(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Designing effective and acceptable road pricing schemes: evidence from the Geneva congestion charge
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/110870.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing effective and acceptable road pricing schemes: evidence from the Geneva congestion charge

Author

Listed:
  • Baranzini, Andrea
  • Carattini, Stefano
  • Tesauro, Linda

Abstract

While instruments to price congestion exist since the 1970s, less than a dozen cities around the world have a cordon or zone pricing scheme. Geneva, Switzerland, may be soon joining them. This paper builds on a detailed review of the existing schemes to identify a set of plausible design options for the Geneva congestion charge. In turn, it analyzes their acceptability, leveraging a large survey of residents of both Geneva and the surrounding areas of Switzerland and France. Our original approach combines a discrete choice experiment with randomized informational treatments. We consider an extensive set of attributes, such as perimeter, price and price modulation, use of revenues, and exemption levels and beneficiaries. The informational treatments address potential biased beliefs concerning the charge’s expected effects on congestion and pollution. We find that public support depends crucially on the policy design. We identify an important demand for exemptions, which, albeit frequently used in the design of environmental taxation, is underexplored in the analysis of public support. This demand for exemptions is not motivated by efficiency reasons. It comes mostly by local residents, for local residents. Further, people show a marked preference for constant prices, even if efficiency would point to dynamic pricing based on external costs. Hence, we highlight a clear trade-off between efficiency and acceptability. However, we also show, causally, that this gap can in part be closed, with information provision. Analyzing heterogeneity, we show that preferences vary substantially with where people live and how they commute. Even so, we identify several designs that reach majority support.

Suggested Citation

  • Baranzini, Andrea & Carattini, Stefano & Tesauro, Linda, 2021. "Designing effective and acceptable road pricing schemes: evidence from the Geneva congestion charge," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110870, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:110870
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/110870/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Janusch & Stephan Kroll & Christopher Goemans & Todd L. Cherry & Steffen Kallbekken, 2021. "Learning to accept welfare-enhancing policies: an experimental investigation of congestion pricing," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 59-86, March.
    2. Ubbels, Barry & Verhoef, Erik, 2006. "Acceptability of road pricing and revenue use in the Netherlands," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 32, pages 69-94.
    3. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Hugosson, Muriel & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2012. "The Stockholm congestion charges – five years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:3, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    4. Ernesto Dal Bó & Pedro Dal Bó & Erik Eyster, 2018. "The Demand for Bad Policy when Voters Underappreciate Equilibrium Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(2), pages 964-998.
    5. Runar Brannlund & Lars Persson, 2012. "To tax, or not to tax: preferences for climate policy attributes," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 704-721, November.
    6. Emilia Simeonova & Janet Currie & Peter Nilsson & Reed Walker, 2021. "Congestion Pricing, Air Pollution, and Children’s Health," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 56(4), pages 971-996.
    7. Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "The Stockholm congestion charges: an overview," Working papers in Transport Economics 2014:7, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    8. Jonathan Leape, 2006. "The London Congestion Charge," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 157-176, Fall.
    9. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    10. Janet Currie & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jamie Mullins & Matthew Neidell, 2014. "What Do We Know About Short- and Long-Term Effects of Early-Life Exposure to Pollution?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 217-247, October.
    11. Christopher R. Knittel & Douglas L. Miller & Nicholas J. Sanders, 2016. "Caution, Drivers! Children Present: Traffic, Pollution, and Infant Health," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(2), pages 350-366, May.
    12. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini, 2017. "Effectiveness, earmarking and labeling: testing the acceptability of carbon taxes with survey data," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(1), pages 197-227, January.
    13. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    14. Eliasson, Jonas & Hultkrantz, Lars & Nerhagen, Lena & Rosqvist, Lena Smidfelt, 2009. "The Stockholm congestion - charging trial 2006: Overview of effects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 240-250, March.
    15. Dixit, Avinash & Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1997. "Common Agency and Coordination: General Theory and Application to Government Policy Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 752-769, August.
    16. Prashant Bharadwaj & Matthew Gibson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Christopher Neilson, 2017. "Gray Matters: Fetal Pollution Exposure and Human Capital Formation," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 505-542.
    17. Coria, Jessica & Bonilla, Jorge & Grundström, Maria & Pleijel, Håkan, 2015. "Air pollution dynamics and the need for temporally differentiated road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 178-195.
    18. Stefano Carattini & Steffen Kallbekken & Anton Orlov, 2019. "How to win public support for a global carbon tax," Nature, Nature, vol. 565(7739), pages 289-291, January.
    19. Steve Cicala & Stephen P. Holland & Erin T. Mansur & Nicholas Z. Muller & Andrew J. Yates, 2020. "Expected Health Effects of Reduced Air Pollution from COVID-19 Social Distancing," NBER Working Papers 27135, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Winslott-Hiselius, Lena & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Vagland, Asa & Byström, Camilla, 2009. "The development of public attitudes towards the Stockholm congestion trial," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 269-282, March.
    21. Arnott, Richard & de Palma, Andre & Lindsey, Robin, 1993. "A Structural Model of Peak-Period Congestion: A Traffic Bottleneck with Elastic Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 161-179, March.
    22. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Hugosson, Muriel B. & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2012. "The Stockholm congestion charges—5 years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 1-12.
    23. Parry, Ian W. H. & Bento, Antonio, 2002. "Estimating the Welfare Effect of Congestion Taxes: The Critical Importance of Other Distortions within the Transport System," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 339-365, March.
    24. Green, Colin P. & Heywood, John S. & Navarro, María, 2016. "Traffic accidents and the London congestion charge," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 11-22.
    25. Z. Eylem Gevrek & Ayse Uyduranoglu, 2015. "Public Preferences for Carbon Tax Attributes," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2015-15, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    26. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    27. Kenneth A. Small & Clifford Winston & Jia Yan, 2005. "Uncovering the Distribution of Motorists' Preferences for Travel Time and Reliability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 1367-1382, July.
    28. Dirk Drechsel & Anne Kathrin Funk, 2017. "Time-Varying and Regional Dynamics in Swiss Housing Markets," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 153(I), pages 37-72, March.
    29. Janet Currie & Reed Walker, 2011. "Traffic Congestion and Infant Health: Evidence from E-ZPass," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 65-90, January.
    30. Börjesson, Maria & Kristoffersson, Ida, 2015. "The Gothenburg congestion charge. Effects, design and politics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 134-146.
    31. Percoco, Marco, 2014. "The effect of road pricing on traffic composition: Evidence from a natural experiment in Milan, Italy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 55-60.
    32. Schade, J. & Baum, M., 2007. "Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 41-48, January.
    33. Stéphanie Souche-Lecorvec & Charles Raux & J. Eliasson & C. Hamilton & K. Brundell-Freij & K. Kiiskilä & J. Tervonen, 2016. "Predicting the results of a referendum on urban road pricing in France: “the cry of Cassandra”?," Post-Print halshs-01347595, HAL.
    34. Kallbekken, Steffen & Kroll, Stephan & Cherry, Todd L., 2011. "Do you not like Pigou, or do you not understand him? Tax aversion and revenue recycling in the lab," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 53-64, July.
    35. Edoardo Croci & Aldo Ravazzi Douvan, 2016. "Urban Road Pricing: A Comparative Study on the Experiences of London, Stockholm and Milan," IEFE Working Papers 85, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    36. Zhang, Xin & Zhang, Xiaobo & Chen, Xi, 2017. "Happiness in the air: How does a dirty sky affect mental health and subjective well-being?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 81-94.
    37. Wes Austin & Stefano Carattini & John Gomez Mahecha & Michael Pesko, 2020. "COVID-19 Mortality and Contemporaneous Air Pollution," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper2016, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    38. Hahn, Robert W, 1989. "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor's Orders," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 95-114, Spring.
    39. Eric Maskin & Jean Tirole, 2004. "The Politician and the Judge: Accountability in Government," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1034-1054, September.
    40. Editorial, 2020. "Covid-19 and Climate Change," Journal, Review of Agrarian Studies, vol. 10(1), pages 5-6, January-J.
    41. Lavy, Victor & Ebenstein, Avraham & Roth, Sefi, 2014. "The Impact of Short Term Exposure to Ambient Air Pollution on Cognitive Performance and Human Capital Formation," CEPR Discussion Papers 10302, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    42. Andersson, David & Nässén, Jonas, 2016. "The Gothenburg congestion charge scheme: A pre–post analysis of commuting behavior and travel satisfaction," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 82-89.
    43. Ieromonachou, P. & Potter, S. & Warren, J.P., 2006. "Norway's urban toll rings: Evolving towards congestion charging?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 367-378, September.
    44. Odeck, James & Bråthen, Svein, 2002. "Toll financing in Norway: The success, the failures and perspectives for the future," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 253-260, July.
    45. Ramjerdi, Farideh & Minken, Harald & Østmoe, Knut, 2004. "10. Norwegian Urban Tolls," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 237-249, January.
    46. Cheng Keat Tang, 2016. "Traffic Externalities and Housing Prices: Evidence from the London Congestion Charge," SERC Discussion Papers 0205, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    47. Kristoffersson, Ida & Engelson, Leonid & Börjesson, Maria, 2017. "Efficiency vs equity: Conflicting objectives of congestion charges," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 99-107.
    48. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    49. De Borger, Bruno & Proost, Stef, 2012. "A political economy model of road pricing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 79-92.
    50. Stephen Ison & Tom Rye, 2005. "Implementing Road User Charging: The Lessons Learnt from Hong Kong, Cambridge and Central London," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 451-465, October.
    51. World Bank, "undated". "State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2020 [Situación y tendencias de la fijación del precio al carbono 2020]," World Bank Publications - Reports 33809, The World Bank Group.
    52. Kottenhoff, Karl & Brundell Freij, Karin, 2009. "The role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of congestion charging - The case of Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 297-305, March.
    53. Schuitema, Geertje & Steg, Linda & Forward, Sonja, 2010. "Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 99-109, February.
    54. Kaplowitz, Stan A. & McCright, Aaron M., 2015. "Effects of policy characteristics and justifications on acceptance of a gasoline tax increase," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 370-381.
    55. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    56. Allen, Simon & Gaunt, Martin & Rye, Tom, 2006. "An investigation into the reasons for the rejection of congestion charging by the citizens of Edinburgh," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 32, pages 95-113.
    57. John Ferejohn, 1986. "Incumbent performance and electoral control," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 5-25, January.
    58. S. Jaensirisak & M. Wardman & A. D. May, 2005. "Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 39(2), pages 127-154, May.
    59. Nan Zhong & Jing Cao & Yuzhu Wang, 2017. "Traffic Congestion, Ambient Air Pollution, and Health: Evidence from Driving Restrictions in Beijing," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(3), pages 821-856.
    60. Eliasson, Jonas & Mattsson, Lars-Göran, 2006. "Equity effects of congestion pricing: Quantitative methodology and a case study for Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 602-620, August.
    61. Sclen, Håkon & Kallbekken, Steffen, 2011. "A choice experiment on fuel taxation and earmarking in Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2181-2190, September.
    62. Gibson, Matthew & Carnovale, Maria, 2015. "The effects of road pricing on driver behavior and air pollution," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 62-73.
    63. Hansla, André & Hysing, Erik & Nilsson, Andreas & Martinsson, Johan, 2017. "Explaining voting behavior in the Gothenburg congestion tax referendum," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 98-106.
    64. David A. Hensher & John M. Rose & Andrew T. Collins, 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, University of Bath, vol. 47(3), pages 453-473, September.
    65. Guojun He & Yuhang Pan & Takanao Tanaka, 2020. "The short-term impacts of COVID-19 lockdown on urban air pollution in China," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 3(12), pages 1005-1011, December.
    66. Antonio Bento & Kevin Roth & Andrew R. Waxman, 2020. "The Value of Urgency: Evidence from Real-Time Congestion Pricing," NBER Working Papers 26956, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    67. Cherry, Todd L. & Kallbekken, Steffen & Kroll, Stephan, 2014. "The impact of trial runs on the acceptability of environmental taxes: Experimental evidence," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 84-95.
    68. Krishnamurthy, Chandra Kiran B. & Ngo, Nicole S., 2020. "The effects of smart-parking on transit and traffic: Evidence from SFpark," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    69. Kramer, Gerald H., 1983. "The Ecological Fallacy Revisited: Aggregate- versus Individual-level Findings on Economics and Elections, and Sociotropic Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 92-111, March.
    70. Parry, I. W. H., 2002. "Comparing the efficiency of alternative policies for reducing traffic congestion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 333-362, September.
    71. Dresner, Simon & Dunne, Louise & Clinch, Peter & Beuermann, Christiane, 2006. "Social and political responses to ecological tax reform in Europe: an introduction to the special issue," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 895-904, May.
    72. Mark R. Jacobsen, 2013. "Fuel Economy and Safety: The Influences of Vehicle Class and Driver Behavior," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(3), pages 1-26, July.
    73. Eliasson, Jonas & Jonsson, Lina, 2011. "The unexpected "yes": Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 636-647, August.
    74. Agarwal, Sumit & Koo, Kang Mo, 2016. "Impact of electronic road pricing (ERP) changes on transport modal choice," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-11.
    75. Kallbekken, Steffen & Aasen, Marianne, 2010. "The demand for earmarking: Results from a focus group study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2183-2190, September.
    76. Jun Yang & Avralt-Od Purevjav & Shanjun Li, 2020. "The Marginal Cost of Traffic Congestion and Road Pricing: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in Beijing," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 418-453, February.
    77. Gevrek, Z.Eylem & Uyduranoglu, Ayse, 2015. "Public preferences for carbon tax attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 186-197.
    78. Hensher, David A. & Li, Zheng, 2013. "Referendum voting in road pricing reform: A review of the evidence," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 186-197.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Helmers, Viola & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan, 2023. "On the Acceptance of Congestion Charges: Experimental Evidence for Six European Countries," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277706, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Vosough, Shaghayegh & de Palma, André & Lindsey, Robin, 2022. "Pricing vehicle emissions and congestion externalities using a dynamic traffic network simulator," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1-24.
    3. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Klaus Eisenack, 2024. "Why Local Governments Set Climate Targets: Effects of City Size and Political Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(11), pages 2935-2965, November.
    5. Klaus Eisenack, 2023. "Why local governments set climate targets: Effects of city size and political costs," Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers 0029, Berlin School of Economics.
    6. Arlinghaus, Johanna Brigitte & Konc, Théo & Mattauch, Linus & Sommer, Stephan, 2024. "The effect of information framing on policy support: Experimental evidence from urban policies," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302449, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Lichtin, Florian & Smith, E. Keith & Axhausen, Kay W. & Bernauer, Thomas, 2024. "How to design publicly acceptable road pricing? Experimental insights from Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    8. Pyddoke, Roger, 2023. "Comparison of policies for increasing sustainable transport mode shares in Swedish cities," Working Papers 2023:9, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
    9. Bondemark, Anders & Andersson, Henrik & Brundell-Freij, Karin, 2022. "Public preferences for distribution in the context of transport investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 160-184.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefano Carattini & Maria Carvalho & Sam Fankhauser, 2018. "Overcoming public resistance to carbon taxes," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(5), September.
    2. Lichtin, Florian & Smith, E. Keith & Axhausen, Kay W. & Bernauer, Thomas, 2024. "How to design publicly acceptable road pricing? Experimental insights from Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    3. Boggio, Margherita & Beria, Paolo, 2019. "The role of transport supply in the acceptability of pollution charge extension. The case of Milan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 92-106.
    4. Hensher, David A. & Li, Zheng, 2013. "Referendum voting in road pricing reform: A review of the evidence," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 186-197.
    5. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Helmers, Viola & Frondel, Manuel & Sommer, Stephan, 2023. "On the Acceptance of Congestion Charges: Experimental Evidence for Six European Countries," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277706, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Eliasson, Jonas, 2017. "Congestion pricing," MPRA Paper 88224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Hammerle, Mara & Best, Rohan & Crosby, Paul, 2021. "Public acceptance of carbon taxes in Australia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Fageda, Xavier & Flores-Fillol, Ricardo & Theilen, Bernd, 2022. "Price versus quantity measures to deal with pollution and congestion in urban areas: A political economy approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    10. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    11. Sara Maestre-Andrés & Stefan Drews & Ivan Savin & Jeroen Bergh, 2021. "Carbon tax acceptability with information provision and mixed revenue uses," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Dieplinger, Maria & Fürst, Elmar, 2014. "The acceptability of road pricing: Evidence from two studies in Vienna and four other European cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 10-18.
    13. Börjesson, Maria & Kristoffersson, Ida, 2018. "The Swedish congestion charges: Ten years on," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 35-51.
    14. Andersson, David & Nässén, Jonas, 2016. "The Gothenburg congestion charge scheme: A pre–post analysis of commuting behavior and travel satisfaction," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 82-89.
    15. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    16. Vonk Noordegraaf, Diana & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2014. "Policy implementation lessons from six road pricing cases," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 172-191.
    17. Zhang, Wenjia & Liu, Chengcheng & Zhang, Hongmou, 2023. "Public acceptance of congestion pricing policies in Beijing: The roles of neighborhood built environment and air pollution perception," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 106-120.
    18. Umit, Resul & Schaffer, Lena Maria, 2020. "Attitudes towards carbon taxes across Europe: The role of perceived uncertainty and self-interest," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    19. Marazi, Naveed Farooz & Majumdar, Bandhan Bandhu & Sahu, Prasanta K. & Potoglou, Dimitris, 2022. "Congestion pricing acceptability among commuters: An Indian perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    20. Bernardo, Valeria & Fageda, Xavier & Flores-Fillol, Ricardo, 2021. "Pollution and congestion in urban areas: The effects of low emission zones," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 26.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    acceptability; congestion charge; poicy design; public support; road pricing; Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy; PZ00P1_180006/1;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:110870. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.