An ongoing discussion concerns road-pricing schemes as measures to abate traffic congestion and air pollution in metropolitan areas. If such measures are to be effective, road-pricing fees must be set sufficiently high However, municipalities are likely to have other goals besides reducing car use, such as upholding fairness among citizens and financial goals such as creating revenues. If conflicts prove to exist between different goals, road-pricing schemes are not likely to achieve the environmental goal. To investigate the degree to which these goal conflicts exist, members of the local governments in the three major metropolitan areas of Sweden responded to a survey questionnaire. In the questionnaire they rated a number of principles guiding the setting of road-pricing fees hypothesized to correspond to the three goals. The results showed that, for the political majority, the hypothesized goal conflicts existed in that no single goal was optimized. It is concluded that in particular fairness may prevent road pricing achieving the environmental goal.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArrowK J, 1970Essays in the Theory of Risk Bearing (Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL)
2.
BaumolW JOatesW E, 1988The Theory of Environmental Policy2nd edition (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
3.
BrewerM BKramerM R, 1986, “Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size and decision framing”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology50543–549
4.
DawesR M, 1980, “Social dilemmas”Annual Review of Psychology31169–193
5.
DawesR MMcTavishJShakleeH, 1977, “Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people's behavior in a commons dilemma situation”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology351–11
6.
EisenhardtK M, 1989, “Agency theory: An assessment and review”Academy of Management Review1457–74
7.
EmmerinkR H MNijkampPRietveldP, 1995, “Is congestion pricing a first-best strategy in transport policy? A critical review of arguments”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design22581–602
8.
FoxJGuyerM, 1978, “‘Public choice’ and cooperation in n-prisoner's dilemma”Journal of Conflict Resolution22469–481
9.
FreyB SPommerehneW W, 1993, “On the fairness of pricing—an empirical survey among the general population”Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization20295–307
10.
GärlingAThøgersenJ, 2001, “Marketing of electric vehicles”Business Strategy and the Environments1053–65
11.
GärlingTEekDLoukopoulosPFujiiSJohansson-StenmanOKitamuraRPendyalaRVilhelmsonB, 2002a, “A conceptual analysis of the impact of travel demand management on private car use”Transport Policy959–70
12.
GärlingTGärlingALoukopoulosP, 2002b, “Forecasting psychological consequences of car-use reduction: A Challenge to an environmental psychology of transportation”Applied Psychology: An International Review5190–106
13.
GoodwinP, 1994, “Road pricing or transport planning?”, in Road Pricing: Theory Empirical Assessment and Policy Eds JohanssonBMattsonL-G (Kluwer, Boston, MA) pp 143–158
14.
GreeneD LWegenerM, 1997, “Sustainable transport”Journal of Transport Geography5177–190
15.
JakobssonCFujiiSGärlingT, 2000, “Determinants of private car users' acceptance of road pricing”Transport Policy7153–158
16.
JohanssonL-OGustafssonMJohansson-StenmanOFalkemarkGGärlingT, in press, “Political acceptance of road pricing: Goal conflicts in municipality decision making”, in Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies Eds SchadeJSchlagB (Elsevier, Oxford)
17.
Johansson-StenmanOSternerT, 1998, “What is the scope for environmental road pricing?”, in Road Pricing, Traffic Congestion and the Environment: Issues of Efficiency and Social Feasibility Eds ButtonK JVerhoefE (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos) pp 150–170
18.
JorgensonD OPapciakA S, 1981, “The effects of communication, resource feedback, and identifiability on behavior in a simulated commons”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology17373–385
19.
KerrN LKaufman-GillilandC M, 1994, “Communication, commitment and cooperation in social dilemmas”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology66513–529
LiebrandW B G, 1984, “The effects of social motives, communication and group size on behavior in social dilemmas in two cultures”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology2186–102
22.
MathesonC, 1998, “Rationality and decision-making in Australian federal government”Australian Journal of Political Science3357–72
23.
Oberholzer-GeeFWeck-HannemannH, 2002, “Pricing road use: Politico-economic and fairness considerations”Transportation Research, Part D7357–371
24.
SamuelsonC DMessickD M, 1986, “Alternative structural solutions to resource dilemmas”Organizational Behavior and Decision Processes37139–155
25.
SmallK A, 1992, “Using the revenues from congestion pricing”Transportation19359–381
26.
Van LangeP A MVan VugtMDe CremerD, 2000, “Choosing between personal comfort and the environment: solutions to transportation dilemmas”, in Cooperation in Modern Society Eds Van VugtMSnyderMTylerT RBielA (Routledge, London) pp 45–63
27.
VickreyW, 1963, “Pricing in urban and suburban transport”American Economic Review59251–261
28.
WaltersA A, 1961, “The theory and measurements of private and social cost of highway congestion”Econometrica29616–699
29.
WilsonR B, 1968, “On the theory of syndicates”Econometrica36119–132
30.
YamagishiT, 1986, “The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51110–116
31.
YamagishiT, 1988, “Seriousness of a social dilemma and the provision of a sanctioning system”Social Psychology Quarterly5132–42
