LinksGlossaryMessagesSitemapHelp


Home

Policy Instruments

Select
Search
Filter
Road user charging
SummaryTaxonomy and descriptionFirst principles assesmentEvidence on performancePolicy contributionComplementary instrumentsReferences

Contribution to objectives and problems

Objective Singapore Area Licensing Singapore Electronic Road Pricing Norwegian Toll Rings Value Pricing in San Diego London Congestion Charging Stockholm Congestion Charging Trial Zone a Traffico Limitato (Limited Traffic Zones), Rome Ecopass Milan Saddler Street, Durham
Efficiency 4 5 2 3
4
4 2 2 2
Liveable streets 2 3 1 0
3
4 2 2 4
Protection of the environment 3 3 1
?
3
4 3 3 4
Equity and social inclusion 0 0 1 2
3
3
?
?
2

Safety
2 3 0 0
2
2 1 2 1
Economic growth
?
?
0
?
0
0 0 0 1
Finance 3 2 5 1
4
3 3 3 2
1= Weakest possible positive contribution,5= strongest possible positive contribution
-1= Weakest possible negative contribution-5= strongest possible negative contribution
0= No contribution


Summary of each case study's contribution to alleviation of key problems

Objective Singapore Area Licensing Singapore Electronic Road Pricing Norwegian Toll Rings Value Pricing in San Diego London Congestion Charging Stockholm Congestion Charging   Zone a Traffico Limitato (Limited Traffic Zones), Rome Ecopass Milan Saddler Street, Durham
Congestion-related delay 4 4 2 2
4
4 2 2 2
Congestion-related unreliability 4 4 2 2
4
4 2 2 2
Community severance 3 3 2
0
3
3 3 3 4
Visual intrusion 1 1 1 1
1
2 2 2 2
Lack of amenity
2 1 1 1
3
3 3 3 3
Global warming
2
1
1 -1
3
3 2 2 1
Local air pollution 3 3 2 1
3
3 3   2
Noise 2 2 2 1
1
2 2 2 2
Reduction of green space 2 1 0 1
1
2 1 1 1
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites 1 1 1 1
2
2 3 3 4
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility impairments 3 3 2 -1
3
3 2 2 2
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic groups 3 2 1 -1
3
3 2 2 2
Number, severity and risk of accidents 2 1 1
?
2
2 1 2 2
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area
?
?
?
?
0
0 0 0 1
1= Weakest possible positive contribution,5= strongest possible positive contribution
-1= Weakest possible negative contribution-5= strongest possible negative contribution
0= No contribution


Appropriate contexts

Urban road charging is applicable to any city. However given that there are costs associated with its implementation, it is recommended that cities considering the introduction of urban road charging should carry out a cost-benefit analysis of doing so.

Based on our above assessments, urban road charging will be particularly applicable in cities where:

  • there is an identifiable problem of traffic congestion; or
  • there has been a decision not to increase the capacity of the road network which may, without efforts to manage demand, lead to problems of traffic congestion;
  • there is (or there is scope for) a good public transport network;
  • there is a degree of economic autonomy in relation to neighbouring cities;
  • there is an identified need to raise revenue for particular projects.

Even within a city or town there will be contexts where urban road charging will be more or less appropriate. Appropriate area-types indicates which area-types are likely to be most and least appropriate.

Appropriate area-types
Area type Suitability
City centre 5
Dense inner suburb 2
Medium density outer suburb 3
Less dense outer suburb 1
District centre 2
Corridor 3
Small town 1
Tourist town 2
1= Least suitable area type5= Most suitable area type


Adverse side-effects

Planners are often concerned at the potentially adverse impact on the economy of the charged area if charging encourages drivers to travel elsewhere, there is no empirical evidence however of this having happened in London or any of the other cities where congestion charging has been implemented. However, a number of desktop and attitudinal studies have concluded that there would be minor negative economic impacts, although these are very much dependent upon the characteristics of the urban centre (e.g. Flowerdew 1994, Richards et al, 1996, Still, 1996). Most studies have highlighted the need for complementary public transport improvements.

The second concern relates to the equity implications. Bus users, pedestrians and cyclists will benefit; rail users will be little affected except, perhaps, by increased patronage, although in the longer term increased patronage may encourage an improved service. If the scheme is a mileage-based system then users of commercial vehicles that drive many miles will be disadvantaged whilst commuters may be net beneficiaries with the reduced congestion more than compensating them. If on the other hand a set daily fee is paid for unlimited mileage then it is likely that commercial drivers will benefit relative to commuters.

Top of the page


Text edited at the Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT