China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
A comprehensive energy policy
Published in Peter M. Schwarz, Energy Economics, 2023
Congestion pricing can relieve congestion and can increase social efficiency, as well as produce revenue. Congestion wastes time as well as fuel. The government or a private company can build and operate the toll road. However, we need to take into account own- and cross-price elasticities. A higher toll reduces the number of cars. It may shift the cars to a different time of use, which is beneficial if it moves cars from peak hours to less-traveled times but not if it simply shifts the time of the peak. It also moves vehicles to different lanes or different roads, which could increase congestion on those roads. EV drivers may receive subsidies by being exempt from tolls, or by being able to use carpool lanes even if they do not have the required number of passengers.
Hi-tech transportation
Published in Peter N. Nemetz, Unsustainable World, 2022
Several economic and regulatory initiatives have been contemplated or implemented in the hope of providing at least short-term relief from some of the negative externalities associated with private passenger vehicles. One such approach involves the use of mobility pricing. Unfortunately such innovative pricing schemes can be a lightning rod for anti-tax sentiment. It is interesting to note, however, that Stockholm introduced congestion charges in 2006 for a seven-month trial period which was followed by a referendum. Somewhat surprisingly, a majority voted to retain the charges (CTS 2014). A recent government-sponsored report in British Columbia details how such a system might be implemented (MPIC 2018). Whether the public acceptance demonstrated in Sweden can be replicated in North America remains an open question in light of the significantly different national attitudes to the role of government in promoting social welfare. However, as recently as April 2019, New York City opted to implement a system of congestion pricing, joining London, Stockholm, and Singapore (New York Times March 26, 2019).
A Social-Network-Enabled Green Transportation System Framework Driven by Connected Vehicle Innovations
Published in Yunpeng Wang, Daxin Tian, Zhengguo Sheng, Jian Wang, Connected Vehicle Systems: Communications, Data, and Control, 2017
Wei Shu, Guohui Zhang, Min-You Wu, Jia-Liang Lu
To reduce traffic congestion and raise revenues, congestion pricing has been proposed and studied for several decades since, Pigou [177], and Knight [122] initially explored congestion pricing theory. In the 1960s, research interest in congestion pricing was resurrected by the work of Walters [239], Beckmann [136], and Vickrey [236]. Vickrey developed a dynamic vehicle congestion model to derive socially optimal tolls featured with flexible departure and arrival time. Since then, substantial research has been conducted by transportation researchers and practitioners [138]. The well-known first-best pricing theory has attracted much research attention [89,136,274]. However, the first-best pricing theory has limited practical value. The second-best pricing principles have been proposed as a practical solution to determining tolls considering physical and economic constraints [235]. Additionally, many researchers such as Ferrari [297], Larsson and Patriksson [127], and Inouye [62] have derived link tolls under capacity constraints based on Wardropian traffic equilibrium [250]. Vickrey [236] and Downs [44] proposed that congestion pricing should be determined based on trial-and-error efforts to enhance its applicability. Li [131], Yang et al. [275], and Meng et al. [156] proposed the iterative toll adjustment mechanisms according to the single and networkwide link flows without demand information. Arnott et al. [143] compared the four distinct pricing strategies and concluded that considerable benefits can be achieved under congestion pricing. In practice, congestion pricing strategies have been implemented worldwide, for instance in Singapore [172]. The cases of congestion pricing in the United States include the HOT and express toll lane systems of State Route (SR) 91 and Intercontinental Highway (I) 15 and I-15 in California, I-10 and US-290 in Texas, and I-394 in Minnesota. [60].
Planning for Congestion Pricing Policies in the Middle East: Public Acceptability and Revenue Distribution
Published in Transportation Letters, 2022
Many transportation economists and traffic planners consider congestion pricing an effective way to reduce road congestion and associated negative impacts of the transportation system, such as the environmental impact (Franz 2020; Abulibdeh 2017; Anas and Lindsey 2011; King, Manville, and Shoup 2007). The cities worldwide, such as Singapore in Asia, and London, Stockholm, Valetta, Rome, and Milan in Europe, have applied cordon pricing, area-wide pricing, and other congestion-pricing policies, while cities in North America and Canada, such as Toronto, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Oakland, Miami, Denver, and San Diego, have applied HOT lanes. Their success has resulted in increasing the interest in introducing or evaluating congestion-pricing policies in a number of other cities (e.g., Gothenburg, Copenhagen, San Francisco, Jakarta, Budapest, and Sydney). However, the number of cities that have actually implemented congestion pricing is still limited – some of the critical reasons for their non-implementation are public rejection and concerns. Thus achieving public acceptance is considered by practitioners to be an essential precondition for successful implementation of such schemes (Hess and Börjesson 2019; Grisolía, López, and Ortúzar 2015; Sikow-Magny 2003). The lack of public support for congestion-pricing policies has been reported in cities like New York, Manchester, and Edinburgh (Schaller 2010; Ryley and Gjersoe 2006).
A cell-based dynamic congestion pricing scheme considering travel distance and time delay
Published in Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics, 2019
Qixiu Cheng, Zhiyuan Liu, W.Y. Szeto
As one of the demand side strategies for transportation management, congestion pricing is widely recognized among economists as an effective economic measurement to ease the traffic congestion problem and improve the system performance in urban areas, and also has received more and more attention both academically and practically. Studies of congestion pricing focus on the first-best pricing as well as the second-best pricing. In the transportation network modeling and analysis, most studies consider that every link in the network is tolled as the first-best pricing scheme (e.g. Yang and Huang 1998; Sumalee and Xu 2011), while only a subset of the links in the network is tolled as the second-best pricing scheme (e.g. Liu and McDonald 1999; Verhoef 2000, 2002; Zhang et al. 2011; Liu, Meng, and Wang 2014; Di, Liu, and Ban 2016; Han, Wang, and Zhu 2017); interested readers can get a comprehensive review from Yang and Huang (2005).
Passenger assignment and pricing strategy for a passenger railway transportation system
Published in Transportation Letters, 2019
Dung-Ying Lin, Jian-Hua Fang, Kuan-Ling Huang
Congestion pricing has been increasingly considered as a promising strategy for addressing urban traffic congestion problems. A large amount of research has been devoted to this issue over the past decade (i.e. Yang and Meng (1998), Verhoef (2002), Verhoef, Koh, and Shepherd (2010) and Meng and Liu (2012)). Due to these excellent research efforts, congestion pricing in roadway traffic is a relatively mature research field. Recently, the pricing problem of transit systems has also been studied in the literature. For instance, Li et al. (2012) studied different pricing structures of transit lines so that the profit of the company could be maximized. Hamdouch and Lawphongpanich (2010) adopted the concept of congestion pricing in roadway traffic and developed models based on it to adjust transit system fares so that overall travel delays could be minimized.