IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v70y2014icp10-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploratory analysis of public perceptions of innovative financing for infrastructure systems in the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Mostafavi, Ali
  • Abraham, Dulcy
  • Vives, Antonio

Abstract

While traditional financing approaches such as federal and state grants funded by taxation are insufficient to address the existing need, innovative financing such as novel public private partnership models, credit enhancement tools, and new bonding instruments has emerged to expand the fiscal space of public agencies for infrastructure development. Formulating innovative financing approaches is one of the challenges faced by policymakers to address the ever growing need for restoring the failing civil infrastructure in the U.S. Public support/opposition is one of the major drivers/disruptors of innovative financing. Assessment of public perceptions is a major component towards gaining public support and developing sustainable infrastructure financing policies. The objective of this study is to investigate the determinants of public perceptions of innovative financing. Data obtained from public survey of 616 individuals from 50 states in the U.S. is analyzed to investigate the effects of: (a) economic factors, (b) infrastructure conditions, and (c) personal characteristics of the public on the knowledge, awareness, perceptions, and attitudes of the public towards innovative financing. The findings reveal that the likelihood of public support of innovative financing is insensitive to economic conditions and is affected by the factors related to infrastructure condition such as the level of need for infrastructure renewal, the ability to protect the public against natural disasters, and the history of using innovative financing for infrastructure renewal. The findings also show that 57% of the sample population in the U.S. were not knowledgeable about different methods for financing infrastructure projects and 77% of the sample population in the U.S. were not aware of the activities of public organizations for finding innovative financing solutions for infrastructure projects. Based on the findings, two main strategies have been proposed for infrastructure agencies to enhance their efforts towards gaining public acceptance of innovative financing: (i) enhance strategies to facilitate learning for the public about innovative financing in infrastructure projects and (ii) improve marketing and citizen involvement strategies to get the public to buy-in to innovative financing methods. The findings can enhance the current efforts of public agencies related to educating the public and citizen involvement strategies by incorporating public preferences in policy development to enhance the likelihood of public support of innovative financing methods. Potential improvements can be made in changing the key messages in educating the public, using more effective strategies for communicating complicated financing concepts, and highlighting the success stories and benefits of innovative financing in other states and countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Mostafavi, Ali & Abraham, Dulcy & Vives, Antonio, 2014. "Exploratory analysis of public perceptions of innovative financing for infrastructure systems in the U.S," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 10-23.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:70:y:2014:i:c:p:10-23
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856414002353
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2014.10.002?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. Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie) & O’Connell, Lenahan & Anuar, Khairul A., 2014. "For whom the tunnel be tolled: A four-factor model for explaining willingness-to-pay tolls," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 13-21.
    2. Gramlich, Edward M, 1994. "Infrastructure Investment: A Review Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1176-1196, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Podgorski, Kaethe V. & Kockelman, Kara M., 2006. "Public perceptions of toll roads: A survey of the Texas perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 888-902, December.
    5. Daniele Calabrese, 2008. "Strategic Communication for Privatization, Public-Private Partnerships, and Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6522.
    6. Paul A. Grout & Margaret Stevens, 2003. "The Assessment: Financing and Managing Public Services," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(2), pages 215-234, Summer.
    7. Dill, Jennifer & Weinstein, Asha, 2007. "How to pay for transportation? A survey of public preferences in California," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 346-356, July.
    8. Paul A Grout & Margaret Stevens, 2003. "Financing and Managing Public Services: An Assessment," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 03/076, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    9. Alicia H. Munnell, 1992. "Policy Watch: Infrastructure Investment and Economic Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 189-198, Fall.
    10. Sigit Sudarmadi & Shosuke Suzuki & Tomoyuki Kawada & Herawati Netti & Soeharsono Soemantri & A. Tri Tugaswati, 2001. "A Survey of Perception, Knowledge, Awareness, and attitude in Regard to Environmental Problems in a Sample of two Different Social Groups in Jakarta, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 169-183, June.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Schade, Jens & Schlag, Bernhard, 2000. "Acceptability of Urban Transport Pricing," Research Reports 72, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    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. Aydin, Burchan, 2019. "Public acceptance of drones: Knowledge, attitudes, and practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    2. Juan David González-Ruiz & Sergio Botero-Botero & Eduardo Duque-Grisales, 2018. "Financial Eco-Innovation as a Mechanism for Fostering the Development of Sustainable Infrastructure Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Taghizadeh-Hesary, Farhad & Sarker, Tapan & Yoshino, Naoyuki & Mortha, Aline & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2021. "Quality infrastructure and natural disaster resiliency: A panel analysis of Asia and the Pacific," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 394-406.
    4. Beatriz Azevedo de Almeida & Ali Mostafavi, 2016. "Resilience of Infrastructure Systems to Sea-Level Rise in Coastal Areas: Impacts, Adaptation Measures, and Implementation Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-28, November.
    5. Lin Tan, Lynn Kai & Lim, Beng Chong & Park, Guihyun & Low, Kin Huat & Seng Yeo, Victor Chuan, 2021. "Public acceptance of drone applications in a highly urbanized environment," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Hu, Wanjie & Dong, Jianjun & Hwang, Bon-Gang & Ren, Rui & Chen, Zhilong, 2022. "Is mass rapid transit applicable for deep integration of freight-passenger transport? A multi-perspective analysis from urban China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 490-510.

    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. Juan Gomez & Anestis Papanikolaou & José Manuel Vassallo, 2017. "Users’ perceptions and willingness to pay in interurban toll roads: identifying differences across regions from a nationwide survey in Spain," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 449-474, May.
    2. Gomez, Juan & Papanikolaou, Anestis & Vassallo, José Manuel, 2016. "Measuring regional differences in users' perceptions towards interurban toll roads," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 22-33.
    3. Jean-Philippe Meloche, 2019. "Towards a New Era in Road Pricing? Lessons from the Experience of First Movers," CIRANO Working Papers 2019s-35, CIRANO.
    4. Glavic, Drazenko & Milos, Mladenovic & Luttinen, Tapio & Cicevic, Svetlana & Trifunovic, Aleksandar, 2017. "Road to price: User perspectives on road pricing in transition country," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 79-94.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Guohui Zhang & Zhong Wang & Khali Persad & C. Walton, 2014. "Enhanced traffic information dissemination to facilitate toll road utilization: a nested logit model of a stated preference survey in Texas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 231-249, March.
    8. Mohamad Shatanawi & Mohammed Hajouj & Belal Edries & Ferenc Mészáros, 2022. "The Interrelationship between Road Pricing Acceptability and Self-Driving Vehicle Adoption: Insights from Four Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-32, October.
    9. Dill, Jennifer & Weinstein, Asha, 2007. "How to pay for transportation? A survey of public preferences in California," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 346-356, July.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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).
    13. Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie) & O’Connell, Lenahan & Anuar, Khairul A., 2014. "For whom the tunnel be tolled: A four-factor model for explaining willingness-to-pay tolls," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 13-21.
    14. Grisolía, José M. & López, Francisco & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2015. "Increasing the acceptability of a congestion charging scheme," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 37-47.
    15. Elmar Fürst & Maria Dieplinger, 2014. "The acceptability of road pricing in Vienna: the preference patterns of car drivers," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 765-784, July.
    16. Krabbenborg, Lizet & van Langevelde-van Bergen, Chris & Molin, Eric, 2021. "Public support for tradable peak credit schemes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 243-259.
    17. Mehdizadeh, Milad & Shariat-Mohaymany, Afshin, 2020. "Who are more likely to break the rule of congestion charging? Evidence from an active scheme with no referendum voting," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 63-79.
    18. Tomasz Gajderowicz & Maciej Jakubowski, 2019. "What works for disadvantaged unemployed: Private or public ALMP services? Evidence from (unplanned) RCT in Poland," Working Papers 2019-04, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    19. Gulyani, Sumila, 2001. "Effects of Poor Transportation on Lean Production and Industrial Clustering: Evidence from the Indian Auto Industry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 1157-1177, July.
    20. Martin, Elliot & Shaheen, Susan & Lipman, Timothy & Camel, Madonna, 2014. "Evaluating the public perception of a feebate policy in California through the estimation and cross-validation of an ordinal regression model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 144-153.

    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:70:y:2014:i:c:p:10-23. 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.