Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies

By J. Schade, B. Schlag. 2003

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Based on the MC-ICAM conference, this text discusses various questions relating to achieving a general public acceptance of various "road pricing" measures.

Subfields: Transportation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f3a639711da63eb7f959bc2f1bb64a7411e03a08

How researchers see this paper

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

In Transportation

1. L. Steg
2. G. Schuitema
3. L. Eriksson
4. A. Nordlund
5. J. Garvill
6. M. Baum
7. W. Abrahamse
8. Satoshi Fujii

Citations in the corpus

• Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm (2010, background): “In general, reductions in driving behaviour and increases in travel costs are perceived as an infringement on one’s freedom (cf. Brehm, 1972; Jakobsson et al., 2000), and consequently, these are unfavourable consequences of road pricing schemes.”
• Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour : An integrative review and research agenda (2009, unknown): “…implemented, particularly in the travel domain (e.g., Bamberg & Rölle, 2003, Jakobsson, Fujii, & Gärling, 2000; Loukopoulos, Jakobsson, Gärling, Schneider, & Fujii, 2004; Schade & Schlag, 2003a, 2003b; see Steg & Schuitema, 2007, for a review), but also regarding energy use (Steg et al., 2005).”
• The role of revenue use in the acceptability of transport pricing policies (2008, background): “One important feature for the acceptability of transport pricing is the allocation of the revenues (see also Jones, 1991; Schade & Schlag, 2000b, 2003; Small, 1992).”
• Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing (2007, methodology): “Among these, variables like negative outcome expectations, perceived unfairness, negative social norms and perceived infringement on freedom have been identified as important determinants (for a comprehensive overview see Schade and Schlag, 2003a).”
• Acceptability of travel demand management measures: The importance of problem awareness, personal norm, freedom, and fairness (2006, background): “For instance, the overall evaluation of a TDMmeasure is influenced by expectations of how the individual would be affected, both positively and negatively, by the TDM measure (Joireman et al., 2001; Schade & Schlag, 2003).”