aspects of toll implementation and rate changes on low-income and minority populations.[27]

Example schemes
See also: Geography of toll roads

Australia

In January 2009, variable tolls were implemented at Sydney Harbour Bridge, two weeks after upgrading to 100% free-flow electronic toll collection. The highest fees are charged during the morning and afternoon peak periods; a toll 25% lower applies for the shoulder periods; and a toll lower than the previously existing is charged at nights, weekends, and public holidays. This is Australia's first road congestion pricing scheme, and has had only a very minor effect on traffic levels, reducing them by 0.19%[28][29][30][31]

China
Pollution in Beijing
High air pollution day in Beijing

Main roadways and highways in Shanghai are tolled, and an assessment was completed to evaluate the implementation of congestion pricing for vehicles entering the central business district.[32][33] The city also restrains car use, ownership and there are restrictions on getting a driver's license; since 1998, the number of new car registrations is limited to 50,000 vehicles a year, and car registrations are sold by public auction, with prices reaching up to US$5,000 in 2006. Parking is also limited.

Congestion based pricing for Beijing was recommended by the World Bank in 2010[34][35] and local officials announced plans to introduce a scheme in September 2011 although no details about the cost or the charge zone have been provided.[36] The city is dealt with traffic congestion and air pollution through a driving restriction scheme implemented since the 2008 Summer Olympics.[37][38] As of June 2016, another 11 Chinese cities have similar restriction schemes in place.[39]

In early 2010 the city Guangzhou, Guangdong province, opened a public discussion on whether to introduce congestion charges. An online survey conducted by two local news outlets found that 84.4% of respondents opposed the charges.[35] The city of Nanjing is also considering the implementation of congestion pricing.[33]

In December 2015, the Beijing Municipal Commission of Transport announced plans to introduce congestion charges in 2016. According to the city's motor vehicle emission control plan 2013–2017, the congestion charge will be a real-time variable pricing scheme based on actual traffic flows and emissions data, and allow the fee to be charged for different vehicles and vary by time of the day and for different districts. The Dongcheng and Xicheng are among the districts that are most likely to first implement congestion charges. Vehicle emissions account for 31% of the city's smog sources, according to Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau. The local government has implemented already several policies to address air quality, and congestion, such as a driving restriction scheme based upon the last digits on their license plates.[40][41] Also a vehicle quota system was introduced in 2011, awarding new car licenses through a lottery, with a ceiling of 6 million units set by the city authority for 2017. In May 2016, the Beijing city legislature announced it will consider starting levying traffic congestion charges by 2020 as part of a package of measures to reform the vehicle quota system.[42] As of June 2016, the city's environmental and transport departments are working together on a congestion pricing proposal.[39]

Hong Kong

Hong Kong's Electronic Road Pricing system operated between 1983 and 1985 with positive results.[43] Public opposition stalled its permanent implementation. Proposals were however raised again in 2012.[44]

Singapore
Main article: Electronic Road Pricing
Electronic Road Pricing Gantry at North Bridge Road, Singapore

The world's first congestion pricing scheme was introduced in Singapore's core central business district in 1975[45] as the Singapore Area Licensing Scheme. It was extended in 1995 and converted to 100% free-flowing Electronic Road Pricing in September 1998. Variable pricing based on congestion levels was introduced in 2007.[46] It is one of a number of elements in their Transportation Demand Management, which also includes high annual road tax, custom duties and vehicle registration fees for new vehicles, a quota system for new vehicles and heavy investment in public transportation.[47] Singapore has one of the highest per capita incomes in Asia, but fewer than 30% of Singaporean households own cars.[48]

Europe
Road sign for toll road for heavy trucks

Austria

A distance-based charging scheme called Go-Maut was implemented in Austria for all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes on motorways in 2004.[6] In addition, all vehicles under 3.5 tonnes are required to buy a sticker or vignette to access the Austrian motorway network, which is owned and operated by a state-owned company called ASFINAG. The vignette enables the vehicle to use almost the entire motorway network in Austria for a specific period of time, with the lower charge set at €8 for 10 days. However, there is an additional toll charge for selected routes, such as long tunnels and expensive routes through the Alps.[49]

Belarus

See Toll roads in Belarus.

Finland

The only Finnish town to suffer serious road congestion is Helsinki, built on a narrow peninsula. In the 1980s and 1990s, the City Administration was already proposing tolls on vehicles entering the centre but the Chamber of Commerce successfully resisted these.[50] Road pricing was taken up in the central government programme in 2011 when the coalition members committed themselves to examine "the introduction of GPS-based road user charges".[51] Transport minister Merja Kyllönen set up a working group to study "road user charging systems" in October 2012.[52] The Ministry was committed to the architecture of the European Electronic Toll Service.[53]

In March 2013, an independent Finnish policy institute recommended a market-based road pricing architecture for Europe. The roads needed for a journey could be pre-booked, the price of "slots" rising as the roads to be used approached capacity. The price would become payable at the scheduled time of departure unless the slot holder resold the slot before then. Casual motorists without bookings would be charged the current price.[54] The paper proposed that Finland, having no serious road congestion to address, could serve as a testbed for road charging mechanisms.

The Transport Ministry's working group reported in December 2013 that a tax proportional to road use would implement transport and environment policies better than current fixed taxes on motoring, although collection costs would be many times higher. The focus of transport policy should be on solving capacity problems by managing demand rather than by building new infrastructure. However, it argued that buses and lorries should be exempted from road use charges on the grounds that the rise in costs could not be offset by cutting other heavy vehicle road taxes, which were already close to the minimum set in the EU's vignette directive. For private cars, the report looked at the implications of fixed and regional kilometre charges but did not consider market or other methods for responding to varying local congestion. Before the adoption of any system, it proposed broad trials to establish the technical viability of taxing road use, its enforceability, and the protection of privacy.[55]

Germany
Main article: LKW-MAUT

The LKW-MAUT distance-based charging scheme large goods vehicles in Germany began operation on 1 January 2005 after a two-year delay with prices varying depending on emission levels and the number of axles. The scheme, which combining satellite technology with other technologies and is operated by Toll Collect, suffered delays before implementation.[6]

Ireland

Toll roads are common in Ireland for motorways and bridges/tunnels, with 11 toll roads in existence as of 2019.

In the 18th and 19th Centuries Turnpike trusts managed the roadways. However, with the onset of railways, the use of roads become far less popular, and tolling was abolished.

The first modern road charging scheme was introduced in 1984 on the East Link, a bascule lift bridge in Dublin's docklands, constructed by National Toll Roads (NTR) under a public-private partnership concession. This was followed by the West-Link bridge in 1990, similarly a concession to NTR. However, despite the opening of a second bridge in 2003, capacity and toll management of the West-Link was woefully inadequate, resulting in massive congestion on the Dublin M50 ring road. In 2007, the government bought out NTR's concession and introduced barrier-free tolling in order to end the jams.

In order to fund long-distance motorway construction in the mid-2000s, a new PPP model of DBOF (design, build, operate and finance PPP) concessions was adopted. International construction companies primarily backed these. The first such toll motorway was the M4/M6 operated by Spanish company Ferrovial, followed by routes such as the Eurolink M3 toll (a joint venture of Ferrovial and Irish company SIAC Construction), the M8 Fermoy bypass (owned by private equity and investment companies such as TIIC Group of Portugal, Aberdeen Standard Investments and 3I) and the M7/M9 Mid Link route owned by the Dutch company BAM and Spanish ACS Group). However, the onset of the Global Financial Crisis towards the end of the decade and the resulting Irish recession saw a large drop off in driving and use of tolls. No new toll routes have been proposed since the economic downturn. However, a model of PPP shadow-tolling has been adopted to build routes such as the M18.

Italy
Entrance to Milan Area C
Main articles: Milan Area C and Ecopass

Rome converted a residents' pass system for the core of the city to a road pricing system in 2001 and Genoa started a trial system in 2003.[16]

The Milan "Ecopass" system began operation in early 2008 with the objective to reduce air pollution from vehicles.[56][57][58] It was extended several times[59] before being replaced by Area C, a conventional congestion pricing scheme covering the same geographic area in January 2012. Electric vehicles, public utilities' vehicles, police and emergency vehicles, buses, and taxis are exempted from the charge. Hybrid electric and bi-fuel natural gas vehicles (CNG and LPG) will be exempted until 1 January 2013.[60]

The scheme was made permanent in March 2013. All net earnings from Area C are invested to promote sustainable mobility and policies to reduce air pollution, including the redevelopment, protection, and development of public transport, "soft mobility" (pedestrians, cycling, Zone 30), and systems to rationalize the distribution of goods.[61]

Malta

The automated 'Controlled Vehicular Access' (CVA) system was launched in Malta's capital city of Valletta on 1 May 2007.[62] The number of vehicles entering the city reduced from 10,000 to 7,900; there has also been a 60% drop in car stays by non-residents of more than eight hours with a marked increase of 34% in non-residential cars visiting the city for an hour or less.[63][64]

Norway
Main articles: Toll roads in Norway and Autopass

Norway implemented electronic urban tolling on the main road corridors into Bergen (1986), Oslo (1990), and then the Trondheim Toll Scheme the following year.[20] The Bergen scheme operated as a cordon on all entry points to the central area of the city. The Oslo scheme was initially created as a conventional road toll for revenue generation reasons but had the unintended effect of reducing traffic by around 5%. Charges vary by time of the day. Parliament approved the legal basis for introducing congestion charging fee in 2001[65] In October 2011 the Norwegian government announced the introduction of rules allowing congestion charging in cities. The measure is intended to cut greenhouse gas and air pollutant emissions, and relieve traffic congestion.[66] As of November 2015, Norwegian authorities have implemented urban charging schemes that operates both on the motorways and for access into downtown areas in five additional cities or municipalities: Haugesund, Kristiansand, Namsos, Stavanger, and Tønsberg.[67]

Sweden
Main articles: Stockholm congestion tax and Gothenburg congestion tax

The Stockholm congestion tax covering Stockholm City Centre was trialed for seven-month trial during 2006 and has been operational on a permanent basis since 1 August 2007;[68][69] all the entrances and exits of this area have unmanned control points operating with automatic number plate recognition and most vehicles pay a fixed fee during peak hours.[70] A similar congestion tax was introduced in Gothenburg in 2013, the Gothenburg congestion tax. In opposite to Stockholm, this tax covers also the usage of bypass roads past the city. The congestion tax is called a tax, not a toll or fee, since a principle has been established that road tolls can only exist to pay for the construction of the specific tolled road, during a limited period. The congestion tax charges every road that crosses certain lines, regardless of its age. Three bridges in Sweden have road tolls (as of 2015).

United Kingdom
Main article: Road pricing in the United Kingdom

The Smeed Report recommended the implementation of congestion charging in 1964.[71] Road pricing for London was considered by the Greater London Council in 1973 but was not progressed. The Durham City congestion charge was introduced in 2002[72] and the London congestion charge in 2003.[73]

In June 2005, Transport Secretary Alistair Darling announced a proposal for a national scheme[74][75] in which every vehicle would be fitted with a satellite receiver that would calculate charges, with prices (including fuel duty) ranging from 2p per mile on uncongested roads to £1.34 on the most congested roads at peak times.[76] The scheme was dropped after an online petition against proposals gained over 1.8 million signatures.[77] A number of local schemes were then proposed and rejected during 2007–2008, including the Manchester congestion charge.[78] UK wide road pricing for large goods vehicles, which was first proposed in 2000 before being dropped[79] and then revived in 2012.[80]

London
Current boundary of the London congestion charge zone (CCZ)

The London congestion charge is a flat-fee daily charge to enter the Congestion Charge Zone (CCZ) in central London, introduced in 2003. This was supplemented in 2008 by a Low Emission Zone (LEZ) charge, and in 2017 by a toxicity charge (‘T-Charge’), now an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) charge. A Western Extension to the Congestion Charge Zone was added in 2007 and then removed in January 2011.

A plan to incorporate an emissions-based supplement into the Congestion Charge was cancelled following the 2008 Mayoral election.[81][82] Instead, the London low emission zone was introduced in stages between 2008 and 2012 with an aim of reducing the pollution emissions of diesel-powered commercial vehicles in London.[83]

Street markings and signs with the white-on-red C alert drivers entering the congestion charge zone (CCZ) at Tower Hill.

Approved by Mayor Boris Johnson in April 2013, the Ultra Low Emission Discount (ULED) went into effect on 1 July 2013, substituting the Greener Vehicle Discount. The ULED introduced more stringent emission standards that limited the free access to the congestion charge zone to electric cars, some plug-in hybrids, and any car or van that emits 75g/km or less of CO2 and meets the Euro 5 emission standards for air quality. The measure was designed to curb the growing number of diesel vehicles on London's roads. The owners of vehicles registered for the Greener Vehicle Discount were granted a three-year sunset period before they have to pay the full congestion charge.[84][85] The sunset period ended on 24 June 2016.[86]

A toxicity charge, known as T-Charge, was introduced on 23 October 2017.[87] Older and more polluting cars and vans that did not meet Euro 4 standards had to pay an extra £10 charge on top of the congestion charge to drive in central London, within the CCZ. The charge typically applied to diesel and petrol vehicles registered before 2006, and the levy was expected to affect up to 10,000 vehicles.[88][89]

The T-Charge was replaced on 8 April 2019 with an ULEZ charge.[90] Motor vehicles that do not meet the emissions criteria are charged £12.50 for most vehicle types, or £100 for heavier vehicles,[91] to enter central London for a day. London-licensed taxis are exempted from the ULEZ; temporary exemptions and discounts apply to residents until 24 October 2021, and to disabled drivers until 26 October 2025.[92]

London Mayor Sadiq Khan announced the introduction of the T-Charge on 17 February 2017 after London achieved record air pollution levels in January 2017, and the city was put on very high pollution alert for the first time ever, as cold and stationary weather failed to clear toxic pollutants emitted mainly by diesel vehicles.[93] The Mayor also announced plans to expand the ULEZ[91] beyond Central London a year earlier than planned in 2019.

Dubai

The Salik (road toll) system in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, was introduced by the Roads and Transport Authority in 2007 and extended in 2008.

New York
Main article: New York congestion pricing

In March 2001, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey implemented a discount during off-peak hours for those vehicles paying tolls for several tunnels and bridges connecting New York City and New Jersey using the electronic EZ Pass.[94][95] Since March 2008, qualified low-emission automobiles could get a 50% discount during off-peak hours.[96]

In April 2007 the New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed a contentious congestion charge on cars using most streets in the central business district (southern half of Manhattan)[97] as part of the broader PlaNYC 2030. The plan received broad support from a coalition of civic, business, environmental, labor, community, and public health organizations and the City Council voted for the measure but also received significant opposition. The New York Legislature declined to vote on it in April 2008 saying that "... the opposition was so overwhelming,... that he would not hold an open vote of the full Assembly".[98]

Governor Andrew Cuomo reintroduced a congestion pricing proposal for New York City in 2017 in response to the New York City Subway's state of emergency, a proposal that Mayor Bill de Blasio opposed. A commission to investigate the feasibility of congestion pricing, organized in late 2017, found that a congestion pricing scheme could benefit New York City. If approved, New York City's congestion pricing zone will be the first in North America.[99][100][101][102] Cuomo's administration was set to review these proposals in January 2018, although the details of the congestion zones had not been revealed yet.[103]

San Francisco
Main article: San Francisco congestion pricing

In 2006, San Francisco authorities began a feasibility study to evaluate congestion pricing in the city. The initial charging scenarios considered were presented in public meetings held in December 2008[104] and the final draft proposal were discussed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (SFBS) in December 2010, which recommended implementation of a six-month to one-year trial in 2015.[105][106] Separately, in July 2010 congestion tolls were implemented at the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.[107]

FasTrak HOT lanes at 91 Express Lanes, at Orange County, California

Other metropolitan areas

In August 2007, the United States Department of Transportation selected five metropolitan areas to initiate congestion pricing demonstration projects under the Urban Partnerships Congestion Initiative, for US$1 billion of federal funding.[108] The five projects under this initiative are: Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco,[109] State Route 520 serving downtown Seattle and communities to its east,[110] Interstate 95 between Miami and Ft. Lauderdale,[111] Interstate 35W serving downtown Minneapolis,[112] and a variable rate parking meter system in Chicago, which replaced New York City after it left the program in 2008.[113]

High-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes
See also: High-occupancy toll lane

High-occupancy toll lanes are lanes where a variable fee based on demand is charged to non-exempt vehicles. Exempt vehicles include high-occupancy vehicles, transit vehicles, and often also low-emission vehicles. Users not wanting to pay the fee can use general-purpose lanes. HOT lanes were first implemented on California's private toll 91 Express Lanes, in Orange County in 1995, followed in 1996 by Interstate 15 in San Diego.

South America
Traffic congestion on Marginal Pinheiros, near downtown São Paulo. According to Time magazine, São Paulo has the world's worst traffic jams.[114] Drivers are informed through variable message signs the prevailing queue length.
"Costanera Norte" Freeway, crossing downtown with 100% free flow, Santiago, Chile

Brazil

In January 2012, the federal government of Brazil enacted the Urban Mobility Law that authorizes municipalities to implement congestion pricing to reduce traffic flows. The law also seeks to encourage the use of public transportation and reduce air pollution. According to the law, revenues from congestion charges should be destined exclusively to urban infrastructure for public transportation and non-motorized modes of locomotion (such as walking and cycling), and to finance public subsidies for transit fares. The law went into effect in April 2013.[115][116][117]

São Paulo city

In April 2012, one of the committees of the São Paulo city council approved a bill to introduce a R$4 (~ US$2) per day congestion charge within the same area as the existing road space rationing (Portuguese: Rodízio veicular) by the last digit of the license plate, which has been in force since 1996. The bill still needs approval by two other committees before going for a final vote at the city council.[118][119] Opinion surveys have shown that the initiative is highly unpopular. A survey by Veja magazine found that 80% of drivers are against congestion pricing, and another survey by Exame magazine found that only 1% of São Paulo's residents support the initiative, while 30% find that extending the metro system is a better solution to reduce traffic congestion.[120][121] São Paulo's strategic urban development plan "SP 2040", approved in November 2012, proposes the implementation of congestion pricing by 2025, when the density of metro and bus corridors is expected to reach 1.25 km/km2. The Plan also requires ample consultation and even a referendum before beginning implementation.[122]

Chile

Congestion pricing has also been implemented in urban freeways. Between 2004 and 2005, Santiago de Chile implemented the first 100% non-stop urban toll for concessioned freeways passing through a downtown area,[123] charging by the distance traveled.[124] Congestion pricing is used since 2007 during rush hours in order to maintain reasonable speeds within the city's core with the aim of keeping a minimum level of service for their customers.[125][126]

See also

References
  1. "Tolling and Pricing Defined". Federal Highway Administration.
  2. Small, Kenneth A.; José A. Gomez-Ibañez (1998). Road Pricing for Congestion Management: The Transition from Theory to Policy (PDF). The University of California Transportation Center, University of California at Berkeley. p. 213.
  3. Paul Johnson, Andrew Leicester & George Stoye (May 2012). "Fuel for Thought – The what, why and how of motoring taxation" (PDF). Institute for Fiscal Studies and Royal Automobile Club Foundation for Motoring. Retrieved 22 May 2012. Executive Summary, pp. v.
  4. Small, Kenneth A.; Verhoef, Erik T. (2007). The Economics of Urban Transportation. Routledge, New York. pp. 148–153. ISBN 978-0-415-28515-5.
  5. "Area C è partita: calate del 40% le auto in centro dopo l'entrata in vigore del pedaggio" [Area C takes off: auto traffic decreased 40% in the center after the toll goes into force]. Corriere della Sera Milano (in Italian). 23 May 2012. Retrieved 16 January 2012.
  6. Scott Wilson (3 May 2012). "Mileage based usage fees – distance based charging – vehicle mileage tax – a future?". Road Pricing Blog. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
  7. Lindsey, Robin (May 2006). "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Road Pricing? The Intellectual History of an Idea". Econ Journal Watch. 3 (2): 292–379. Retrieved 9 December 2008.
  8. "Road Pricing. Congestion Pricing, Value Pricing, Toll Roads and HOT Lanes". Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
  9. "Road Pricing: The Next Steps" (PDF). Transport Select Committee.
  10. "Inquiry into Federal-State Road Funding Arrangements". Parliament of Victoria. p. 143.
  11. "Glossary terms". Texas Transportation Institute.
  12. The Rand paper series. RAND Corporation. 1970. p. 16. Potentially more effective in the near term would be the use of direct road pricing to make freight journeys more expensive on congested routes or to influence the time of day at which freight traffic operates
  13. "Road Pricing: Lessons from London". Models of increasing sophistication, which describe congestion have been developed over the years since the seminal work of Vickrey (1955).
  14. Gross, Daniel (11 February 2007). "What's the Toll? It Depends on the Time of Day". The New York Times.
  15. Pigou, A. C. (1920). The Economics of Welfare. London: Macmillan.
  16. "Comparisons of different implementation procedures of road pricing schemes in two European countries". 2005.
  17. Gabriel Joseph Roth; John Michael Thomson (1963). Road pricing, a cure for congestion?. University of Cambridge.
  18. R.J.Smeed (1964). Road Pricing: The Economic and Technical Possibilities (Smeed Report). Ministry of Transport.
  19. Walters, A. A. (1968). The Economics of Road User Charges. World Bank Staff Occasional Papers Number Five, Chapter VII, Washington, D.C. pp. 191–217. ISBN 978-0-8018-0653-7.
  20. Ieromanachou, Potter and Warren. "Norway's urban toll rings: evolving towards congestion charging?" (PDF).
  21. "Driving Fee Rolls Back Asthma Attacks in Stockholm". Inside Science. 2 February 2017. Retrieved 9 February 2017.
  22. Simeonova, Emilia; Currie, Janet; Nilsson, Peter; Walker, Reed (March 2018). "Congestion Pricing, Air Pollution and Children's Health". NBER Working Paper No. 24410. doi:10.3386/w24410.
  23. Frakt, Austin (21 January 2019). "Stuck and Stressed: The Health Costs of Traffic". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
  24. Peirce, Sean; Puckett, Sean; Petrella, Margaret; Minnice, Paul; Lappin, Jane (2013). "Effects of Full-Facility Variable Tolling on Traveler Behavior: Evidence from a Panel Study of the Sr-520 Corridor in Seattle, Washington". Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2345: 74–82. doi:10.3141/2345-10. S2CID 109715156.
  25. Agarwal, Sumit; Koo, Kang Mo (1 September 2016). "Impact of electronic road pricing (ERP) changes on transport modal choice". Regional Science and Urban Economics. 60: 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2016.05.003. ISSN 0166-0462.
  26. Agarwal, Sumit; Koo, Kang Mo; Sing, Tien Foo (1 November 2015). "Impact of electronic road pricing on real estate prices in Singapore". Journal of Urban Economics. 90: 50–59. doi:10.1016/j.jue.2015.09.004. ISSN 0094-1190.
  27. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering (12 January 2018). Assessing the Environmental Justice Effects of Toll Implementation or Rate Changes: Guidebook and Toolbox. The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/24991. ISBN 978-0-309-47070-4.
  28. "Harbour Bridge variable tolls 'to stay' - Yahoo!7". Archived from the original on 15 January 2012. Retrieved 21 April 2012.
  29. "Peak hour toll begins on Harbour Bridge". Yahoo!7 News (Australia). 27 January 2009. Archived from the original on 5 October 2009. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  30. Michael Daley (5 February 2009). "Motorists Embrace Cashless Tolling on Sydney Harbour Bridge" (PDF). NSW Minister for Roads. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  31. "Harbour congestion tax 'will anger some'". ABC News (Australia). 22 January 2009. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  32. Sperling, Daniel & Deborah Gordon (2009). Two billion cars: driving toward sustainability. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 219–220. ISBN 978-0-19-537664-7. . See on Chapter 8 Stimulating Chinese Innovation.
  33. Bob McQueen; Tom Biggstitle & Chris Bausher (2006). "Congestion pricing" (iPaper). ETC, Etc. Thinking Highways. I (1): 35–36. Retrieved 23 February 2009. A PDF version of the article is available for download here
  34. "Time to fix traffic in Beijing". China Daily. Xinhuanet. 21 December 2010. Archived from the original on 24 December 2010. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
  35. "Will Congestion Pricing Relieve Traffic Jams?". Beijing Review. 31 May 2010. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
  36. "Beijing 'plans congestion charge' to ease traffic woes". BBC News. 2 September 2011. Retrieved 7 September 2011.
  37. "Post-Olympics Beijing car restrictions to take effect next month". China View news. 28 September 2008. Archived from the original on 1 October 2008. Retrieved 17 October 2009.
  38. Michael Wines (16 October 2009). "Beijing's Air Is Cleaner, but Far From Clean". The New York Times. Retrieved 17 October 2009.
  39. "The great crawl". The Economist. 18 June 2016. Retrieved 22 June 2016. From the print edition.
  40. "Beijing mulls congestion charge". China Daily. Xinhua News Agency. 3 December 2015. Retrieved 7 December 2015.
  41. Natasha Li (4 December 2015). "Beijing Plans to Implement 'Congestion Charge' Next Year". Gasgoo.com. Retrieved 7 December 2015.
  42. "Beijing Seeks to Legislate Car Quotas as It Mulls Congestion Fee". Bloomberg News. 25 May 2016. Retrieved 28 May 2016.
  43. Electronic road pricing. Developments in Hong Kong 1983–1986
  44. "HK news watch". South China Morning Post. 27 February 2012.
  45. Cervero, Robert (1998). The Transit Metropolis. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. p. 169. ISBN 1-55963-591-6. Chapter 6/The Master Planned Transit Metropolis: Singapore.
  46. Ken Belson (16 March 2008). "Importing a Decongestant for Midtown Streets". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 April 2008.
  47. R. Cervero op. cit. pp. 155
  48. Singapore Census of Population Office
  49. Scott Wilson (25 February 2012). "Salzburg seeks vignette exemption for local motorways". Road Pricing Blog. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
  50. "Helsingin kauppakamari: Tietullit olisivat katastrofi (Helsinki Chamber of Commerce: Road tolls would be catastrophic)". Helsingin Sanomat. 18 August 1993.
  51. "Programme of Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen's Government" (PDF). Prime Minister of Finland. 22 June 2011. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  52. "Road user charging systems to be explored". Ministry of Transport and Communications of Finland. 23 October 2012. Retrieved 6 March 2013.
  53. "The European Electronic Toll Service" (PDF). European Commission. 16 June 2011. Retrieved 6 March 2013.
  54. Humphreys, Pat (5 March 2013). "Road Authorities: price or tax?" (PDF). Nordic Communications Corporation. Retrieved 6 March 2013.
  55. "Oikeudenmukaista ja älykästä liikennettä, Työryhmän loppuraportti (Fair and intelligent Transport Working Group, Final report)". Ministry of Transport and Communications of Finland. 16 December 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  56. Marco Bertacche (3 January 2008). "Milan Introduces Congestion Charge To Cut Pollution". The New York Sun. Retrieved 17 January 2008.
  57. Ken Belson (27 January 2008). "Toll Discounts for Going Green". The New York Times. Retrieved 27 January 2008.
  58. "Milan introduces traffic charge". BBC News. 2 March 2008. Retrieved 17 January 2008.
  59. Edoardo Croci (31 December 2008). "Ecopass. Prorogato fino al 31 dicembre 2009. Nei primi mesi dell'anno prevista la consultazione dei cittadini" (in Italian). Comune di Milano. Retrieved 14 February 2009. The complete pricing scheme is presented in this article.
  60. Rosario Mastrosimone (27 December 2011). "Congestion charge Milano: Area C, tariffe, divieti, esenti" (in Italian). Sostenibile. Retrieved 2 January 2012.
  61. Comune di Milano (17 March 2013). "Area C. Istituita la congestion charge definitiva" [Area C. The congestion charge was made permanent] (in Italian). Comune di Milano. Retrieved 19 October 2013.
  62. Controlled Vehicular Access Archived 6 March 2012 at the Wayback Machine, CVA Technology, 1 May 2007.
  63. "Valletta traffic congestion considerably reduced". MaltaMedia News. 6 May 2007. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  64. European Local Transport Information Service (ELTIS). "Controlled Vehicle Access, Valleta, Malta". Archived from the original on 7 September 2009. Retrieved 5 April 2008.
  65. Wærsted, Kristian. "Urban Tolling in Norway" (PDF). p. 5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 August 2011.
  66. AECC (September 2011). "Norway to allow Congestion Charging" (PDF). AECC Newsletter: International Regulatory Developments. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 November 2015. Retrieved 17 November 2015. See pp. 7
  67. Sadler Consultants Ltd. (2015). "Urban Access Regulations: Norway Road Charging". CLARS (Charging, Low Emission Zones, other Access Regulation Schemes). Retrieved 17 November 2015.
  68. "Trängselskatt i Stockholm". Swedish Road Administration. Archived from the original on 9 July 2007. Retrieved 1 August 2007.
  69. "Odramatisk start för biltullarna". Dagens Nyheter. 1 August 2007. Archived from the original on 30 September 2007. Retrieved 1 August 2007.
  70. "Tider och belopp". Swedish Road Administration. Archived from the original on 3 July 2007. Retrieved 1 August 2007.
  71. Tempest, Matthews (7 August 2006). "Q&A: National road charging scheme". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 22 June 2007.
  72. "Local welcome for congestion charge". BBC News. 1 October 2002. Retrieved 27 April 2007.
  73. Beard, Matthew (17 February 2003). "Livingstone predicts 'difficult few days' as congestion charge begins". The Independent. London. Archived from the original on 30 September 2007. Retrieved 9 April 2006.
  74. "'Pay-as-you-go' road charge plan". BBC News. 6 June 2005. Retrieved 22 June 2007.
  75. Tempest, Matthew (9 June 2005). "Darling unveils road charging plans". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 22 June 2007.
  76. "Feasibility study of road pricing in the UK". Department for Transport. 16 July 2004. pp. para B.52. Archived from the original on 17 July 2007. Retrieved 25 August 2007.
  77. "Blair's statement in full". BBC News. BBC. 21 February 2007. Retrieved 22 June 2007.
  78. Salter, Alan (25 May 2007). "C-charge details revealed". Manchester Evening News. M.E.N. media 2007. Retrieved 25 November 2007.
  79. "Roads: lorry road user charging" (PDF). Parliament.
  80. "Foreign lorries face £10 daily charge on UK roads". BBC News. 25 January 2012. Foreign lorry drivers could pay as much as £10 a day to use UK roads, the government has announced. UK haulage firms already have to pay to make journeys in other European Union countries, including France. Transport Minister Mike Penning said charging overseas companies would create a "fairer" situation.
  81. "Mayor quashes £25 C-charge hike". BBC News. 8 July 2008. Retrieved 16 August 2008.
  82. "Consultation results". Transport for London. Retrieved 6 December 2010.
  83. "The Low Emission Zone. Cleaner air for Greater London" (PDF). Transport for London. pp. 10–12. Retrieved 25 November 2007.
  84. "London to introduce new Ulta Low Emission Discount for Congestion Charge scheme; countering dieselization". Green Car Congress. 24 April 2013. Retrieved 24 April 2013.
  85. "London tightens up congestion charge in an attempt to drive out diesel". The Guardian. 24 April 2013. Retrieved 24 April 2013.
  86. Lilly, Chris (24 June 2016). "Congestion charge sunset period ends today". Next Green Car. Retrieved 29 June 2016.
  87. "Mayor's new £10 'T-Charge' starts today in central London". London City Hall (Press release). 23 October 2017. Retrieved 13 April 2021.
  88. Mason, Rowena (17 February 2017). "London to introduce £10 vehicle pollution charge, says Sadiq Khan". The Guardian. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
  89. Saarinen, Martin (17 February 2017). "London introduces new £10 'T-charge' to cut vehicle pollution". Auto Express. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
  90. "World's first 24 hour Ultra Low Emission Zone starts in London". London City Hall (Press release). 8 April 2019. Retrieved 13 April 2021.
  91. "Ultra Low Emission Zone". Transport for London. Retrieved 13 April 2021.
  92. "Discounts and exemptions". Transport for London. Retrieved 13 April 2021.
  93. Kimiko de Reytas-Tamura (17 February 2017). "A Push for Diesel Leaves London Gasping Amid Record Pollution". The New York Times. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
  94. Peter Samuel (11 January 2001). "Peak/Off-Peak Tolls:Whitman whittles down PANYNJ tolls". TOLLROADSnews. Archived from the original on 2 March 2009. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  95. Ronald Smothers (27 March 2001). "Grumbling, but Still Moving, Under New Rush-Hour Tolls". The New York Times. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  96. "New Toll Rates – Effective, 3 AM, March 2, 2008: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS)". Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Archived from the original on 1 March 2009. Retrieved 10 March 2009.
  97. "Transportation has always been the key to unlocking New York's potential" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 July 2007. Retrieved 8 March 2012.
  98. "Congestion Pricing Dies in Albany". NY1. 30 March 2010. Archived from the original on 11 May 2008. Retrieved 12 December 2010.
  99. Santora, Marc (August 13, 2017). "Cuomo Calls Manhattan Traffic Plan an Idea 'Whose Time Has Come'". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331.
  100. Goodman, J. David (21 August 2017). "Mayor de Blasio Says He 'Does Not Believe' in Congestion Pricing". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 23 August 2017.
  101. Hu, Winnie (28 November 2017). "New York's Tilt Toward Congestion Pricing Was Years in the Making". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 30 November 2017.
  102. Dwyer, Jim; Hu, Winnie (19 January 2018). "Driving a Car in Manhattan Could Cost $11.52 Under Congestion Plan". The New York Times.
  103. Hu, Winnie; Wang, Vivian (28 November 2017). "Cuomo's Congestion Pricing for New York City Begins to Take Shape". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 January 2018.
  104. Malia Wollan (4 January 2009). "San Francisco Studies Fees to Ease Traffic". The New York Times. Retrieved 22 February 2009.
  105. Rachel Gordon (11 November 2010). "S.F. may hit drivers with variety of tolls". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  106. Heather Ishimaru (10 November 2010). "SF considers downtown congestion pricing". ABC7 News San Francisco. Retrieved 5 December 2010.
  107. Michael Cabanatuan (13 May 2010). "Reminder: Bridge tolls go up July 1". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 21 January 2011.
  108. "Urban Partnerships". U.S. Department of Transportation. Archived from the original on 28 June 2008. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  109. "San Francisco Urban Partnership Agreement". U.S. Department of Transportation. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  110. "Seattle (Lake Washington) Urban Partnership Agreement". U.S. Department of Transportation. Archived from the original on 7 August 2008. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  111. "Miami Urban Partnership Agreement". U.S. Department of Transportation. Archived from the original on 3 May 2008. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  112. "Minneapolis Urban Partnership Agreement". U.S. Department of Transportation. Archived from the original on 7 August 2008. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  113. Jennifer Lee (29 April 2008). "Chicago Gets New York's Congestion Money". The New York Times blogs. Retrieved 20 June 2008.
  114. Andrew Downie (21 April 2008). "The World's Worst Traffic Jams". Time. Archived from the original on 23 April 2008. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  115. Marta Salomon, Iuri Dantas & Andréa Jubé Vianna (9 January 2012). "Lei federal autoriza criação de pedágio urbano por prefeituras" [Federal law authorizes the creation of congestion pricing by local governments]. O Estado de S. Paulo (in Portuguese). Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  116. Agência Estado (4 January 2012). "Dilma aprova lei que prevê pedágio urbano" [Dilma approves law that allows congestion pricing]. R7 Noticias (in Portuguese). Retrieved 26 June 2013.
  117. Presidência da República (3 January 2012). "Lei Nº 12.587, de 3 de Janeiro de 2012" [Law N. 12.587 of 3 January 2012] (in Portuguese). Presidência da República, Casa Civil. Retrieved 26 June 2013. See article 23.
  118. Roney Domingos (25 April 2012). "Projeto que cria pedágio urbano passa em comissão na Câmara de SP" [Bill to create congestion pricing passed in commission of the São Paulo city council]. O Globo (in Portuguese). Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  119. "Pedágio urbano de São Paulo pode custar até R$88 por mês" [São Paulo's congestion pricing could cost up to R$88 per month]. Terra (in Portuguese). 26 April 2012. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  120. Claudia Jordão e Maria Paola de Salvo (20 June 2012). "Perdendo 30 bilhões de reais por ano por congestionamentos de trânsito, SP mira o exemplo do pedágio urbano de Londres" [Lossing 30 billion reais per year due to traffic congestion, São Paulo looks at the example of London congestion charges]. Veja São Paulo (in Portuguese). Archived from the original on 19 December 2013. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  121. Amanda Previdelli (11 June 2012). "Paulistano não quer pedágio urbano, segundo Datafolha" [São Paulo residents do not want congestion pricing according to Datafolha]. Exame (in Portuguese). Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  122. "Pedágio urbano e incineração de lixo estão entre as propostas da SP 2040" [Congestion pricing and waste incineration are among the proposals of SP 2040]. Folha de S. Paulo (in Portuguese). 13 November 2012. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
  123. UK Commission on Integrated Transport. "Road Charging Scheme: South America – Chile, Santiago de Chile". Archived from the original on 21 April 2008. Retrieved 4 July 2008.
  124. Costanera Norte Freeway. "Costanera Norte Freeway" (in Spanish).
  125. "Costanera Norte Tarifas 2010" (PDF) (in Spanish). Sociedad Concesionaria Costanera Norte. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 February 2010. Retrieved 27 February 2010. Three different tolls are charged based on pre-set average operating speeds: basic non-peak hour, basic rush hour, and fixed congestion toll.
  126. "Autopistas urbanas proponen subir tarifas y el MOP elabora plan para auditar alzas" (in Spanish). ODECU. 15 July 2009. Archived from the original on 7 July 2011. Retrieved 27 February 2010.

Bibliography
  • Button, Kenneth J. (2010). Transport Economics 3rd Edition. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK. ISBN 978-1-84064-191-2. (See Chapter 9: Optimizing Traffic Congestion)
  • Santos, Georgina, ed. (2004). Road Pricing, Volume 9: Theory and Evidence (Research in Transportation Economics). JAI Press. ISBN 978-0762309689.
  • Schade, Jens; Schlag, Bernhard, eds. (2003). Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, West Yorkshire. ISBN 978-0080441993.
  • Small, Kenneth A.; Verhoef, Erik T. (2007). The Economics of Urban Transportation. Routledge, New York. ISBN 978-0-415-28515-5. (See Chapter 4: Pricing)
  • Smeed, R.J. (1964). Road pricing: the economic and technical possibilities. HMSO.
  • Tsekeris, Theodore; Voß, Stefan (2009). "Design and evaluation of road pricing: State-of-the-art and methodological advances". Netnomics. 10: 5–52. doi:10.1007/s11066-008-9024-z. S2CID 153724717.
  • Verhoef, Erik T.; Bliemer, Michiel; Steg, Linda; Van Wee, Bert, eds. (2008). Pricing in Road Transport: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK. ISBN 978-1845428600.
  • Walters, A. A. (1968). The Economics of Road User Charges. World Bank Staff Occasional Papers Number Five, Washington, D.C. ISBN 978-0-8018-0653-7.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.