THE "RULE OF THREE": A POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THE POLITICAL PROBLEM OF COMPETING OBJECTIVES FOR ROAD PRICING. IN: URBAN TRANSPORT

By Phil B. Goodwin. 2003

124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f95a586f9a275de4ae5881bed481de3dd477ce3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The Stockholm congestion charges – five years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt (2012, background): “…in the acceptance literature is that congestion charges must be part of a “package”, within which it is clear how the income is going to be spent to the advantage of the general public, if it is going to have any chance of being accepted (see for example (Goodwin 1989), (Jones 1991), (Small 1992)).”
The Gothenburg congestion charge. Effects, design and politics (2015, methodology): “The Gothenburg case challenges the notion that a focus on revenue recycling and infrastructure investments packages (Goodwin, 1989; Jones, 1991; King et al., 2 We have throughout this paper converted SEK to Euro using a conversion rate of 10 SEK/€.”
Do Economists Reach A Conclusion on Road Pricing? The Intellectual History of an Idea (2006, background): “Goodwin (1989) proposed a “Rule of Three” whereby revenues would be allocated in equal parts to: (1) development and maintenance of new road infrastructure; (2) public transport; and (3) either to reducing the general tax burden or to increased spending.”
Political Calculus of Congestion Pricing (2007, background): “Goodwin (1989) and Small (1992) have both offered proposals to spend congestion toll revenue in ways designed to maximize political support.”
Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes (2005, background): “recognised (Goodwin, 1989; Jones, 1991; Small, 1992). Jones (1991) found acceptability to increase from 30 per cent where there was no explicit mention of the use to which the revenue would be put to 57 per cent when it was stated that the revenue would be used for improving public transport and fac”