IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v60y2014icp40-52.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategies to manage barriers in policy formation and implementation of road pricing packages

Author

Listed:
  • Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard
  • Isaksson, Karolina
  • Macmillen, James
  • Åkerman, Jonas
  • Kressler, Florian

Abstract

In the transport policy domain, as in other highly-contested spheres of public policy, it is commonplace for certain policy measures to emerge as promising only to then remain unimplemented. Road pricing is one example of a theoretically well-developed transport policy measure that has proven notoriously difficult to decide and implement. There are however lessons to learn from practice on how to manage barriers to policy formation and implementation also within this field. Drawing on the congestion charging schemes implemented in London in 2003 and Stockholm in 2006, and the Swiss Heavy Vehicle Fee scheme implemented in 2001, this paper identifies a selection of strategies which appear to have supported the policymakers’ capacity to implement effective road pricing schemes. Together, these three examples offer a sound empirical basis from which to infer a set of strategies for the formulation and implementation of politically-contentious road pricing packages—addressing issues of measure combination, flexibility, legitimacy, communication, timing and organisational dynamics. While acknowledging the primacy of broader external and contextual issues, the conclusion is that taking inspiration from the strategies identified in this paper may increase the likelihood of successful policy package processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard & Isaksson, Karolina & Macmillen, James & Åkerman, Jonas & Kressler, Florian, 2014. "Strategies to manage barriers in policy formation and implementation of road pricing packages," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 40-52.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:60:y:2014:i:c:p:40-52
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2013.10.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856413002012
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2013.10.013?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. Oecd, 2005. "The Window of Opportunity: How the Obstacles to the Introduction of the Swiss Heavy Goods Vehicle Fee have been Overcome," OECD Papers, OECD Publishing, vol. 5(5), pages 1-39.
    2. Ieromonachou, Petros & Warren, James, 2008. "Policy Packages as potential routes to urban road pricing in the UK," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 40, pages 106-123.
    3. Isaksson, Karolina & Richardson, Tim, 2009. "Building legitimacy for risky policies: The cost of avoiding conflict in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 251-257, March.
    4. Attard, Maria & Ison, Stephen G., 2010. "The implementation of road user charging and the lessons learnt: the case of Valletta, Malta," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-22.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. May, A. D. & Roberts, M, 1995. "The design of integrated transport strategies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 97-105, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Harrington, Winston & Krupnick, Alan J. & Alberini, Anna, 2001. "Overcoming public aversion to congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 87-105, February.
    10. Jonathan Leape, 2006. "The London Congestion Charge," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 157-176, Fall.
    11. 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.
    12. Tore Langmyhr, 1999. "Understanding innovation: The case of road pricing," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 255-271, January.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    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. Seán Schmitz & Sophia Becker & Laura Weiand & Norman Niehoff & Frank Schwartzbach & Erika von Schneidemesser, 2019. "Determinants of Public Acceptance for Traffic-Reducing Policies to Improve Urban Air Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Rigot-Müller, Patrick, 2018. "Analysing the heavy goods vehicle “écotaxe” in France: Why did a promising idea fail in implementation?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 147-173.
    3. Chu, Singfat, 2015. "Car restraint policies and mileage in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 404-412.
    4. Regmi, Madan B., 2024. "Governance of urban mobility policies and plans in Asian cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 108-121.
    5. 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.
    6. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    7. Lisa Schmieder & Dirk Scheer & Chiara Iurato, 2021. "Streams Analysis for Better Air Quality: The German Lead City Program Assessed by the Policy Package Approach and the Multiple Streams Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-22, January.
    8. Hysing, Erik, 2015. "Citizen participation or representative government – Building legitimacy for the Gothenburg congestion tax," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-8.
    9. Brudner, Amir, 2023. "On the management of residential on-street parking: Policies and repercussions," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 94-107.
    10. Ramjerdi, Farideh & Fearnley, Nils, 2014. "Risk and irreversibility of transport interventions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 31-39.
    11. 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.
    12. Whitelaw, Sandy & Bell, Anthony & Clark, David, 2022. "The expression of ‘policy’ in palliative care: A critical review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(9), pages 889-898.
    13. 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.
    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. Kjersti Granås Bardal & Mathias Brynildsen Reinar & Aase Kristine Lundberg & Maiken Bjørkan, 2021. "Factors Facilitating the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in Regional and Local Planning—Experiences from Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Tønnesen, Anders, 2015. "Policy packages and state engagement: Comparing car-use reduction policy in two Norwegian cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 89-98.
    17. 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.
    18. Hirschhorn, Fabio & van de Velde, Didier & Veeneman, Wijnand & ten Heuvelhof, Ernst, 2020. "The governance of attractive public transport: Informal institutions, institutional entrepreneurs, and problem-solving know-how in Oslo and Amsterdam," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    19. Jean-Philippe Meloche, 2019. "Towards a New Era in Road Pricing? Lessons from the Experience of First Movers," CIRANO Working Papers 2019s-35, CIRANO.
    20. John W Helsel & Venktesh Pandey & Stephen D. Boyles, 2020. "Time-Equitable Dynamic Tolling Scheme For Single Bottlenecks," Papers 2007.07091, arXiv.org.
    21. Magalhães, David José Ahouagi Vaz de & Rivera-Gonzalez, Carlos, 2021. "Car users’ attitudes towards an enhanced bus system to mitigate urban congestion in a developing country," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 452-464.

    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. 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.
    2. Özgül Ardıç & Jan Anne Annema & Eric Molin & Bert Wee, 2018. "The association between news and attitudes towards a Dutch road pricing proposal," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 827-848, May.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Hrelja, Robert & Isaksson, Karolina & Richardson, Tim, 2013. "Choosing conflict on the road to sustainable mobility: A risky strategy for breaking path dependency in urban policy making," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 195-205.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    9. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    10. Björn Hårsman & John M. Quigley, 2010. "Political and public acceptability of congestion pricing: Ideology and self-interest," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 854-874.
    11. Daniel Albalate & Germa Bel, 2008. "Shaping urban traffic patterns through congestion charging: What factors drive success or failure?," IREA Working Papers 200801, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jan 2008.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Ardıç, Özgül & Annema, Jan Anne & van Wee, Bert, 2013. "Has the Dutch news media acted as a policy actor in the road pricing policy debate?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 47-63.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Marsden, Greg & Groer, Stefan, 2016. "Do institutional structures matter? A comparative analysis of urban carbon management policies in the UK and Germany," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 170-179.
    20. 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.

    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:60:y:2014:i:c:p:40-52. 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.