Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Spillover effect of congestion charging on pro-environmental behavior

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper reports an examination of a spillover effect from a real-world intervention policy of traffic congestion charging that impacted various pro-environmental behaviors. A mailed questionnaire surveyed randomly sampled car owners living in Stockholm County (Sweden) to gather data on travel modes and pro-environmental behavior before and after the introduction of a trial congestion charging policy in Stockholm. Results of paired t test on 291 valid samples revealed that this policy not only directly mitigates traffic congestion (i.e., a direct effect of the policy intervention), but it also indirectly ‘spills over’ to affect pro-environmental behaviors in nontransportation situations (resource and energy use). A spillover to pro-environmental behavior was confirmed by respondents who shifted their travel mode from car to pro-environmental travel mode. Interestingly, the spillover was also confirmed in a group of respondents who remained in the pro-environmental travel mode and others who adversely shifted away from a pro-environmental travel mode to cars. Results suggest that the spillover effect from an environmental policy intervention can have considerable impact on facilitating pro-environmental behaviors and surrounding issues in more general contexts, thus warranting careful evaluation with a wider perspective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2013). Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1773–1785. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anas, A., & Lindsey, R. (2011). Reducing urban road transportation externalities: Road pricing in theory and in practice. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 5(1), 66–88. doi:10.1093/reep/req019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, M., Eriksson, O., & von Borgstede, C. (2012). The effects of environmental management systems on source separation in the work and home settings. Sustainability, 4(12), 1292–1308. doi:10.3390/su4061292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börjesson, M., Eliasson, J., Hugosson, M. B., & Brundell-Freij, K. (2012). The Stockholm congestion charges—5 years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt. Transport Policy, 20, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2006). The role of value orientations in evaluating quality of life consequences of a transport pricing policy. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 11(2), 160–165. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2005.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson, J. (2009). A cost–benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(4), 468–480. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.11.014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson, J., Hultkrantz, L., Nerhagen, L., & Rosqvist, L. S. (2009). The Stockholm congestion—charging trial 2006: Overview of effects. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(3), 240–250. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson, J., & Jonsson, L. (2011). The unexpected “yes”: Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm. Transport Policy, 18(4), 636–647. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.03.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, B., & Abraham, C. (2007). What drives car use? A grounded theory analysis of commuters’ reasons for driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 10(3), 187–200. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2006.09.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, D. L., & Wegener, M. (1997). Sustainable transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 5(3), 177–190. doi:10.1016/S0966-6923(97)00013-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudmundsson, H., Ericsson, E., Hugosson, M. B., & Rosqvist, L. S. (2009). Framing the role of decision support in the case of Stockholm congestion charging trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(3), 258–268. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, T., Nye, M., & Burgess, J. (2010). Making energy visible: A qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy, 38(10), 6111–6119. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.05.068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlström, A., & Franklin, J. P. (2009). Behavioral adjustments and equity effects of congestion pricing: Analysis of morning commutes during the Stockholm Trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(3), 283–296. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klöckner, C. A., Nayum, A., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2013). Positive and negative spillover effects from electric car purchase to car use. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 21, 32–38. doi:10.1016/j.trd.2013.02.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kottenhoff, K., & Brundell Freij, K. (2009). The role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of congestion charging—The case of Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(3), 297–305. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, S., & Steg, L. (2007). Normative, gain and hedonic goal frames guiding environmental behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 117–137. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00499.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2002). Value structures behind proenvironmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34(6), 740–756. doi:10.1177/001391602237244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2012). Compact city policies: A comparative assessment (p. 283). Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schuitema, G., Steg, L., & Forward, S. (2010). Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44(2), 99–109. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2009.11.005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Sweden. (2013a). Average age of the population by region and sex. The Statistical Database. Retrieved November 01, 2013, from http://www.scb.se/.

  • Statistics Sweden. (2013b). Population by region, level of education, sex and period. The Statistical Database. Retrieved November 01, 2013, from http://www.scb.se/.

  • Statistics Sweden. (2013c). Disposable income of households by county. The Statistical Database. Retrieved November 01, 2013, from http://www.scb.se/.

  • Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309–317. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (2000). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22, 461–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockholmsforsoket. (2006). Facts and results from the Stockholm Trials-Final version-December 2006 (p. 152). Stockholm.

  • Suzuki, H., Dastur, A., Moffat, S., Yabuki, N., & Maruyama, H. (2010). Eco2 cities: Ecological cities as economic cities. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J. (1999). Spillover processes in the development of a sustainable consumption pattern. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20, 53–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J., & Ölander, F. (2003). Spillover of environment-friendly consumer behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(3), 225–236. doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00018-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlek, C., & Steg, L. (2007). Human behavior and environmental sustainability: Problems, driving forces, and research topics. Journal of Social Issues, 63(1), 1–19. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2007.00493.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winslott-Hiselius, L., Brundell-Freij, K., Vagland, Å., & Byström, C. (2009). The development of public attitudes towards the Stockholm congestion trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43(3), 269–282. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by TEPCO Memorial Foundation (Research Grant fiscal year 2007). Authors thank survey participants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Engineering, Information and Systems, The University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 3058573, Japan

    Naoko Kaida

  2. Human Technology Research Institute, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Tsukuba Central 6-11, 1-1-1 Higashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 3058566, Japan

    Kosuke Kaida

Authors
  1. Naoko Kaida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kosuke Kaida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naoko Kaida.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaida, N., Kaida, K. Spillover effect of congestion charging on pro-environmental behavior. Environ Dev Sustain 17, 409–421 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9550-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9550-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation