IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v17y2010i4p266-273.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New York City's congestion pricing experience and implications for road pricing acceptance in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Schaller, Bruce

Abstract

Public acceptance is widely recognized as a major barrier to widespread adoption of road pricing in the United States and internationally. Using New York City as a case study, this paper analyzes how Mayor Michael Bloomberg's 2007 congestion pricing proposal gained widespread public support but was ultimately blocked in the State Legislature. The paper assesses the implications of New York's experience for pursuing congestion pricing and mileage-based taxes in the United States. A central conclusion from this analysis is that gaining approval of pricing will require changing how motorists view the effect of pricing on them personally. Given the power of even small groups of auto users to block pricing through the political process, pricing proposals need to be perceived as benefiting drivers individually and not simply society at large. The paper discusses approaches to road pricing in light of New York City's experience.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:17:y:2010:i:4:p:266-273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(10)00032-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Eliasson, Jonas, 2008. "Lessons from the Stockholm congestion charging trial," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 395-404, November.
    2. de Palma, André & Lindsey, Robin & Niskanen, Esko, 2006. "Policy insights from the urban road pricing case studies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 149-161, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Eliasson, Jonas & Börjesson, Maria & van Amelsfort, Dirk & Brundell-Freij, Karin & Engelson, Leonid, 2013. "Accuracy of congestion pricing forecasts," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 34-46.
    2. Qixiu Cheng & Zhiyuan Liu & Feifei Liu & Ruo Jia, 2017. "Urban dynamic congestion pricing: an overview and emerging research needs," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(0), pages 3-18, August.
    3. Mattauch, Linus & Hepburn, Cameron & Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Pigou pushes preferences: decarbonisation and endogenous values," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-16, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    4. Hakim Hammadou & Claire Papaix, 2015. "Policy packages for modal shift and CO2 reduction in Lille, France," Working Papers 1501, Chaire Economie du climat.
    5. Eliasson, Jonas, 2016. "Is congestion pricing fair? Consumer and citizen perspectives on equity effects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1-15.
    6. 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.
    7. Palma, André de & Lindsey, Robin & Proost, Stef, 2006. "Research challenges in modelling urban road pricing: An overview," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 97-105, March.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Anderstig, Christer & Berglund, Svante & Eliasson, Jonas & Andersson, Matts & Pyddoke, Roger, 2012. "Congestion charges and labour market imperfections: “Wider economic benefits” or “losses”?," Working papers in Transport Economics 2012:4, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    11. Eliasson, Jonas, 2017. "Congestion pricing," MPRA Paper 88224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Arlinghaus, Johanna Brigitte & Konc, Théo & Mattauch, Linus & Sommer, Stephan, 2024. "The effect of information framing on policy support: Experimental evidence from urban policies," VfS Annual Conference 2024 (Berlin): Upcoming Labor Market Challenges 302449, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. De Borger, Bruno & Russo, Antonio, 2018. "The political economy of cordon tolls," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 133-148.
    14. Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Bascuñán, Raúl & Rizzi, Luis Ignacio & Salata, Andrés, 2021. "Assessing the potential acceptability of road pricing in Santiago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 153-169.
    15. Eliasson, Jonas, 2014. "The Stockholm congestion charges: an overview," Working papers in Transport Economics 2014:7, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    16. Souche-Le Corvec, Stéphanie & Mercier, Aurélie & Ovtracht, Nicolas & Chevallier, Amandine, 2019. "Urban toll and electric vehicles: The winning ticket for Lyon Metropolitan Area (France)," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 17-33.
    17. Börjesson, Maria & Eliasson, Jonas & Rubensson, Isak, 2020. "Distributional effects of public transport subsidies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Attard, Maria & Enoch, Marcus, 2011. "Policy transfer and the introduction of road pricing in Valletta, Malta," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 544-553, May.
    20. 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.

    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:trapol:v:17:y:2010:i:4:p:266-273. 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/30473/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.