Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distributional impacts of road pricing: The truth behind the myth

  • Published:
Transportation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper shows that road pricing can be regressive, progressive or neutral, and refutes the generalised idea that road pricing is always regressive. The potential distributional impacts of a road pricing scheme are assessed in three English towns. It is found that impacts are town specific and depend on where people live, where people work and what mode of transport they use to go to work. Initial impacts may be progressive even before any compensation scheme for losers is taken into account. When the situation before the scheme is implemented is such that majority of drivers entering the area where the scheme would operate come from households with incomes above the average, it can be expected that, once the scheme is implemented, these drivers coming from rich households will continue to cross the cordon and will be prepared to pay the charge. In such a case the overall effect will be that on average, rich people will pay the toll and poor people will not.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acts of Parliament (1999) Greater London Authority Act 1999 c. 29, London: HMSO. http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1999/19990029.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acts of Parliament (2000) Transport Act 2000 c. 38. December 2000. http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000038.htm.

  • Blow L & Crawford I (1997) The distributional effects of taxes on private motoring. Commentary No. 65. London: The Institute for Fiscal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Button K & Verhoef E (1998) Pricing, Traffic Congestion and the Environment. Lincolnshire: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • CASWEB, Web-based Interface to Census Area Statistics. http://census.ac.uk/casweb/.

  • Census Dissemination Unit (CDU), MIMAS, Manchester Computing Service. http://www.mimas.ac.uk/.

  • Commission for Integrated Transport (2002) Congestion Charging in the UK, December 20. http://www.cfit.gov.uk/congestioncharging/factsheets/uk/index.htm.

  • Commission of the European Communities, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations, and World Bank (1993) System of National Accounts 1993. Brussels, Luxembourg, New York, Paris, Washington DC.

  • Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000) Transport 2010: The 10 Year Plan. http://www.dft.gov.uk/trans2010/plan/index.htm.

  • Dodgson J, Young J & van der Veer J (2002) Paying for Road Use, Technical Report, A Report to the Commission for Integrated Transport, National Economic Research Associates (NERA), London, February. http://www.cfit.gov.uk/research/pfru/pdf/pfru-tech.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durham County Council Press and Publicity Unit (2002) Country's First Town Centre Toad Toll Goes Live Next Week, September 26. http://www.durham.gov.uk.

  • Digitised Boundaries for Cambridge. Edinburgh UKBORDERS Facility, UKBORDERS, EDINA Data Centre, Digital Boundary Data (DBD) associated with the 1991 Census of Population, University of Edinburgh. http://www.edina.ac.uk/ukborders/.

  • Eliasson, J & Mattsson L-G (2001) Transport and location effects of road pricing. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 35: 417-456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans A (1992) Road congestion pricing? When is it a good policy? Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 26: 213-243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flowerdew A (1993) Urban Traffic Congestion in Europe: Road Pricing and Public Transport Demand, Research Report, The Economics Intelligence Unit, London, May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giuliano G (1994) Equity and fairness considerations of congestion pricing. In: Transportation Research Board (1994): 250-279.

  • Goodwin P (1989) The rule of three: A possible solution to the political problem of competing objectives for road pricing. Traffic Engineering and Control 30: 495-497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin P (1990) How to make road pricing popular. Economic Affairs 10: 6-7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington W, Krupnick A & Alberini A (2001) Overcoming public aversion to congestion pricing. Transportation Research A 35: 87-105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ison S (2000) Local authority and academic attitudes to urban road pricing: A UK perspective. Transport Policy 7: 269-277.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITS International (1999) Great expectations. ITS International, Jan–Feb: 37-39.

  • Johnson P, McKay S & Smith S (1990) The distributional consequences of environmental taxes. Commentary No. 23. London: The Institute for Fiscal Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones P (1998) Urban road pricing: Public acceptability and barriers to implementation. In: Button and Verhoef (1998): 263-284.

  • Larsen O & Østmoe K (2001) The experience of urban toll cordons in Norway: Lessons for the future. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 35: 457-471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layard R (1977) The distributional effects of congestion taxes. Economica 44: 297-341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lex Services (1998) Lex Report on Motoring: Driving for the Future. Bucks: Lex Service PLC, January.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litman T (1996) Using road pricing revenue: Economic efficiency and equity considerations. Transportation Research Record 1558: 24-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen B & Jensen-Butler C (2001) Modelling the Local Economic Impacts of Road Pricing, SØM Publication No. 46, Society, Economics & Environment Research Centre, Institute of Local Government Studies, Denmark, December. http://www.akf.dk/som/pdf/som46.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Transport (1964) Road Pricing: The Economic and Technical Possibilities. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison SA (1986) A survey of road pricing. Transportation Research A 20: 87-97.

    Google Scholar 

  • MVA (1995) The London Congestion Charging Research Programme, Final Report, Vol. 1: Text, Government Office for London, London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Economic Development Office (1991) A Road User Charge: Londoner's Views, Report on Survey Findings, Harris/NEDO, London. Cited in Flowerdew (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbery D (1990) Pricing and congestion: Economic principles relevant to pricing roads. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 6: 22-38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbery D (1994) The case for a public road authority. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 28: 235-253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbery D & Santos G (1999) Road taxes, road user charges and earmarking. Fiscal Studies 20: 103-132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newbery D & Santos G (2002) Estimating urban road congestion costs. CEPR Discussion Paper 3176, Centre for Economic Policy Research, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odeck J & Bråthen S (1997) On public attitudes toward implementation of toll roads — the case of Oslo toll ring. Transport Policy 4: 73-83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odeck J & Bråthen S (2002) Toll financing in Norway: The success, the failures and perspectives for the future. Transport Policy 9: 253-260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for National Statistics (1998) New Earnings Survey, Part D: Analysis by Occupation, Newport, December.

  • Pigou A (1920) The Economics of Welfare. London: MacMillan and Co., Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • RAC Foundation for Motoring (2003) RAC Report on Motoring Making the Most of Britain's Roads, London.

  • Richardson, H & Bae C-H (1998), The equity impacts of road congestion pricing. In: Button and Verhoef (1998): 247-262.

  • ROCOL Working Group (2000) Road Charging Options for London: A Technical Assessment. London: The Stationary Office, March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos G, Newbery D & Rojey L (2001) Static versus demand-sensitive models and estimation of second-best cordon tolls: An exercise for eight English towns. Transportation Research Record 1747: 44-50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small K (1983) The incidence of congestion tolls on urban highways. Journal of Urban Economics 13: 90-111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small K (1992) Using the revenues from congestion pricing. Transportation 19: 359-381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small K & Gómez-Ibáñez J (1998) Road pricing for congestion management: The transition from theory to policy. In: Button and Verhoef (1998): 213-246.

  • Toh R (1992) Experimental measures to curb road congestion in Singapore: Pricing and quotas. Logistics and Transportation Review 28: 289-317.

    Google Scholar 

  • report_mayor.shtml.

    Google Scholar 

  • Transportation Research Board (1994) Curbing Gridlock: Peak Period Fees to Relieve Traffic Congestion, Special Report 242, Washington DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoef E, Nijkamp P & Rietveld P (1997) The social feasibility of road pricing: A case study for the randstad area. Journal of Transport Economic and Policy 31: 255-276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead T (2002) Road user charging and business performance: Identifying the processes of economic change. Transport Policy 9: 221-240.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge, Sidgwick Site, CB3 9DE, UK

    Georgina Santos

  2. Ecole Polytechnique, France

    Laurent Rojey

Authors
  1. Georgina Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laurent Rojey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georgina Santos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Santos, G., Rojey, L. Distributional impacts of road pricing: The truth behind the myth. Transportation 31, 21–42 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PORT.0000007234.98158.6b

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PORT.0000007234.98158.6b

Search

Navigation