Share:


Measuring the public acceptance of urban congestion-pricing: a survey in Melbourne (Australia)

    Zhiyuan Liu Affiliation
    ; Nirajan Shiwakoti Affiliation
    ; Yiming Bie Affiliation

Abstract

The practical implementations of congestion-pricing are largely restricted, due to the low public acceptance level. Based on a field survey, this study reveals the public acceptance level in Melbourne, Australia. It was found that the level of acceptance for a new congestion-pricing scheme is 42%, which still needs to be improved if a congestion-pricing scheme is to be implemented. Some strategies are proposed and discussed to increase the acceptance level towards congestion charge in urban cities, including an information campaign, public transport improvements and a trial.


First Published Online: 29 Mar 2016

Keyword : public acceptance, congestion-pricing, mega city, traffic congestion, field survey

How to Cite
Liu, Z., Shiwakoti, N., & Bie, Y. (2018). Measuring the public acceptance of urban congestion-pricing: a survey in Melbourne (Australia). Transport, 33(4), 902-912. https://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2016.1155170
Published in Issue
Dec 5, 2018
Abstract Views
70
PDF Downloads
63
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

ABS. 2014. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Available from Internet: http://www.abs.gov.au

Ahmed, B. 2011. Manchester congestion charge scheme: a review, Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Technology 2(11): 236–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/JCECT11.025

CityLink. 2014. CityLink Melbourne Limited. Available from Internet: http://www.citylink.com.au

Clarke, H.; Hawkins, A. 2006. Economic framework for Melbourne traffic planning, Agenda 13(1): 63–80.

De Borger, B.; Proost, S. 2012. A political economy model of road pricing, Journal of Urban Economics 71(1): 79–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2011.08.002

Di Ciommo, F.; Monzón, A.; Fernandez, A. 2010. Measuring the acceptability of interurban road pricing among different groups of stakeholders. The case of Spain, in TRB 89th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers, 10–14 January 2010, Washington, DC, 1–22.

Do, M.; Kobayashi, K. 2000. Route navigation by state-contingent road pricing, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 4(3): 119–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02830865

Eliasson, J. 2009. A cost–benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 43(4): 468–480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2008.11.014

Eliasson, J. 2008. Lessons from the Stockholm congestion charging trial, Transport Policy 15(6): 395–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2008.12.004

Gaunt, M.; Rye, T.; Allen, S. 2007. Public acceptability of road user charging: the case of Edinburgh and the 2005 referendum, Transport Reviews 27(1): 85–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441640600831299

Goh, M. 2002. Congestion management and electronic road pricing in Singapore, Journal of Transport Geography 10(1): 29–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(01)00036-9

Hamer, P.; Currie, G.; Young, W. 2011. Parking price policies: a review of the Melbourne congestion levy, in Australasian Transport Research Forum 2011 Proceedings, 28–30 September 2011, Adelaide, Australia, 1–16.

Hau, T. D. 1990. Electronic road pricing: developments in Hong Kong 1983–1989, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 24(2): 203–214.

Hensher, D. A.; Li, Z. 2013. Referendum voting in road pricing reform: a review of the evidence, Transport Policy 25: 186–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.11.012

Hensher, D. A.; Rose, J. M.; Collins, A. T. 2013. Understanding buy-in for risky prospects: incorporating degree of belief into the ex-ante assessment of support for alternative road pricing schemes, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 47(3): 453–473.

Ieromonachou, P.; Potter, S.; Warren, J. P. 2006. Norway’s urban toll rings: evolving towards congestion charging?, Transport Policy 13(5): 367–378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2006.01.003

Jaensirisak, S.; Wardman, M.; May, A. D. 2005. Explaining variations in public acceptability of road pricing schemes, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 39(2): 127–153.

Jakobsson, C.; Fujii, S.; Gärling, T. 2000. Determinants of private car users’ acceptance of road pricing, Transport Policy 7(2): 153–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00005-6

Kroes, E. P.; Sheldon, R. J. 1988. Stated preference methods: an introduction, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 22(1): 11–25.

Lawphongpanich, S.; Hearn, D. W.; Smith, M. J. 2006. Mathematical and Computational Models for Congestion Charging. Springer. 240 p. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/0-387-29645-X

Litman, T. 2011. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. 14 p. Available from Internet: http://www.vtpi.org/london.pdf

Liu, Z.; Meng, Q.; Wang, S. 2013. Speed-based toll design for cordon-based congestion pricing scheme, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 31: 83–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2013.02.012

Liu, Z.; Meng, Q.; Wang, S. 2014a. Variational inequality model for cordon-based congestion pricing under side constrained stochastic user equilibrium conditions, Transport-metrica A: Transport Science 10(8): 693–704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23249935.2013.821228

Liu, Z.; Wang, S.; Meng, Q. 2014b. Optimal joint distance and time toll for cordon-based congestion pricing, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 69: 81–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2014.08.005

Liu, Z., Wang, S.; Meng, Q. 2014c. Toll pricing framework under logit-based stochastic user equilibrium constraints, Journal of Advanced Transportation 48(8): 1121–1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/atr.1255

Luk, J.; Chung, E. 1997. Public acceptance and technologies for road pricing, Research Report ARR 307: 1–26.

Meng, Q.; Liu, Z. 2012. Impact analysis of cordon-based congestion pricing on mode-split for a bimodal transportation network, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 21(1): 134–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2011.06.007

Meng, Q.; Liu, Z. 2011. Trial-and-error method for congestion pricing scheme under side-constrained probit-based stochastic user equilibrium conditions, Transportation 38(5): 819–843. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11116-011-9346-9

Meng, Q.; Liu, Z.; Wang, S. 2012. Optimal distance tolls under congestion pricing and continuously distributed value of time, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 48(5): 937–957. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2012.04.004

Phang, S.-Y.; Toh, R. S. 1997. From manual to electronic road congestion pricing: the Singapore experience and experiment, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 33(2): 97–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(97)00006-9

Pigou, A. C. 1920. The Economics of Welfare. Macmillan and Co. 1024 p.

Qu, X.; Wang, S.; Zhang, J. 2015. On the fundamental diagram for freeway traffic: A novel calibration approach for singleregime models, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 73: 91–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2015.01.001

Rentziou, A.; Milioti, C.; Gkritza, K.; Karlaftis, M. G. 2011. Urban road pricing: modeling public acceptance, Journal of Urban Planning and Development 137(1): 56–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000041

Rotaris, L.; Danielis, R.; Marcucci, E.; Massiani, J. 2010. The urban road pricing scheme to curb pollution in Milan, Italy: description, impacts and preliminary cost–benefit analysis assessment, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 44(5): 359–375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2010.03.008

Santos, G.; Shaffer, B. 2004. Preliminary results of the London congestion charging scheme, Public Works Management and Policy 9(2): 164–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1087724X04268569

Santos, G. 2005. Urban congestion charging: a comparison between London and Singapore, Transport Reviews 25(5): 511–534. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01441640500064439

Schaller, B. 2010. New York City’s congestion pricing experience and implications for road pricing acceptance in the United States, Transport Policy 17(4): 266–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.01.013

Schuitema, G.; Steg, L.; Forward, S. 2010. Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 44(2): 99–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2009.11.005

Seik, F. T. 2000. An advanced demand management instrument in urban transport: electronic road pricing in Singapore, Cities 17(1): 33–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(99)00050-5

Sturcke, J. 2008. Manchester says no to congestion charging, The Guardian, 12 December 2008. Available from Internet: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/dec/12/congestioncharging-transport

Tezcan, H. 2012. Using parking pricing as a travel demand management tool at a university campus: an example for Istanbul technical university, Transportation Letters 4(3): 181–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.3328/TL.2012.04.03.181-192

Wang, S.; Meng, Q.; Liu, Z. 2013. Fundamental properties of volume–capacity ratio of a private toll road in general networks, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 47: 77–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2012.09.006

Wang, S.; Meng, Q.; Yang, H. 2013. Global optimization methods for the discrete network design problem, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 50: 42–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2013.01.006

Yang, H.; Huang, H.-J. 2005. Mathematical and Economic Theory of Road Pricing. Elsevier Science. 486 p.

Yang, H.; Wang, X. 2011. Managing network mobility with tradable credits, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 45(3): 580–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2010.10.002