OVERCOMING PUBLIC AVERSION TO CONGESTION PRICING

By W. Harrington, Alan Krupnick, Anna Alberini. 2001

167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Transportation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a7c3454c10c0d0e97e22cc786ef937b43bc6319b

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Steffen Kallbekken
2. H. Sælen
3. Jonas Eliasson
4. G. Santos
5. Lina Jonsson
6. M. Wardman
7. A. May
8. S. Jaensirisak

In Transportation

1. Jonas Eliasson
2. Lina Jonsson
3. Steffen Kallbekken
4. H. Sælen
5. G. Santos
6. M. Wardman
7. A. May
8. S. Jaensirisak

Citations in the corpus

• The unexpected "yes!" : Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm (2011, background): “(1999), Rietveld and Verhoef (1998), Bartely (1995), Harrington et al. (2001) and Thorpe et al.”
• Public Acceptability of Road User Charging: The Case of Edinburgh and the 2005 Referendum (2007, background): “As could perhaps be expected, public opposition to charging is reduced in accordance with a lower level of charge (Harrington et al., 2001; Cain et al., 2002; Jaensirisak et al., 2005).”
• Distributional impacts of road pricing: The truth behind the myth (2004, background): “Harrington et al (24) found between 7% and 17% increase in support to congestion pricing when use of revenues was specified in a survey they conducted between residents in Southern California.”
• A choice experiment on fuel taxation and earmarking in Norway (2011, result): “Similar results are found by for instance Banister (2003), Harrington et al. (2001), Hsu et al. (2008), Ison (2000), Schade and Schlag (2003), Schuitema and Steg (2008), Steg et al. (2006) and Thalmann (2004).”
• Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes (2005, methodology): “…(Jones, 1991; GOL, 2000; Schlag and Schade, 2000; CfIT/ MORI, 2001; Thorpe et al., 2000; Hårsman, 2001) while in others it is investment in the road network (Larsen, 1995; PATS Consortium, 2001) and in yet others it is reduction in taxes (CfIT/MORI, 2000; Harrington et al., 2001; Lex, 2002).”