IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v150y2021icp256-270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public acceptability towards Low Emission Zones: The role of attitudes, norms, emotions, and trust

Author

Listed:
  • Morton, Craig
  • Mattioli, Giulio
  • Anable, Jillian

Abstract

In recent years, the topic of air quality has grown in prominence due to an improved understanding of the detrimental impacts of local air pollutants on human health and wellbeing. The introduction of Urban Vehicle Access Regulations such as Low Emission Zones represents one policy that is being actively considered in city governance to address this problem, whereby the access of highly polluting vehicles is restricted to reduce traffic-related emissions. For such a policy to be implemented, an understanding of public support can prove useful by identifying the issues that underpin citizen reaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Morton, Craig & Mattioli, Giulio & Anable, Jillian, 2021. "Public acceptability towards Low Emission Zones: The role of attitudes, norms, emotions, and trust," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 256-270.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:150:y:2021:i:c:p:256-270
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.06.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856421001555
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2021.06.007?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. Bamberg, Sebastian & Fujii, Satoshi & Friman, Margareta & Gärling, Tommy, 2011. "Behaviour theory and soft transport policy measures," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 228-235, January.
    2. 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).
    3. Brand, Christian, 2016. "Beyond ‘Dieselgate’: Implications of unaccounted and future air pollutant emissions and energy use for cars in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Robert Noland & Mohammed Quddus & Washington Ochieng, 2008. "The effect of the London congestion charge on road casualties: an intervention analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 73-91, January.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Souche, Stéphanie & Raux, Charles & Croissant, Yves, 2012. "On the perceived justice of urban road pricing: An empirical study in Lyon," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1124-1136.
    8. Munford, Luke A., 2017. "The impact of congestion charging on social capital," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 192-208.
    9. Tom Rye & Martin Gaunt & Stephen Ison, 2008. "Edinburgh's Congestion Charging Plans: An Analysis of Reasons for Non-Implementation," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 641-661, March.
    10. Meyer, Michael D., 1999. "Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 575-599.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. de Oña, Juan & de Oña, Rocío & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2013. "Perceived service quality in bus transit service: A structural equation approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 219-226.
    14. Hysing, Erik & Isaksson, Karolina, 2015. "Building acceptance for congestion charges – the Swedish experiences compared," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 52-60.
    15. Bonsall, Peter & Kelly, Charlotte, 2005. "Road user charging and social exclusion: The impact of congestion charges on at-risk groups," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 406-418, September.
    16. Vigar, Geoff & Shaw, Andrew & Swann, Richard, 2011. "Selling sustainable mobility: The reporting of the Manchester Transport Innovation Fund bid in UK media," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 468-479, March.
    17. Cools, Mario & Brijs, Kris & Tormans, Hans & Moons, Elke & Janssens, Davy & Wets, Geert, 2011. "The socio-cognitive links between road pricing acceptability and changes in travel-behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 779-788, October.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Christiansen, Petter, 2018. "Public support of transport policy instruments, perceived transport quality and satisfaction with democracy. What is the relationship?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 305-318.
    21. Lois, David & López-Sáez, Mercedes, 2009. "The relationship between instrumental, symbolic and affective factors as predictors of car use: A structural equation modeling approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(9-10), pages 790-799, November.
    22. Junghwa Kim & Jan-Dirk Schmöcker & Cecilia Bergstad & Satoshi Fujii & Tommy Gärling, 2014. "The influence of personality on acceptability of sustainable transport policies," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 855-872, July.
    23. 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.
    24. Hensher, David A. & Puckett, Sean M., 2007. "Congestion and variable user charging as an effective travel demand management instrument," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 615-626, August.
    25. 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.
    26. Quddus, Mohammed A. & Bell, Michael G.H. & Schmöcker, Jan-Dirk & Fonzone, Achille, 2007. "The impact of the congestion charge on the retail business in London: An econometric analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 433-444, September.
    27. Jones, Peter & Lucas, Karen, 2012. "The social consequences of transport decision-making: clarifying concepts, synthesising knowledge and assessing implications," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 4-16.
    28. Joachim Scheiner & Christian Holz-Rau, 2007. "Travel mode choice: affected by objective or subjective determinants?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 487-511, 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. Ceccato, Riccardo & Rossi, Riccardo & Gastaldi, Massimiliano, 2024. "Low emission zone and mobility behavior: Ex-ante evaluation of vehicle pollutant emissions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Fessler, Andreas & Cash, Philip & Thorhauge, Mikkel & Haustein, Sonja, 2023. "A public transport based crowdshipping concept: Results of a field test in Denmark," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 106-118.
    3. Muhamad Rizki & Muhammad Zudhy Irawan & Puspita Dirgahayani & Prawira Fajarindra Belgiawan & Retno Wihanesta, 2022. "Low Emission Zone (LEZ) Expansion in Jakarta: Acceptability and Restriction Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Maha Attia & Taslim Alade & Shady Attia, 2023. "The Influence of Passenger Car Banning Policies on Modal Shifts: Rotterdam’s Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, April.

    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. 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.
    2. Morton, Craig & Lovelace, Robin & Anable, Jillian, 2017. "Exploring the effect of local transport policies on the adoption of low emission vehicles: Evidence from the London Congestion Charge and Hybrid Electric Vehicles," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 34-46.
    3. Ding, Hongliang & Sze, N.N. & Li, Haojie & Guo, Yanyong, 2021. "Affected area and residual period of London Congestion Charging scheme on road safety," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 120-128.
    4. Eliasson, Jonas, 2017. "Congestion pricing," MPRA Paper 88224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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).
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. De Vos, Jonas, 2016. "Road pricing in a polycentric urban region: Analysing a pilot project in Belgium," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 134-142.
    11. Jens West & Maria Börjesson, 2020. "The Gothenburg congestion charges: cost–benefit analysis and distribution effects," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 145-174, February.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Percoco, Marco, 2014. "The impact of road pricing on housing prices: Preliminary evidence from Milan," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 188-194.
    15. Di Ciommo, Floridea & Monzón, Andrés & Fernandez-Heredia, Alvaro, 2013. "Improving the analysis of road pricing acceptability surveys by using hybrid models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 302-316.
    16. 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.
    17. Yacan Wang & Yu Wang & Luyao Xie & Huiyu Zhou, 2018. "Impact of Perceived Uncertainty on Public Acceptability of Congestion Charging: An Empirical Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    18. Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "The role of attitude structures, direct experience and reframing for the success of congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 81-95.
    19. Velaga, Nagendra R. & Pangbourne, Kate, 2014. "Achieving genuinely dynamic road user charging: issues with a GNSS-based approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 243-253.
    20. Moshe Givoni, 2012. "Re-assessing the Results of the London Congestion Charging Scheme," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(5), pages 1089-1105, April.

    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:transa:v:150:y:2021:i:c:p:256-270. 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/547/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.