IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v8y2011i8p3202-3215d13379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmentally Reformed Travel Habits During the 2006 Congestion Charge Trial in Stockholm—A Qualitative Study

Author

Listed:
  • Greger Henriksson

    (Department of Urban Planning and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Drottning Kristinas väg 30, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Olle Hagman

    (Department of Sociology, University of Gothenburg, SE-405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden)

  • Håkan Andréasson

    (Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg, SE-405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden)

Abstract

Policy measures that reduce or replace road traffic can improve environmental conditions in most large cities. In Stockholm a congestion charge was introduced during a test period in 2006. This was a full-scale trial that proved to meet its targets by reducing traffic crossing the inner city segment during rush hours by 20%. Emissions of carbon dioxide and particles were also substantially reduced. This study, based on in-depth interviews with 40 inhabitants, analyses how and why new travel habits emerged. The results show that particular, sometimes unexpected, features of everyday life (habits, resources, opportunities, values, etc. ) were crucial for adjustment of travel behaviour in relation to the policy instrument. One example was that those accustomed to mixing different modes of transport on a daily basis more easily adapted their travel in the targeted way. On a more general level, the results revealed that the policy measure could actually tip the scales for the individual towards trying out a new behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Greger Henriksson & Olle Hagman & Håkan Andréasson, 2011. "Environmentally Reformed Travel Habits During the 2006 Congestion Charge Trial in Stockholm—A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-14, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:8:y:2011:i:8:p:3202-3215:d:13379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/8/8/3202/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/8/8/3202/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. 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)

    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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. Hultkrantz, Lars & Liu, Xing, 2012. "Green cars sterilize congestion charges: A model analysis of the reduced impact of Stockholm road tolls," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 110-118.
    9. 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.
    10. Naoko Kaida & Kosuke Kaida, 2015. "Spillover effect of congestion charging on pro-environmental behavior," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 409-421, June.
    11. Odeck, James & Kjerkreit, Anne, 2010. "Evidence on users' attitudes towards road user charges--A cross-sectional survey of six Norwegian toll schemes," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 349-358, November.
    12. 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.
    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. 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.
    15. Milenković, Marina & Glavić, Draženko & Maričić, Milica, 2019. "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 58-74.
    16. Millner, Antony & Ollivier, Hélène & Simon, Leo, 2014. "Policy experimentation, political competition, and heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 84-96.
    17. 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.
    18. Martin Lanzendorf & Annabell Baumgartner & Nora Klinner, 2024. "Do citizens support the transformation of urban transport? Evidence for the acceptability of parking management, car lane conversion and road closures from a German case study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2073-2101, December.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:8:y:2011:i:8:p:3202-3215:d:13379. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.