IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/retrec/v103y2024ics0739885923001142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acceptability of transportation demand management policy packages considering interactions and socio-economic heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Moeinaddini, Amin
  • Habibian, Meeghat

Abstract

The Transportation Demand Management (TDM) policies will not be authorized if they have not enough public acceptability. In this study, policy packing is proposed as a way to alleviate the unacceptability of coercive (push) TDM policies that have considerable effectiveness (e.g., cordon and parking pricing) by using some non-coercive (pull) TDM policies (e.g., transit development). Furthermore, in addition to the main effects, the interaction effects of TDM policies on the acceptability of two policy packages are addressed. Policy package (I) includes cordon pricing and reduction of transit access time, and Policy package (II) contains parking pricing and reduction of transit access time. A Random Parameter Ordered Logit (RPOL) model is developed based on a choice experiment designed for car commuters of Tehran, Iran. Results confirm that while reducing transit access time have a significant interaction effect with cordon pricing on the acceptability of Package (I) it has not a significant interaction effect with parking pricing on the acceptability of Package (II). Furthermore, the heterogeneity of respondents' cars value and the presence of free parking at the workplace can significantly affect the acceptability of Package (II). This study also addresses the effect of respondents’ trip and socio-economic characteristics on the acceptability.

Suggested Citation

  • Moeinaddini, Amin & Habibian, Meeghat, 2024. "Acceptability of transportation demand management policy packages considering interactions and socio-economic heterogeneity," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:retrec:v:103:y:2024:i:c:s0739885923001142
    DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2023.101374
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885923001142
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.retrec.2023.101374?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bellizzi, Maria Grazia & dell'Olio, Luigi & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2020. "Heterogeneity in desired bus service quality from users’ and potential users’ perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 365-377.
    2. Nilsson, Andreas & Hansla, André & Heiling, Joakim Malmborg & Bergstad, Cecilia Jakobsson & Martinsson, Johan, 2016. "Public acceptability towards environmental policy measures: Value-matching appeals," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 176-184.
    3. Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio & Marciani, Massimo & Cossu, Paola, 2017. "Measuring the effects of an urban freight policy package defined via a collaborative governance model," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 3-9.
    4. Zheng, Zuduo & Liu, Zhiyuan & Liu, Chuanli & Shiwakoti, Nirajan, 2014. "Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 117-134.
    5. Meeghat Habibian & Ali Rezaei, 2017. "Accounting for systematic heterogeneity across car commuters in response to multiple TDM policies: case study of Tehran," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 681-700, July.
    6. Schaller, Bruce, 2010. "New York City's congestion pricing experience and implications for road pricing acceptance in the United States," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 266-273, August.
    7. 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.
    8. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A. & Rose, John, 2006. "Accounting for heterogeneity in the variance of unobserved effects in mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 75-92, January.
    9. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    10. Lindsey, Robin & Santos, Georgina, 2020. "Addressing transportation and environmental externalities with economics: Are policy makers listening?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Habibian, Meeghat & Kermanshah, Mohammad, 2013. "Coping with congestion: Understanding the role of simultaneous transportation demand management policies on commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 229-237.
    13. 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.
    14. Scorrano, Mariangela & Danielis, Romeo, 2021. "Active mobility in an Italian city: Mode choice determinants and attitudes before and during the Covid-19 emergency," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    15. Alataş, Sedat, 2022. "Do environmental technologies help to reduce transport sector CO2 emissions? Evidence from the EU15 countries," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Khalilikhah, Majid & Habibian, Meeghat & Heaslip, Kevin, 2016. "Acceptability of increasing petrol price as a TDM pricing policy: A case study in Tehran," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 136-144.
    18. Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2017. "Investigating the potential for off-hour deliveries in the city of Rome: Retailers’ perceptions and stated reactions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 142-156.
    19. Eldeeb, Gamal & Mohamed, Moataz, 2022. "Consumers oriented investments in transit service quality improvements: The best bang for your buck," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    20. Maggi, Elena & Vallino, Elena, 2016. "Understanding urban mobility and the impact of public policies: The role of the agent-based models," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 50-59.
    21. Burchell, Jonathan & Ison, Stephen & Enoch, Marcus & Budd, Lucy, 2019. "Implementation of the workplace parking levy as a transport policy instrument," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    22. Taeihagh, Araz & Bañares-Alcántara, René & Givoni, Moshe, 2014. "A virtual environment for the formulation of policy packages," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 53-68.
    23. Moshe Givoni & James Macmillen & David Banister & Eran Feitelson, 2013. "From Policy Measures to Policy Packages," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, January.
    24. Deng, Taotao & Nelson, John D., 2013. "Bus Rapid Transit implementation in Beijing: An evaluation of performance and impacts," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 108-113.
    25. Chung, Younshik & Song, Taijin & Park, Jungsik, 2012. "Freeway booking policy: Public discourse and acceptability analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 223-231.
    26. Sara Maestre-Andrés & Stefan Drews & Jeroen van den Bergh, 2020. "Perceived fairness and public acceptability of carbon pricing: a review of the literature," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(9), pages 1186-1204, July.
    27. Justen, Andreas & Fearnley, Nils & Givoni, Moshe & Macmillen, James, 2014. "A process for designing policy packaging: Ideals and realities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 9-18.
    28. Venter, Christoffel, 2016. "Assessing the potential of bus rapid transit-led network restructuring for enhancing affordable access to employment – The case of Johannesburg's Corridors of Freedom," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 441-449.
    29. Wei Yang & Wijnand Veeneman & Martin De Jong, 2018. "Transport Demand Management Policy Integration in Chinese Cities: A Proposed Analysis of Its Effects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, May.
    30. 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.
    31. Borsati, Mattia & Nocera, Silvio & Percoco, Marco, 2022. "Questioning the spatial association between the initial spread of COVID-19 and transit usage in Italy," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    32. O'Fallon, Carolyn & Sullivan, Charles & Hensher, David A, 2004. "Constraints affecting mode choices by morning car commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 17-29, January.
    33. 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.
    34. 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).
    35. Litman, Todd, 2003. "The Online TDM Encyclopedia: mobility management information gateway," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 245-249, July.
    36. Renne, John L. & Hamidi, Shima & Ewing, Reid, 2016. "Transit commuting, the network accessibility effect, and the built environment in station areas across the United States," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 35-43.
    37. Santos, Georgina & Behrendt, Hannah & Teytelboym, Alexander, 2010. "Part II: Policy instruments for sustainable road transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 46-91.
    38. Eriksson, Louise & Garvill, Jörgen & Nordlund, Annika M., 2008. "Acceptability of single and combined transport policy measures: The importance of environmental and policy specific beliefs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1117-1128, October.
    39. Kelly, Charlotte & May, Anthony D. & Jopson, Ann, 2008. "The development of an option generation tool to identify potential transport policy packages," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 361-371, November.
    40. Filipe, Luis N. & Macário, Rosário, 2014. "Policy packaging in BRT projects: A methodology for case study analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 152-158.
    41. Vieira, João & Moura, Filipe & Manuel Viegas, José, 2007. "Transport policy and environmental impacts: The importance of multi-instrumentality in policy integration," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 421-432, September.
    42. Thorpe, Neil & Hills, Peter & Jaensirisak, Sittha, 2000. "Public attitudes to TDM measures: a comparative study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 243-257, October.
    43. Evangelinos, Christos & Tscharaktschiew, Stefan & Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2018. "Pricing workplace parking via cash-out: Effects on modal choice and implications for transport policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 369-380.
    44. Antonio Comi & Antonio Polimeni, 2020. "Bus Travel Time: Experimental Evidence and Forecasting," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-14, August.
    45. Ramos, Raúl & Cantillo, Víctor & Arellana, Julián & Sarmiento, Iván, 2017. "From restricting the use of cars by license plate numbers to congestion charging: Analysis for Medellin, Colombia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 119-130.
    46. Malayath, Manoj & Verma, Ashish, 2013. "Activity based travel demand models as a tool for evaluating sustainable transportation policies," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 45-66.
    47. Stradling, S. G. & Meadows, M. L. & Beatty, S., 2000. "Helping drivers out of their cars Integrating transport policy and social psychology for sustainable change," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 207-215, July.
    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. Kevin Riehl & Anastasios Kouvelas & Michail Makridis, 2024. "Fair Money -- Public Good Value Pricing With Karma Economies," Papers 2407.05132, arXiv.org.

    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. Moeinaddini, Amin & Habibian, Meeghat, 2023. "Transportation demand management policy efficiency: An attempt to address the effectiveness and acceptability of policy packages," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 317-330.
    2. Romero, Fernando & Gomez, Juan & Paez, Antonio & Vassallo, José Manuel, 2020. "Toll roads vs. Public transportation: A study on the acceptance of congestion-calming measures in Madrid," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 319-342.
    3. Habibian, Meeghat & Kermanshah, Mohammad, 2013. "Coping with congestion: Understanding the role of simultaneous transportation demand management policies on commuters," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 229-237.
    4. Khalilikhah, Majid & Habibian, Meeghat & Heaslip, Kevin, 2016. "Acceptability of increasing petrol price as a TDM pricing policy: A case study in Tehran," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 136-144.
    5. Meeghat Habibian & Ali Rezaei, 2017. "Accounting for systematic heterogeneity across car commuters in response to multiple TDM policies: case study of Tehran," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 681-700, July.
    6. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    7. Wei Yang & Wijnand Veeneman & Martin De Jong, 2018. "Transport Demand Management Policy Integration in Chinese Cities: A Proposed Analysis of Its Effects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, May.
    8. 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.
    9. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    10. Christophe Alaux, 2012. "Confiance, acceptabilité et comportement d’achat: la performance des politiques publiques environnementales," Post-Print hal-01824049, HAL.
    11. 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.
    12. Araz Taeihagh, 2017. "Network-centric policy design," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 317-338, June.
    13. 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).
    14. Sugiarto, Sugiarto & Miwa, Tomio & Morikawa, Takayuki, 2017. "Inclusion of latent constructs in utilitarian resource allocation model for analyzing revenue spending options in congestion charging policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 36-53.
    15. Xin Li & John W. Shaw & Daizong Liu & Yun Yuan, 2019. "Acceptability of Beijing congestion charging from a business perspective," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 753-776, June.
    16. 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).
    17. Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Hillel Bar-Gera & Yoram Shiftan, 2023. "Congestion pricing and positive incentives: conceptual analysis and empirical findings from Israel," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 607-633, April.
    18. Wang, Yacan & Geng, Kexin & May, Anthony D. & Zhou, Huiyu, 2022. "The impact of traffic demand management policy mix on commuter travel choices," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 74-87.
    19. Fowri, Hamid R. & Seyedabrishami, Seyedehsan, 2020. "Assessment of urban transportation pricing policies with incorporation of unobserved heterogeneity," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 12-19.
    20. Amalie Bjørnåvold & Maia David & Vincent Mermet-Bijon & Olivier Beaumais & Romain Crastes Dit Sourd & Steven van Passel & Vincent Martinet, 2023. "To tax or to ban? A discrete choice experiment to elicit public preferences for phasing out glyphosate use in agriculture [Taxer ou interdire ? Une expérience de choix discret pour obtenir les préf," Post-Print hal-04057671, HAL.

    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:eee:retrec:v:103:y:2024:i:c:s0739885923001142. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620614/description#description .

    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.