123456
| [show] |
|---|
Question
Does congestion charge scheme constrain individual choice and behavior in EU countries?
Boundaries
The question can be considered generally but for the purpose of the congestion charge assessment the borders are set by the countries located in the EU province. The existing situations as well as the accessible data which can be updated are considered in the effects of congestion charges.
Answer
No decent answer is approved for this question. Some people consider it as an opportunity to shift into precise alternatives while mostly as seen in reports individual choices has shifted into other possibilities rather than using vehicles in the roads.
Rationale
An individual’s choice among various modes of transportation is not simple nor based just on monetary costs; concerns such as transit times, waiting times, reliability, comfort, privacy, and security also factor into the decision. While on the surface it may seem transit fares would need to be less than the imposed congestion charge in order to incent commuters to switch to public transit, this may not be the case because the congestion charge is only one component of the monetary cost of driving. Moreover, the objective effects of the charges cause two types of perceived effects. First, there are direct effects on the individual, such as changed travel costs and travel times. Naturally, these effects depend on the individual's travel behavior. Second, there are “social” effects, system level effects that do not directly affect the individual. It is known, however, that not only direct, individual effects but also such “system” or “social” effects affect attitudes. Schmöcker et al. (2005) identified a change in the shopping frequency after the implementation of a congestion charge. Study performed in 2008 in Stockholm revealed that trial Trips going through the cordon depend more on the gender. Almost half of the women change to a different mode, whereas 70 % of the men continue using their car. In a study performed in Gothenburg, the adaptation strategies, however, differ between commuting and discretionary trips. The 9000 commuters priced off the road apparently switched to public transport, increasing by 12,000 trips. Among discretionary travelers the main adaptation strategies are changing destination and reducing trip frequency. In fact, the number of public transport trips even reduced. The congestion charges have not had any measurable impact on the market share for cycling. The individual choice and behavior observed in Stockholm are remarkably similar to those observed in Gothenburg: commuters diverted to public transport and discretionary travelers adapted in other ways. A study in the spring of 2006 showed most drivers were unaware that they had reduced their trips across the Stockholm congestion charging cordon. Moreover, there are many other changing processes going on. People move and change jobs, for example: between any two years, 20‐25% of the workforce will have changed jobs (or started working), and 15‐20% of the population will have moved. In another study behaviors of travelers, including car drivers and motorcyclists, in response to in-town congestion charge in Taipei City were modeled in order to propose feasible in-town congestion charge scheme accordingly. The estimation results showed the existence of correlation among alternatives and heterogeneity for car drivers. Additionally, results revealed that motorcyclists are much more sensitive to the charge than car drivers.
Dependencies
| Obs | Year | City | different choices parameter | behavior effected due to congestion charge implmentation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2008 | London | The amount of pedal cycles | increased by 66% |
| 2 | 2008 | London | Buses and coaches | increased by 31% |
| 3 | 2006 | London | Cars and minicabs | reduced by 36% |
| 4 | 2006 | Stockholm | Public transport | increased by 4‐5% |
| 5 | 2005 | Stockholm | Cars and minicabs | decreased by 22% |
| 6 | 2013 | Göteborg | traffic flow | decreased by 20% |
| 7 | 2005 | London | shopping in the shops in the congestion | 95.5% shop less often |
| 8 | 2004 | London | traffic flow | reduced by 12% |
Formula
See also
Keywords
References
Related files
<mfanonymousfilelist></mfanonymousfilelist>