Just Who Should Pay for What? Vertical Equity, Transit Subsidy and Road Pricing: The Case of New York City

Peters, Jonathan; Kramer, Jonathan K.

doi:10.5038/2375-0901.15.2.6

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Examining the equity impacts of congestion pricing in Stockholm, Eliasson and Mattsson argue that initial travel patterns are the most important for determining equity impacts, as initial travelers are the ones most affected by change (18). Peters and Kramer make the same argument in work on New York City (29).…”

Section: Methodology: Measuring the Distribution Of Benefits And Costsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Tax or Toll?

Venter

Joubert

2014

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As user charging increasingly supplements taxation as a transport financing mechanism worldwide, the need to measure and understand its distributional impacts across affected groups grows more critical. The case of the 185-km Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project in the Johannesburg–Pretoria area of South Africa offers an opportunity to empirically examine the equity impacts of large-scale road pricing in middle-income countries. The paper reports on the novel use of GPS data from multiple sources to assess the distribution of benefits and costs of electronic tolling across passenger and freight users. GPS data from commercial truck fleets are combined with multiday GPS tracks from a panel of private vehicle drivers to derive measures of user benefit by class. Compared with an alternative hypothecated fuel tax, electronic tolling is more progressive in regard to income and vehicle class because such tolling transfers costs from private to commercial vehicles, in line with the greater pavement damage caused by trucks. Time-of-day discounts favoring commercial vehicles suggests that the injudicious application of discounts and exemptions can distort rather than enhance equity in road pricing projects.

show abstract

Section: Methodology: Measuring the Distribution Of Benefits And Costsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Tax or Toll?

Venter

Joubert

2014

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a large literature on the topic (e.g., Ison 1998, King et al, 2007, Levinson 2010and Peters and Kramer 2012. Despite the recognition that revenue allocation 15 can be a major lever to gain community support for road pricing reform, as shown by statistically significant parameters for the three sources of funding hypothecation (i.e., public transport, roads and reductions in personal income tax), there is also a view and evidence that revenue redistribution cannot resolve all equity and fairness concerns.…”

Section: Estasyvarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the relationship between perceived acceptability and referendum voting support for alternative road pricing schemes

Hensher

2013

Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A dominant theme in the debate on road pricing reform is securing buy in from all key stakeholders as a pre-condition for gaining support from politicians. This paper explores the key influences and the extent to which particular road pricing schemes are acceptable to the community at large, and how this translates into support if a scheme were subject to a vote in a referendum. Using data collected in Sydney in 2012 from a sample of car users, we estimate a recursive simultaneous bivariate probit model that recognises the endogeneity effect of scheme acceptability on voting plans. We find that there is a very strong link between voting intentions and scheme acceptability, and provide a series of direct elasticity estimates of the influence that the cost elements of road pricing reform schemes have on the joint probability of accepting and voting for a scheme.

show abstract

“…In the transport sector, it is recognised that transport policy gives rise to winners and losers [21,22] but the discussion of equity from a formal economic perspective (in terms of vertical and horizontal equity) is lacking in the literature. There are some notable exceptions, for example, Peters and Kramer [23] or Welch [24] but these are used for the evaluation of particular policies, for example public transport subsidies [23] and public transport and Are network planning guidelines based on equal access equitable? Mulley, Ma, Clifton and Tanner affordable housing [24].…”

Section: Equitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Network Planning Guidelines Based on Equal Access Equitable?

Mulley

Clifton

et al. 2017

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public transport network planning principles include simplicity, legibility, frequency and spatial coverage. These principles are normally translated into a series of "Guidelines" setting out the specific standards for network design within a jurisdiction. In practice such guidelines usually concentrate on creating a bus network or on the role of buses within a multimodal network as rail-based routes are regarded as fixed in location and separate planning processes are typically used to design rail frequencies and stopping patterns. The outcome of the network planning gives rise to trade-offs between the economic and institutional environments and is conditioned by historical legacy. Bus routes often continue because historically this is where they operated. This paper offers a case study based on Sydney, Australia where the network planning guidelines still place emphasis on equality of spatial coverage despite moving towards a more 'integrated' approach to network planning. This paper identifies that guidelines focusing on equal spatial coverage may inadvertently promote inequity through not taking account of the difficulties (and therefore higher cost) of serving challenging topographical areas. This paper therefore examines the equity impacts of the implementation of service planning guidelines based on equal spatial coverage using Sydney as a case study. Criteria relating to equity will be established which are then measured using bus supply data, journey to work and socioeconomic data. The conclusions of the paper are a contribution to network planning implementation with many cities both in Australia and elsewhere implementing similar guidelines to Sydney.

show abstract

Just Who Should Pay for What? Vertical Equity, Transit Subsidy and Road Pricing: The Case of New York City

Cited by 11 publications

References 13 publications

Tax or Toll?

Tax or Toll?

Exploring the relationship between perceived acceptability and referendum voting support for alternative road pricing schemes

Are Network Planning Guidelines Based on Equal Access Equitable?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About