Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes

By S. Jaensirisak, M. Wardman, A. May. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 2005

258 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The literature on acceptability of road pricing schemes is reviewed, and a number of limitations of that research are identified. In particular, little evidence is found of the differences between users and non-users and the effects of scheme design and level of charge. A stated preference survey was conducted in two UK cities to provide evidence on these issues. Charging was found to be more acceptable to non-users, those who perceived pollution and congestion to be very serious, those who considered current conditions unacceptable, and those who judged road pricing to be effective. It proved possible to identify design combinations, for both cities, which would be voted for by a majority.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Transportation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bcd4f0c9a64d955924b14a30487be517941aa085

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

In Transportation

Citations in the corpus

Equity Effects of Road Pricing: A Review (2010, background): “…pricing, as it is the political concerns, rather than their economic efficacy that have held back implementation (Odeck and Brathen, 1997; Truelove, 1998; Padam and Wijkmark, 2000; Link and Polak, 2003; Marini and Marcucci, 2003; Schade and Schlag, 2003; Whittles, 2003; Jaensirisak et al., 2005).”
Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing (2007, background): “Socio-economic factors like income revealed a clearly lesser and rather unsystematic impact on acceptability than did attitudinal factors (Jaensirisak et al., 2005).”
Public acceptability of personal carbon trading and carbon tax (2010, background): “This preference for hypothecation is 651 in line with the overwhelming findings regarding public acceptability of road 652 user pricing (Jaensirisak et al., 2005).”
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).”
The Stockholm congestion – charging trial 2006: Overview of effects ☆ (2009, background): “…have found that positive effects of road pricing on environment and safety are important factors affecting public acceptance of road pricing schemes (Jaensirisak et al., 2005) and such effects may have been more noticeable to inner city residents than to suburban commuters to the inner city.”
Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm (2010, background): “Many have proposed that the acceptability of road pricing increases over time if people experience positive effects of road pricing (Jaensirisak et al., 2005; Odeck and Bråthen, 1997, 2002; Rienstra et al., 1999; Schade and Schlag, 2000; Schlag and Teubel, 1997; Tretvik, 2003; Winslott-Hiselius et a”