Congestion Charging by PRESS4TRANSPORT

Congestion

Charging

Tested Methodologies 1

and

Results

from Europe

Table of

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CONGESTION CHARGING

The scope of the Topic

Measures to tackle insatiable mobility demand

Key research areas and actions at EU and National levels

Benefits from key projects

What next?

This publication was produced by the PRESS4TRANSPORT consortium on behalf of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport. The European Union, the European Commission or any person acting on their behalf are not responsible for the accurateness, completeness, use of the information contained in this Fiche, nor shall they be liable for any loss, including consequential loss, that might derive from such use or from the findings of the Fiche themselves. Although the authors exercised all reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy and the quality of the contents of this publication, the Consortium assumes no liability for any inadvertent error or omission that may appear in this publication. Additional information on the analyzed projects is available on the PRESS4TRANSPORT website at http://www.press4transport.eu/vpo/thematic_fiches.php Created by: PRESS4TRANSPORT Consortium Coordinator: Cybion Srl Responsible Scientific Partner: Budapest University of Technology and Economics Author: Gabor Szendro, MSc. in Environmental Engineering

pollution

EXECUTIVE

optimization.

This document is intended to

basically shows the background

present

and

mobility

European

demand

Union.

framework

that

success,

introduced

finishing

recommendations implications

and

European the

Union

problem

from

gives a general overview on the current

actions

and

measures

already in place to address the

with

problems described in Section 1.

with

possible

It also introduces the reader to mobility management, why it

structure of this paper is the

is necessary and what tools are

following:

available. 1,

research.

shows the ways

The

Section

POLICY

policy point of view. It basically

then

from Europe where congestion was

the

tackling

presents two outstanding cases charging

behind

BACKGROUND,

regulatory

place,

section

justification

Section

analyzing the background and the

This

congestion charging.

introduces the concept by first investigating

increasingly

present in business decisions and

charging – as implemented in the

are

ignored

and

longer

SUMMARY

management tool – congestion

can

CONGESTION

Section

defines

the

CHARGING, presents the brief

RESEARCH CONTEXT

introduction

PROGRAMMES on both EU and

congestion

charging and the scope of the

national

topic addressed, providing some

congestion

sector

and

charging traffic

the

problem. It tackles the different

makes

levels

show

currently in place to tackle the

why

views,

sense in an environment where congestion,

efforts and frameworks that are

background information on the transport

levels

AND

implementations

approaches

and

that

give

rise

and to

different

systems

management congestion

and

mobility

further research that could serve

specifically

to pave the way for a more

charging.

differences

are

These

then

widespread

further

RESULTS,

Union.

European sections

RESEARCH

congestion charging across the

analyzed in Section 4. Section

implementation

aim

These

present

the

reader with a view on possible

demonstrates how

future trends and insight into the

congestion charging schemes are

desirable

improvements

implemented in practice in two

directions

that

countries that are early adopters

research to improve the situation

of this measure:

Sweden

England

could

and enable

over time.

and

through the analysis

Overall, this document aims to

of case studies. The case studies

give

go through the systems in place

concise overview on congestion

in London and Stockholm and

charging in theory and practice

also contain a comparison of the

two schemes based on various

becomes more popular and well-

aspects,

how

known as well as increasingly

and

implemented across Europe to

approaches in different countries

foster more livable cities and a

result in varying yet at the same

time

systems.

showing

contrasting

circumstances

convergent

systems

the

comprehensive

hopes

that

sustainable

this

and

topic

transport

pursuing the same goals. Section 5, EUROPEAN POLICY 6,

PRESS4TRANSPORT details:

OUTLOOK ON RESEARCH,

This fiche is produced within the

investigate

PRESS4TRANSPORT

IMPLICATIONS,

and

implications

for

European policy and the possible

Press

and desirable future avenues of

Office

Sustainable

(Virtual

improve

Surface

Transport

Â research media visibility on a national

and

regional

level)

project. The overall aim of the project is to assists EU, National and

Regional

communicate

funded

projects

their

surface

transport research results to the media.

PRESS4TRANSPORT

is funded

by the European Commission's

Directorate-General for Research under the Seventh Framework Programme Technological

for

Research

and

Development

(FP7).

pollution, it is also a key area

CONGESTION CHARGING

where

harmful

(greenhouse substances,

The

scope

During

is an effort to make drivers pay the

delays,

congestion

each

they

other.

costs

and

impose

upon

enables

internalization

acidifying precursors,

matter,

etc.)

can

effectively be reduced.

Congestion charging, simply put, for

gases, ozone

particulate

of the Topic

emissions

the

1990's,

European

cities have began suffering from congestion

due

swiftly

increasing traffic volumes. The

the

conditions

these

have

continued

worsen to a level that it now

costs; thereby introducing them

threatens

to the optimization process of

has very serious environmental

individuals every day (“should I

implications. Congestion in the

use my car to go to work, or

city centers across Europe also

should I walk?”), while it also

results in the isolation of outlying

has economic and environmental

regions

advantages.

threatened with apoplexy

competitiveness

(“The

and

role

at the centre and paralysis

transport plays in our everyday

at the extremities”), since

life as well as the economy and

the low traffic volumes do not

society is not to be contested.

make

Transport produces more than

elements viable, thereby making

10% of the GDP within the EU,

these regions stranded, without

and

transport

The

importance

provides

the

employment

new

links

infrastructure

regional

The lack of efficient

more than 10 million workers.

centers.

Transport is one of the major

and effective organization

fields where economy, society

is apparent in Europe's transport

and the environment intersect

system from these missing links,

each other. As a major source of

bottlenecks and a general lack of

upgrading

interoperability. A few ambitious

candidate countries

projects have been completed

requires

enormous

Øresund bridge-

amounts

(such as the

tunnel

investment capital.

between Denmark and

Sweden),

but

improvement

can

Because of the sheer magnitude

further only

of the costs to society associated

with transport, there is no room

foreseen in the medium term.

for errors in judgment. Different

One of the reasons behind these

transport policy measures have

issues is the fact that users

been developed throughout the

rarely cover the full costs of their transportation.

The

infrastructure, environmental

costs

years to cope with the problems

transport is facing. These issues

congestion, damages

require

and

MULTILATERAL careful

planning

accidents are not covered, or are

APPROACH

considered “external”.

and execution, and sometimes need considerable time to take

In order to deal with transport

effect. Countries in the European

problems, three issues must be

Union

tackled:

differently,

using

this

issue different

measures.

Economic growth generates transport

This Fiche aims to give a general

demand

overview on the concept and

Enlargement of the

idea behind congestion charging,

huge

including

flows,

research

creates

transport especially

the

Improving accessibility

policy and

background, practical

implementation through a brief

borders

address

analysis of the systems in place the

in London and Stockholm. It is

also intended to give an outlook

remote regions and

Â to possible

future trends

and research avenues.

POLICY

certain area from heavy traffic loads through a charge that must

BACKGROUND Measures

be paid upon entering the zone. There are no barriers or toll

tackle

booths, instead, payments are

insatiable mobility demand A

new

policy

done electronically. Exemptions and reductions usually apply (ex.

direction:

for medical or military vehicles,

congestion charging

local residents). Before

continuing

with

the

analysis of the two congestion

As with any tax, controversy

charge case studies, it is useful

about

to briefly introduce congestion

avoidance arises. Even though

charging

most

and

find

out

what

different

methods

motorists

complied

of with

advantages and disadvantages it

regulations, the introduction of

has compared to other policy

congestion charging led to an

measures available.

increase in specific crimes. In

London,

Opinions are extremely divided

the

number

in the judgment of this policy.

vehicles carrying false number

The trade of transport claims

plates

that congestion charging serves

significantly.

traffic

and

estimations, the plates of 1 out

environmental protection as a

of every 250 vehicles entering

priority,

the zone were false (40 000

calming financial

benefit

only

has

According

license

cities have introduced some form

2006 alone). This was the result

of congestion charging, such as

Singapore,

behind enforcement. Fines for

Oslo,

London

and

were

specific

stolen

comes second. So far, only a few

the

plates

increased

mechanisms

non-payment are automatically

Stockholm.

sent Congestion charging influences

without

vehicle usage by protecting a

the

vehicle's

owner,

first

checking

the

Â offending

vehicle

actually

the

matches the number plate.

net

reduction

volumes

and

the

traffic

changes

modal split. Greenhouse gases, The effect of congestion charging

nitrous

on businesses within the zone is

and

particulates

can all be expected to decrease

controversial. Some businesses

oxide

upon

introducing

charging,

whether

sustained

may report a loss in sales,

although

while

costs

benefits can be achieved (as

are also an issue. The former

opposed to a one-off result at

may drive a extension of opening

the time of introduction) is still a

hours to include weekends or

matter of debate, and studies

holidays (when the charge does

are currently being undertaken

not

to investigate this matter.

increased

apply).

delivery

Since

the

charge

affects different social strata to a different effect

extent,

neutral

the

business

with

overall

Initial public resistance is likely

likely

to diminish after the first few

large

months

variations

introduction

between shops. This may result

positive effects are starting to

businesses

materialize. This can be observed

some

relocating outside after

the

the zone

introduction

acceptance

charge

congestion were

not

reasons

and

increased

rapidly

Common Transport Policy The

reduce

(environmental

concerns listed for

The European Community has

targets

among

long been unable to implement

the

the Common Transport Policy as

introducing

defined by the Treaty of Rome.

congestion charging in London, for

London

after introduction.

Even though the primary goal of

aspects,

the

Stockholm cases, where public

the

scheme.

the

both

example),

The foundations of the Common

environmental

Transport

benefits are also realized through

Policy

have

been

further reinforced by the Treaty

transport demand seems to be

of Maastricht where the need

insatiable, it is now accepted

for unanimity in decisions were

among experts in the field that

replaced by qualified majority, a

simply

ruling that had little effect in

infrastructure perpetually will not

practice, as decisions tend to be

solve the problems associated

unanimous

day.

with increasing traffic volumes.

important

In fact, since new infrastructure

Probably

even to the

most

this

building

additional

measure in the Maastricht Treaty

elements

was the establishment of the

traffic, this approach can only

Trans-European Network.

make matters worse. The only

actually

generate

viable option, therefore, is to

Transport policy

optimize the transport

measures

system

The basic issue to be tackled is the

increase

mobility

transport

These

technological progress and more have

demands

meets

while

also

considerations

can

summarized by saying that the

environmentally friendly modes transportation

that

retaining a minimized footprint.

demand. The positive effects of

transport system needs to be

mostly

made sustainable.

been cancelled out by the sheer growth in traffic volumes across

Transport is the cardinal point of

Europe and around the world.

European

Vehicle ownership and primary

competitiveness.

energy demand are both on the increase, gradually

with being

the

to this sector within the EU, that

so 10% of GDP is produced by

developing countries. Projections

transport.

show that this trend will prevail

that

throughout the coming decades, countries.

Moreover, transport

the

fact

provides

employment to one person in ten

with car ownership tripling in non-OECD

More than

€1 000 billion can be attributed

emphasis

placed

economy’s

also emphasizes its significance.

Since

Â Demand

for

transport

this policy has been directed

continuously increasing all over

towards

the world, which raises many

between

problems to be solved such as:

irrelevant by facilitating the free

overload of traffic interchanges,

movement of individuals and of

increase

goods.

the

number

making

boundaries

Member

Later,

States

the

Treaty

congestion'sâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; occurrence, lack of

Maastricht

parking places, stranded areas

foundations

with

underdeveloped

Transport Policy, inter alia by

infrastructure, insufficient access

introducing the concept of the

of outlying regions, changes in

Trans-European

quality

(TEN)

and

transport

safety

services

traffic

level

well

accidents

these

The

aims

European

strike

the

represents

and

comprehensive

main

purposes

this

internal

market,

support

sustainable development, extend

Commission

transport

balance

Network

transport policy are to complete

complicated

questions. For these numerous reasons

Common

the help of Community funding.

further

infrastructure obviously does not solve

the

approach at European level with

environmental pollution. Simply constructing

which

integrated

and

confirmed

networks

throughout

Europe, make use of space as

between economic development

efficiently as possible, reinforce

and

safety

safety and facilitate international

demands made by society in

cooperation. The Single Market

order

indicated a considerable turning

the to

quality create

and a

modern,

sustainable transport system.

point

Rome

the

Treaty

common

policy

Since the 2001 release of the

Community's foremost common As

the

concerning the area of transport.

Transport is one of the European

policies.

White Paper published by the

European

came into force in 1958,

Commission,

this

policy has been oriented towards

harmoniously and simultaneously

consumption habits of European

improving the various modes of

citizens.

transport, in particular with co-

mobility is now more or less seen

modality. In the

as an acquired right. In the wake

2006 revision

of the White

Paper,

Commission

set

aim

improving

“door-to-door”

demand

transport

the

use

for

transport

disquietingly

increasing.

However, the more or less rapid

technology, introducing charges for

convenience

provided by personal mobility the

systems operating with the latest

personal

of technical development and the

the

increasing the competitiveness of railway,

Increased

implementation of the European

infrastructure,

Community’s decisions according

supporting alternative propulsion

to modes of transport explains

vehicles and elaborating methods

the

to reduce congestion.

existence

certain

difficulties, such as the unequal

Consequences of the

growth in the different modes of

changes in modal split

transport. Road now takes 44%

The

guiding

principle

of the goods transport market

the

compared with 8% for rail and

Commission’s White Paper was

opening up

4% for inland waterways.

the transport

market.

the

passenger

transport

market, road accounts for 79%, Over the last ten years or so, this

objective

has

air for 5% and rail for 6%. The

generally

problem is that most passenger

become a reality. The first real advance

the

Transport

Policy

significant

drop

brought in

traffic goes by road due to its

Common

several advantages, and other

means

consumer

transport

are

overshadowed.

prices, combined with a higher quality of services and a wider

Congestion is increasing on the

range of choices, thus actually

major roads and in urban areas

changing

the

lifestyle

and

well.

This

causes

many

harmful effects such as delays,

already

traffic

“railway package”,

safety

issues

adopted

second

environmental pollution requiring surplus

expenditures

from

society, which are not covered at

Improving interoperability

between networks and systems,

all in many cases. If road space

is unpriced, traffic volumes will

increase until congestion limits

establish

further

infrastructure

growth

case

A framework directive to

“Tragedy of the Commons”). For

pricing

decades,

common

economists

recommended

road

have

the

principles charging

structure,

and

including

methodology

congestion

incorporate internal and external

pricing as a way to encourage a

costs and aiming to create the

conditions for fair competition

efficient

use

the

transport system, and address congestion

and

between modes,

pollution

problems, providing net benefits

these

of new technologies such as

European

electronic driving licenses, speed

proposed

limits for cars and intelligent

society.

Considering

reasons

the

Commission

has

several measures in order to

Supporting the development

transport systems.

cope with imbalance of transport, increasing

congestion,

Inter-modality: relieving

high

roads

number of accidents as well as with

poor

quality

air

and

This directive aims to reduce

environment. The main

road

guidelines

bringing

Intermodal

railway

and

developing

transport

together

waterway Revitalizing

combined

of the

policy:

transport

rail,

sea or

inland

transport. combined

transport means the transport of

network, the Commission has

goods between Member States

between sea, inland waterways

where the vehicle uses the road

and rail.

on the one leg of the journey Managing

and on the other leg, rail or inland

waterway

maritime

It is widely acknowledged that

services. Thereby intermodality

the individual modes of transport

can provide a means of coping

do not always cover the costs

with growing congestion on road

they generate. According to a

and rail infrastructure and also of

recent study, the external costs

tackling air pollution. From this

aspect,

one

initiatives

Polo"

was

the

supported 2006)

1% of the Community’s GDP. Congestion mostly affects urban

Community

areas, causing further delays in

program

which

of congestion alone amount to

major

"Marco

the

European

mobility

aimed

–

road and air transport. Indeed,

shift

the price structure generally fails

(2003 to

freight from the roads to more

environmentally friendly modes.

infrastructure,

The program targeted to make

accidents

better

damage.

use

infrastructure

existing

and

service

reflect

Paper

the

costs

congestion,

and In

total

environmental earlier

White

Commission

has

resources by integrating short

already concluded on transport

sea shipping, rail transport and

policy: “One of the important

inland

waterways

logistics

chain.

advantage, can

that

make

into

the

reasons why imbalances and

Despite

the

inefficiencies

inter-modality

road

have

arisen

because transport users have not

transport

been adequately confronted with

disburdened by replacing it with

the full costs of their activities...

rail or waterway transport, the biggest missing link is still the

As prices do not reflect the full

lack

social cost of transport, demand

connection

has been artificially high. If

appropriate

pricing

and

should

infrastructure policies were to be pursued,

these

this

matter

Commission

developed

the

possible

for

revenue.

other

words tolls or fees would be

the

levied in order to finance future

has

investments.

following

the

level

funding from national budgets is

guidelines:

quite low and the possibilities of

private partnerships are limited,

1. Harmonizing and separating taxation

made

even before it can collect its first operating

European

fuel

areas

to make an “income” available

time.” solving

sensitive

constructing new infrastructure

inefficiencies

would largely disappear over

For

certain

for

private

innovative solutions based on a

and

pooling

commercial users,

the

infrastructure

income charges

from are

2. Elaborating the appropriate

needed.

charging

European Union tends to open up

system

for

The

policy

the

infrastructure use,

the opportunity of allocating part

3. Achieving full internalization of

of the revenue from user charges

external costs.

The integration of external costs

investments

process, in

Regarding

the

Commission plans to propose a

impact and using the revenues the

friendly

financing of infrastructure, the

modes of lesser environmental in

construction

infrastructure.

must also encourage the use of

raised

the

environmentally

change

allow

establish

new

funding a

rules

and

Community

framework to channel revenue

infrastructure, as proposed by

from charges on infrastructure

the European Parliament in the

use towards implementing new

Costa report.

investments.

supports

RESEARCH

Strategic

Key research areas

Congestion with

and deployment of cost-effective low carbon technologies through

measures and

system

means.

belongs

transport

policy

manage demand

make of

variety

at the EU level

charging

other

Energy

aims to foster the development

and

Technology Plan (SET-Plan)

and

National levels Key actions

electrification

transport.

CONTEXT AND PROGRAMMES actions

the

transport EU

sustainable.

DG MOVE

is in charge of the

transport policy and alternative The

SET-Plan is operating on two

decarbonisation of transport

timelines, for 2020 it plans to

is a very important issue in the

develop and deploy a framework

for low carbon technologies. By

coordinated by DG MOVE. It is

2050, they intend to limit global

also expected to launch a Clean

temperature rise to 2 °C by

Transport Initiative in 2011, and

reducing EU GHG emissions by

is co-funding research projects

85-90%.

fuel

policy

2020

the

strategy

EU.

and

focused on alternative fuels and propulsion systems. Through the Green

Car

Initiative,

aims

also

give participating cities tools to achieve

cleaner,

sustainable and energy-efficient

(DaSTS)”.

transport

2009 Delivering a Sustainable

system

through

November

complex set of technology and

Transport

policy

Its

being used by the Department

Transport

for Transport (DfT) to determine

Development Strategy aims to

national spending decisions in

develop safe and secure mobility

2012 for the period 2014 – 2019.

plans

There are five broad goals they

based

measures.

Sustainable

well

implement

demand management strategies.

Since System

(DaSTS)

set out to achieve: 1.

More on:

support

economic

growth,

DG MOVE: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/index_e n.htm

tackling climate change,

contribute safety,

Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan)

better

security

and

health,

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/technolog y/set_plan/set_plan_en.htm

promote

equality

opportunity,

CIVITAS 5.

improve quality of life.

http://www.civitas-initiative.org In a more specific sense, the DaSTS

report

introduction

the

case

the

congestion

charging as a tool to be used in

National programs In

specified

the

(including

Wales

and

Scotland):

London

congestion charging scheme, the

“We are working with local

initiative stems from the national

authorities

program called “Delivering a

developing

Sustainable Transport System

who proposals

are to

manage

demand

roads

charging.

their

congestion

are

also

continuing to monitor work around the world, looking at

MISTRA

new technologies that might make

road

practicable future,

option

and

international

pricing

the

draw

experience

with

about

Foundation

and

Research,

sustainable

congestion

charging,

for

Strategic

SSF,

research

small

and

medium-sized

enterprises in cooperation with

for a wider application across Europe.

universities

institutions

focusing

environmentally

Sweden,

research

ProEnviro. The program focuses

thereby laying the groundwork

initiatives

major

Mistra funds run alongside the

transport strategy through tools

Foundation

twenty

cases even longer.

very

implement a complex demand

For

environmental

six to eight years and in some

provides an example of how to

major

programs, each of which runs for

important in the sense that it

such

contribute

23 million) per year. It invests in

manage

programme

management

users

approximately SEK 200 million (€

motorways.” This

strong

problems. The aid amounts to

toll lanes to consider how to

the

solving

options such as car-share and better

research groups in collaboration

for

invests

the

aims

products

MISTRA to

on friendly

and

increasing

competitiveness.

support

focusing

research

Mistra's overall goal is to ensure

sustainability and solving long-

that the best research is put to

term environmental problems.

practical public

use and

companies, voluntary

Â organizations. In this way, Mistra investments contribute to solving environmental

problems.

The

most recent program they have launched sustainable

the

field

mobility,

named

TransportMistra,

set out to

implement transport

a system

sustainable by

utilizing

strategies and models to foster

the practical implementation of sustainable

mobility

solutions,

such as congestion charging.

RESEARCH

How

RESULTS

The London congestion charge

Benefits from

it works

was introduced by Transport for

key projects

London (TfL) in 2003. It is a daily

fee

entering charge)

such

yet

weekends,

bank

open

question.

The

area of 21 km2 (See Figure 1).

start to avoid the side-effects of previous measures (such as the Greek

purchased

Inner Ring Road and covers an

other. It was a priority from the

simply

from

charging zone is bounded by the

Report

the delays they imposed on each

motorists

operation

of the western extension is as

suggested charging drivers for

where

and New Year's day. The removal

doubled over a period of 5 years.

ban,

holidays, or between Christmas

vehicle registrations more than

Athens

The

when traffic levels are lower,

suggested in the early 1960's as

Smeed

London.

and 18:00. It does not apply

not a recent concept. It was first

1964

drivers

Monday to Friday between 07:00

Road pricing in Great Britain is

The

Central

congestion charge (or road user

The London congestion charge

imposed

second vehicle to be able to use a car on odd and even days. In addition, these were often cheap, second-hand and more polluting vehicles, raising questions about the usefulness of the scheme).

Figure 1: The London congestion

Enforcement and

charging

payment

zone

Department

(Source:

Transportation Enforcement is done by cameras

[11])

that read the number plates of

By paying the congestion charge,

vehicles entering the zone (ANPR

the purchaser effectively buys

–

the right to enter and leave the

Recognition).

central (charging) area as many

registration

times as desired for one day. The

automatically

cost is the same for all vehicles

database and compared against

entering

the database of vehicles that

the

zone,

but

Automatic

Number The

Plate vehicle

number

stored

then in

exemptions apply. For example,

have

residents

are

exempt or are eligible for a

automatically eligible for 90%

100% discount each midnight. If

discount,

the

zone

public

vehicles

are

transport automatically

paid

charge

from

seats

midnight

motorbikes

well and

taxis),

bicycles

charge,

has

been

are

paid,

images are automatically deleted

exempt (buses with at least 10 as

the

core of

system

the

following

also.

charging day. Upon finding a

The exemption of motorcycles

vehicle that entered the zone

goes to show that congestion

without paying, the images are

charging is not a tax imposed on

retained

motorists for the generation of

Record (ER), the details are

profit; it is enforced in order to reduce

congestion.

The

forwarded to the

net

and

proceeds of the scheme are to be used

for

“relevant

DVLA (Driver

Vehicle

Agency),

transport

Evidential

which

Licensing in

turn

purposes” by TfL, the Greater

supplies TfL with the data of the

London Authority (GLA), or a

registered owner. TfL then issues

London borough council for 10

a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN),

years.

the

vehicles

persistent

decrease in traffic (around 4 000

offenders may be seized.

less

vehicles

responsible There

are

wide

variety

(7%).

payment. Daily, weekly, monthly

the

motorists

clearly show. The first image contains car use, the second

daily charge is £8 (~€10). Nonin

direction, as the images below

the writing of this paper, the results

Most

split also changed in a favorable

discount for prepayment. As of

payment

small

000 were contested). The modal

certain retail outlets, by post or is

000 fines were issued monthly (2

over the phone, the Internet, There

only

was

complied with the charge, 100

or annual passes can be bought

messages.

for

day)

fraction of the drop in retail sales

options available for arranging

text

each

shows bicycle use (red dots are

fine

decreases,

between £ 60 and 180 (~€75-

blue

dots

are

increases).

€220).

Results

achieved

On the first day the congestion charge was in force, 190 000 vehicles entered the zone, which was

25%

decrease

from

normal traffic levels (it should be noted, though, that it was a school holiday). While traffic rose by 5% after the school holidays, a permanent drop of 15-20% remained. Journey times were reduced by 14%, also becoming

Figure 2: Changes in travel mode

more reliable (variation in travel

(Source: Wikipedia)

times

for

decreased

the

same

significantly).

route The

Â Bus patronage is up by 16% within the zone, cycling is up 66%,

CO2-emissions

are

down 19%. Public acceptance of the scheme has also improved since its introduction (55% for and 30% against, up from 4040). As a negative side-effect, traffic on the Inner Ring Road increased by about 5%, but this

change

had

little

effect

speeds. Congestion charging had a minor effect on traffic safety as well, although

much

less

than

anticipated. It is also difficult to differentiate the effects of the charge from the general trend in London and the UK toward fewer accidents.

Estimations

concur

that around 40-70 accidents

have

been

prevented

annually since the introduction of the scheme. Accidents involving cyclists

have

actually

seen

slight increase, likely due to their

Have a look to the Congestion Charging webpage on the Transport for London website:

increased numbers.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/c ongestioncharging/

The Stockholm congestion tax Public

consultations

integral

part

were

the

London

congestion charging scheme, but the Stockholm Trial has taken it one

step

further.

Figure 3: Stockholm congestion

Congestion

charge

charging was first introduced for

trial

period

six

be paid every time upon entering

consultation and the evaluation

the zone, to a maximum of 60

of results, a public referendum

SEK

was called to decide whether

has

No to

congestion

paid

weekends, public holidays, the

permanent. As a result of the

day before public holidays, or in

was

the month of July. The amount

introduced on a permanent basis

paid is deductible from the taxes

on August 1, 2007. How it

(~€6).

charge

congestion charging should be scheme

own

Also, the congestion charge must

July 31, 2006. After extensive

the

(Source:

compilation)

months

between January 3, 2006 and

referendum,

prices

both

individuals.

works

businesses

and

Businesses

may

deduct all charges paid, while

Unlike the London scheme, the

restrictions apply to individuals.

Stockholm congestion charging

There

system is not a uniform entrance

vehicle-based

fee. Instead, it is differentiated

Geographic

when

time

and

follows

peak

are

there

geographic

and

exemptions. exemptions is

apply viable

alternative route (such as the

demand periods (Figure 3).

island of Lidingö, which has its only connection to the mainland

through the congestion charging zone). Emergency

vehicles,

buses

(weight min. 14 t), diplomatic corps

and

military

vehicles,

motorcycles, vehicles registered in a foreign country, cars running on

alternative

automatically

fuels

are

exempt

(this

applies until July 31, 2012). Enforcement and Control

Figure 4: Control points around

payment

points

are

Stockholm

purposes

passing

vehicles.

Contrary to the London scheme,

registering The

ANPR technology

Swedish

Transport Agency [12]

placed

throughout the charge zone for the

(Source:

the charges are summarized in a

same

bill (“tax decision”) which is sent

is used as

the

vehicle's

owner

in the London scheme (sensors

monthly basis and can also be

are mounted on gantries). For a

viewed on the web page of the

Swedish Road Administration by

vehicles that are either exempt

logging in). The bill must be paid

or traveling through the charging

by the end of the next month,

zone often, there is an option to

and the onus is placed on the

install a DSRC

vehicle's owner, even if the bill

accurate

recognition

(Dedicated

Short-Range

never arrived. The bill is sent

Communications)

either by traditional mail, to the

transponder. The control points

recipient's

are laid out around the charging

account,

area (see Figure 4).

deducted

automatically

direct

internet

debit

the

banking money via

is a

arrangement

(Autogiro)

for

maximum

regulations and paid the charge

convenience of the end user.

in due time.

If the bill is not paid in due time,

The congestion charge creates

a reminder is issued along with a

about

50 EUR penalty fine. If the bill

revenues.

and

the

penalty

fine

remain

the

Enforcement They

will

rest of the funds can be used for

Swedish

other

Administration.

issue

and

circa €25 million per year, the

case will be transferred to the of

Running

maintaining the system requires

unpaid for a further 30 days, the jurisdiction

€80 million per year in

allocated

additional

purposes, to

they new

are road

constructions around Stockholm.

penalty fine of at least 60 EUR, also noting the vehicle in the Enforcement Register unless the bill is paid.

Results

achieved

According to the data collected and published by the Swedish Road

Administration,

traffic

volumes decreased by 20-25%

For further information on

within the charging zone during

the Stockholm

the trial period. As congestion

Congestion TAX:

charging

was

discontinued

http://www.transportstyrelsen.se/e n/road/Congestion-tax/

July 31, 2006, traffic volumes increased to their original levels. Air quality changed in much the same way. The great majority of drivers (~96%) complied with

CONCLUSIONS: key outcomes

from the

two projects Economical and environmental

effectiveness

of the schemes

Apart from its role in reducing congestion in downtown London, congestion charging is also a tool for internalizing other external costs resulting from transport (such as pollution). In this regard, flat-rate schemes are not efficient.

In an ideal situation, the charge that must be paid would be differentiated by the time of day and the route taken. It should be noted, however, that such an approach would require greater effort in monitoring the movement of vehicles. It would also result in greater complexity regarding the calculation of the charge. These effects would require substantially increased administration costs. Congestion tends to be less heterogeneous in peak hours, so the flat-rate charging, while not perfect, is not a bad approximation. The amount to be paid is also debatable and should be periodically reviewed to perpetually adapt the system. As prices and incomes rise, the amount to be paid, regardless of its initial value, will become less significant, and therefore the effects of the charge will diminish. If public transport demand or congestion just outside the charging zone increase dramatically, then the charge may be too high. If congestion is not substantially affected, then the charge is too low. It is also a subject of debate whether it is appropriate to only introduce charging in

city centers

as traffic speeds have been falling in other areas as well. It

would probably make sense to introduce congestion charging outer areas as well, especially during peak hours.Â

Â Comparative analysis based

5. The incidence of the system

Smeed Criteria.

on the

upon

individual

road

users

should be accepted as fair, 6.

The 1964 Smeed Report set out

The

simple

the design criteria for road

method for

should

users

road

understand,

pricing schemes which are still

valid today and are applicable

here. Before continuing with the

possess

comparison of the London and

reliability,

Any

equipment a

high

should

degree

Stockholm schemes, it is useful 8. It should be reasonably free

to review these criteria:

from the possibility of fraud 1.

Charges

should be closely

and evasion, both deliberate

related to the amount of use

and unintentional,

made of the roads, 9. It should be capable of being 2. It should be possible to vary

applied, if necessary, to the

areas,

whole country and to a vehicle

times of day, week or year and

population expected to rise to

classes of vehicle,

over 30 million.

prices

for

Prices

different

It should be noted that these

should be stable and

criteria are meant to apply for

readily ascertainable by road

those

users before they embark upon a

eligible

(exemptions

journey,

for

should

payment not

considered here). The original

4. Payment in advance should

Smeed criteria have since been

credit

expanded to contain 12 aspects

possible

facilities

although may

also

(See Table 2).

permissible,

The following table compares the two charging schemes detailed so far against the extended Smeed Criteria:

Table 2: Comparison based on the extended Smeed Criteria (Source: own compilation)

Usage

Charges should be a function of road usage. Neither scheme complies with these criteria, although it should be noted that the Stockholm system has differentiated prices based on the time of day.

Prices should be varied by area, vehicle type and time of day to better reflect social costs. As discussed above, the Stockholm scheme partly complies with this requirement by being time‐ sensitive.

Price variation

Perfect information

All road users should have the necessary information about

pricing and how to pay before embarking on a journey. Both systems are in compliance with this requirement as information about the charging schemes is readily available through a variety of channels.

Payment

number plates) have mostly been resolved.

Payment should be possible in advance and using several methods. Both systems fulfill this requirement.

Enforceable Both systems use a sophisticated system of photographs and number plates with special software to enforce payment, and they therefore meet this Smeed criterion.

Fair

The idea here is to impose higher charges on drivers with higher income. Neither scheme meets this criterion, although it is a valid point to argue that congestion charges cannot be unfair, since car owners usually have higher income. Also, since the proceeds from the schemes are used for transport investments, it can be stated that by paying the charge, derivers are financing improvements to the transport system that are of benefit to all.

Expandable

Both systems are based on a rugged framework that makes them expandable, thereby meeting this criterion. Foreigners The London scheme allows anyone to easily pay the congestion charge if they are willing.

Simple

Vehicles registered in the UK are easily identified, vehicles registered in other countries may be tracked down through a European Debt Collection Agency (although this process may be tedious and unsuccessful). Therefore, the London scheme complies with this criterion, as opposed to the Stockholm scheme, where foreign‐registered vehicles are automatically exempt.

Both systems are quite simple and straightforward, easy to understand. Reliable

As both systems use the same Automatic Number Plate Recognition system, both are very reliable (~90% accuracy). The initial problems (false

Privacy Both schemes respect the drivers' privacy, as images taken are automatically deleted from the system if the charge has been paid, and is only retained for enforcement purposes as evidence.

Technology integration

The London scheme is quite basic (cameras and number plate recognition), and is not a system that can be integrated. Integration in this case would mean that the congestion charge could be paid with the same smart card, web page, etc. for different cities. The Stockholm system includes a DSRC transponder which, in theory, could serve integration, but it is an option only and is installed in a minority of vehicles.

EUROPEAN POLICY

challenge

IMPLICATIONS

financially relevant. Data on how

What

the

necessity

perpetual adaptation in order for the charge to remain fair and congestion

next?

charging

impacts

local businesses is debated and controversial, more research is definitely needed in this area.

Both systems have been very effective and are considered to

successful

respective

both

their

administrators

and

the general public. Initially low

public acceptance has improved much

both

introduction,

and

cases solid

after The

results

systems

have been achieved. Therefore, both

solutions

should

London are

pioneers

and

Stockholm

among of

the

few

congestion

considered as leading examples

charging;

hopefully

to other European cities that are

governments

contemplating the introduction of

municipalities

a congestion charging scheme.

consider adapting these systems so

As we have seen, most of the extended

Smeed

are

met

the

increasing

criteria

London

that

the

will

and and

begin

effects

mobility

ever-

demands,

congestion, and pollution may be

and

increasingly addressed in Europe

Stockholm schemes (London fails

and around the world. These

4, Stockholm fails 3).

developments

Future

goals require that

European

should aim at

policy remain focused

increasing compliance with these

on and committed to

criteria.

Perhaps

the

greatest

sustainability

Â general and sustainable

comprehensive and persevering

mobility

incentive and policy background.

particular,

and

Naturally, such a system requires

continue onwards on the path of integration

transport

the

are

systems

background

and

While there have been a few of

voluntary

and

proactive implementation across

Europe,

widespread (required

that

implementation to

environmental, social

likely

benefits)

achieve

economic cannot

research as

foundation (see next section).

legislations in its Member States.

examples

strong

and be

expected in the absence of a

its

OUTLOOK

The answers to these questions

ON RESEARCH

expected to be extremely varied

and the feasible solutions are across the Member States due to different social, economic and

What next?

legal backgrounds. One of the main challenges future research

on this topic needs to face is the

There are a number of initiatives,

consolidation

calls and research opportunities

differences across the EU, all

the while developing the system

the

European

Union

that

provide an excellent ecosystem

that

for research. A common policy

effective and fair.

on congestion

charging

would

problems

questions

and

about

remains

usable,

and state of the art tools to gain

answer

public

congestion

acceptance

within

reasonable time frame (in the

charging such as:

these

Research should focus on new

require more focused research to solve

still

cases of London and Stockholm, it took long years to get public

Public acceptance,

acceptance to higher levels, and

Effect on

the

businesses,

situation

has

since

deteriorated with the financial

Evasion,

abuse

crisis dragging on).

and

enforcement,

Social

inequalities,

Different

Another

avenue

research

comprehensive

is idea

focus