Round table onSocial Impacts of Time and Space-Based Road Pricing
Auckland – 30/11 & 1/12/2017

Urban Toll:
Rethinking Acceptability through Accessibility
Yves CROZET & Aurélie MERCIER

1

Contents• 1) Road pricing: the acceptability issue- Congestion charging: a thwarted evidence- Winners, losers and public transit- Congestion charging: a spatial approach• 2) Accessibility and the tension between
acceptability and economic efficiency
2

Additional travel time due to congestion(Cities of more than 5 million inhabitants)

3

Economic efficiency andthe evidence of congestion charging
Generalized
Cost

Marginal
cost

Averagecost

DemandDensity

Congestion charging: a distributive issue
Generalized
Cost

Marginal
cost

Averagecost

DemandDensity

The acceptability issue• Congestion charging = welfare improvement• The main winner of the congestion charge isthe beneficiary of the revenues of the toll
• Road users are paying more that theirwelfare gain under the assumption of asingle value of time
• What if we adopt another hypothesis
6

Value of time and modal split

12/12/2017

7

Winners and loosers of congestion pricing

12/12/20178

Public transit improvement:a win-win game?

12/12/2017

9

From winners and losers to public transit• Value of time and the sensitivity tocongestion charging• More losers than winners• Except if there is a huge improvement ofpublic transit• Why do we need to introduce othermodes of transport?
10Compared space-time consumption
m².h/traveler
m².h/veh km Occupation ratekm
Pedestrian
CyclistTwo-wheeled motor vehicles
Cars
Bus (12 m)
in peak hour
Articulated bus (18 m)
in peak hour
12/12/2017

0,3
0,6
1,71,87710
10

1
1
1,05
1,31750
23
70

0,30,61,6
1,40,30,15
0,30,15

Difference /pedestrian
125
5
1,40,5
1,40,511

Speed and Space-time
consumption of a car (Héran 2008)

12/12/2017

12The speed-flow curve

12/12/201713

Congestion charging
and the scarcity of urban space• A new approach of congestion charging• For individual, time is the rarest resource• For the community, space is the rarest
resource• Two key spatial issues– the space consumption of different mode oftransports– How to address the spatial impacts ofcongestion charging
14

Contents• 1) Road pricing: the acceptability issue• 2) Accessibility and the tension between
acceptability and economic efficiency- A spatial approach of the acceptability
issue- Accessibility to identify winners andlosers- The compensation issue
15

Accessibility: A concept to address “the tension
between acceptability and economic efficiency”• Paradox between search for maximum economic
efficiency and the acceptability transport policies
Westin et al. (2016)
 how to reconcile efficiency and equity dimensions byintroducing a spatial dimension?
 to what extent and under what conditions a spatial
accessibility based approach help resolve the acceptability
issue?

16

The gravity-based access measure
Following Hansen (1959):Ai   D j expj

 βcij 

Sensitivity parameter

Opportunities

Generalized
travel cost

- Transport/ land use interaction- Accessibility to jobs
17

Accessibility: A concept to integrate individual and local
disparities• Travel cost sensitivity and income level
Impact of value of time on accessibility
 Efficiency issues according VoT hypotheses
Accessibility variation per zone following a EUR 5 urban toll implementation (Souche et al., 2016)18

• Travel cost sensitivity and socio-economic factors
Impact of socio-economic factors on travel cost sensitivity
Figure 10: Travel time sensitivity

Source: Bonnafous et al., 2009

19

20

Accessibility to identify winners and losers
The example of two urban toll schemes in Lyon
Job-access variation for car drivers(EUR 3 zone toll)

Job-access variation for car drivers(EUR 3 cordon toll)

Source : Crozet et al., 2012
Péage de Zone 3€Surplus variation according to thestarting accessibility level

Péage Grand Lyon 3€

264 194244 822231 964

222 152

212 559

202 975

191 574

180 054

168 480

156 607143 750

131 297

120 380

109 709

101 690

93 27285 55179 40073 86367 80561 89354 26846 80337 73725 4989 750

15 736

5 402

603-500,00

275 488

256 261239 943

229 439

220 719

211 900

202 975

192 607

181 960

171 220160 356

148 673

136 685

126 198

115 834

107 451

99 91092 59485 14379 63774 60068 99164 10857 63750 08442 88532 954-1000,00
0,00

22 0300,00
8 988

500,0014 064

1000,00

603

1000,00

5 110

Surplus variation according to the starting accessibility level-2000,00-3000,00-1000,00-4000,00-1500,00-2000,00-5000,00-6000,00

21

How to interpret accessibility in terms of acceptability: theexample of the « Anneau des Sciences » bypass implementation

Source : Crozet et al., 201222

Accessibility to answer the compensation issue

What type of compensation scheme can be implemented tocompensate major losers and make road charging more
acceptable?
• Time compensation: the example of a EUR 5 cordon toll in Lyon
• 5% car traffic decrease in the city center due to a lower incoming traffic• For a worker located in the city center: time gain of 30 seconds to join innercity jobs (average time trip = 8 minutes)≠ for people living in suburban areas23• Cost compensation: encouraging people to share their vehicle-> high-occupancy vehicle lane

• Increase of accessibility• However travel time gains depends on the levelof traffic on reserved lines and are likely to declinewith the success of carpooling Space consumption issues

24Conclusion• Congestion charging for time gains of totake care of the scarcity of space?
• Congestion charging and accessibility– A way to address the issue of acceptability
for people living in the outskirts– A way to imagine different compensation
process and the development of sharedmobility
25