The political calculus of congestion pricing

Transport Policy

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 111-123

  King, David ^a   Manville, Michael ^a   Shoup, Donald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Congestion tolls; Political feasibility

Indexed keywords

FEASIBILITY STUDY; METROPOLITAN AREA; PRICING POLICY; TRAFFIC CONGESTION; TRANSPORTATION POLICY;

CALIFORNIA; LOS ANGELES; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33847417994     PISSN: 0967070X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2006.11.002     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Altshuler A., and Luberoff D. Mega-Projects (2003), Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
2. Agranoff R., and McGuire M. The intergovernmental context of local economic development. State and Local Economic Development Review 30 3 (1998) 150-164
3. Anderson, D., Mohring, H., 1996. Congestion costs and congestion pricing for the twin cities. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Report No. 96-32.
4. Anderson D., and Mohring H. Congestion costs and congestion pricing. In: Greene D.L., Jones D.W., and Delucchi M. (Eds). Full Costs and Benefits of Transportation (1997), Springer Press, Berlin
5. Armelius H., and Hultkrantz L. The politico-economic link between public transport and road pricing: an ex-ante study of the Stockholm road-pricing trial. Transport Policy 13 2 (2006) 162-172
6. Baum D. The ultimate jam session. Wired 9 11 (2001). http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.11/singapore_pr.html/ www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.11/singapore_pr.html
7. Bertrand, M., Karlin, D., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., Zinman, J., 2005. What's Pyschology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 11892, 〈http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/11892.html〉
8. Borins S. Electronic road pricing: an idea whose time may never come. Transportation Research A 22 1 (1988) 37-44
9. Calfee J., and Winston C. The value of automobile travel time: implications for congestion policy. Journal of Public Economic 69 (1998) 83-102
10. Cammisa A.M. Governments as Interest Groups (1995), Praeger, London
11. Castelazo, M., Garret, T., 2004. Light rail: boon or boondoggle?. The Regional Economist, July, 12-13.
12. Cervero R. Transit Metropolis (1998), Island Press, Washington, DC
13. Deakin, E., Harvey, G., 1996. Transportation Pricing Strategies for California: An Assessment of Congestion, Emissions, Energy and Equity Impacts: Final Report. California Air Resource Board.
14. Eliasson J., and Mattsson L. Equity effects of congestion pricing: quantitative methodology and a case study for Stockholm. Transportation Research A 40 7 (2006) 602-620
15. Evans, A., Gougherty, M., Morris, E., Smirti, M., 2007. Politics, public opinion, and project design in California. Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
16. Fielding G.J., and Klein D.B. Hot lanes: introducing congestion-pricing one lane at a time. Access 11 Fall (1997) 10-15
17. Garrison W.L., and Ward J.D. Tomorrow's Transportation: Changing Cities, Economies and Lives (2000), Artech House, Boston
18. Giuliano G. An assessment of the political acceptability of congestion pricing. Transportation 19 4 (1992) 335-358
19. Glaister S., and Graham D. Proper pricing for transportation infrastructure and the case of urban road congestion. Urban Studies 43 8 (2006) 1395-1418
20. Gómez-Ibáñez J. The political economy of highway tolls and congestion pricing. Transportation Quarterly 46 3 (1992) 343-360
21. Goodwin P. The rule of three: a possible solution to the political problem of competing objectives for road pricing. Traffic Engineering and Control 30 10 (1989)
22. Goodwin, P., 1997. Solving Congestion: Inaugural Lecture of the Professorship of Transport Policy, University College London. Available online at 〈http://www.cts.ucl.ac.uk/tsu/pbginau.htm〉 (Accessed October 8, 2006).
23. Haneman M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ?. American Economic Review 81 3 (1991) 647-653
24. Hinze, S., Baker, K., 2005. Minnesota's Fiscal Disparities Programs: Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and Iron Range. Minnesota State House Research, January 2005.
25. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L., and Thaler R. Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion, and the status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 1 (1991) 191-206
26. Kockelman K.M., and Kalmanje S. Credit-based congestion pricing: a policy proposal and the public's response. Transportation Research A 39 (2005) 671-690
27. Marlowe, J., 2003. City management and the myth of policy neutrality. Paper Presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, April 3-6, Chicago, IL.
28. Olson M. The Logic of Collective Action (1963), Harvard University Press, Cambridge
29. Orfield M. Metropolitics: A Regional Agenda for Community and Stability (1997), Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
30. Richmond J. Transport of Delight: The Mythical Conception of Rail Transit in Los Angeles (2004), University of Akron Press, Akron
31. Shoup D. The High Cost of Free Parking (2005), Planners Press, Chicago
32. Small K. Using the revenues from congestion pricing. Transportation 19 4 (1992) 359-382
33. Small K. Road Pricing and Public Transit: Unnoticed Lessons from London. Access 26 3 (2005) 10-15
34. Texas Transportation Institute, 2005. 2005 Urban Mobility Study, 〈http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/report/〉.
35. Transport for London, 2003. Impacts Monitoring: First Annual Report, 〈http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/cclondon/cc_monitoring-1st-report.shtml〉.
36. Tullock G., Seldon A., and Brady G. Government Failure (2002), Cato Institute, Washington, DC
37. Wachs M. Will congestion pricing ever be adopted?. Access 4 (1994) 15-19
38. Wilson J.Q. The Politics of Regulation (1980), Basic Books, New York
39. Winston C., and Shirley C. Alternate Route: Toward Efficient Transportation (1998), Brookings Institution, Washington, DC