When Are Transport Pricing Policies Fair and Acceptable?
- 397 Downloads
This study examines the relative importance of six policy outcomes related to different fairness principles for the perceived fairness and acceptability of pricing policies aimed at changing transport behaviour. The fairness and acceptability of six different types of transport pricing policies were systematically higher if policy outcomes were related to environmental justice and equality. The policy measures were evaluated as more acceptable and fair when respondents believed that future generations, nature and the environment were protected (reflecting environmental justice), and to a lesser extent, when everybody was equally affected by the policy outcomes (reflecting equality), irrespective of absolute differences in fairness and acceptability of the policies. Policy outcomes reflecting egoistic concerns (e.g. being financially worse off and being worse off than others) and equity (e.g. proportional to people’s income and contribution to problems) were related to the fairness and acceptability of some policy measures, but no systematic pattern was found across six policy measures. This suggests that policy outcomes related to distributions that focus on collective considerations appear to be more important for the fairness and acceptability of transport pricing policies than those focusing on individual interests. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.
KeywordsAcceptability Fairness Fairness principles Policies Transport
- Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (10th ed., pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Bullard, R. D. (1994). Grassroots flowering the environmental justice movements comes of age. Amicus, 16, 32–37.Google Scholar
- Button, K. (1993). Transport economics. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Dutch Ministry of Transport. (2007). Making a start on a price per kilometre. Overview of preparatory research for the government decision on a price per kilometre. The Hague: Dutch Ministry of Transport.Google Scholar
- Jaensirisak, S., Wardman, M., & May, A. D. (2005). Explaining variations in public acceptability of road pricing schemes. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 39, 127–153.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, 44, 99–109.Google Scholar
- Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Steg, E. M. (1996). Gedragsverandering ter vermindering van het autogebruik: theoretische analyse en empirische studie over probleembesef, verminderingsbereidheid en beoordeling van beleidsmaatregelen. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen: Faculteit der Psychologische, Sociologische en Pedagogische Wetenschappen (dissertation).Google Scholar
- Ubbels, B. (2006). Road pricing: Effectiveness, acceptance and institutional aspects. Amsterdam: Free University (dissertation).Google Scholar
- Ubbels, B., & Verhoef, E. (2007). The economics of transport pricing. In T. Gärling & L. Steg (Eds.), Threats to the quality of life from car traffic: Problems, causes, and solutions (pp. 325–345). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar