Identifying Latent Factors Affecting Congestion Pricing Acceptance )Case Study: Tehran Peak-Based Scheme(

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate professor‌, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

2 M.Sc., Grad., Institute for Management and Planning Studies, Tehran, Iran.

3 Ph.D., Candidate, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Nowadays traffic congestion in metropolitan areas like Tehran has become a critical issue requiring transportation demand management policies as solutions to reduce demand and maximize facilities efficiency. An effective transportation management measure is congestion pricing, which needs special attention to be performed successfully because of its low public acceptance. In this study, based on the data gathered from 455 face-to-face questionnaires through a surveys conducted at restricted traffic areas of Tehran in 2018, we analyze latent factors affecting acceptance of Tehran peak-based scheme. Exploratory factor analysis and ordinal logit models are used for our purpose. Results show that attitudinal factors like perceived effectiveness of the scheme, officials’ performance, scheme design and the way it is performed and environmental concerns besides some socioeconomic factors like education, car ownership and travel patterns are among the most effective items. Results also show that congestion pricing acceptability among people with more information about this program is more, and less for regular users of restricted traffic areas. This research can assist transportation decision makers in taking appropriate measures and policies with maximum acceptance level.

Keywords

References

-Abdi, H., & Williams, L. J., (2010), "Principal component analysis. Wiley interdisciplinary reviews: computational statistics", 2(4), pp.433-459.
 
-Altshuler, A., (2010), "Equity, pricing, and surface transportation politics. Urban Affairs Review", 46(2), pp.155-179.
-Bartley, B., (1995), "Mobility impacts, reactions and opinions: traffic demand management options in Europe", the miro project. Traffic engineering & control. Vol. 36, No. 11.
 
-Ding, C., & Song, S., (2012), "Traffic paradoxes and economic solutions". Journal of Urban Management, 1(1), pp.63-76.
 
-Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S., (2007), "The advantages of an inclusive definition of attitude. Social cognition", 25(5), pp.582-602.
 
-Eliasson, J., & Jonsson, L., (2011), “The unexpected “yes”: Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm, Transport Policy, 18(4),
pp.636-647.
 
-Eliasson, J., & Jonsson, L., (2011), "The unexpected “yes”: Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm". Transport Policy, 18(4),
pp.636-647.
 
-Grisolía, J. M., López, F., & de Dios Ortúzar, J., (2015), Increasing the acceptability of a congestion charging scheme, Transport Policy, 39, pp.37-47.
 
-Gu, Z., Liu, Z., Cheng, Q., & Saberi, M. (2018), "Congestion pricing practices and public acceptance: A review of evidence. Case Studies on Transport Policy", 6(1), pp.94-101.
 
-Harrington, W., Krupnick, A. J., & Alberini, A., (2001), "Overcoming public aversion to congestion pricing". Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35(2), pp.87-105.
 
-Hensher, D. A., & Johnson, L. W., (2018), "Applied discrete-choice modelling": Routledge.
 
-Hess, S., & Börjesson, M., (2019), “Understanding attitudes towards congestion pricing: a latent variable investigation with data from four cities”, Transportation Letters, 11(2), pp.63-77.
 
-Jaensirisak, S., Wardman, M., & May, A., (2005), "Explaining variations in public acceptability of road pricing schemes". Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP), 39(2), pp.127-154.
 
-Johnson, R. A., & Wichern, D. W., (2019), "Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis: Pearson".
 
-Laird, J., Nash, C., & Shepherd, S., (2007), "Cordon charges and the use of revenue: A case study of Edinburgh". Research in Transportation Economics, 19, pp.161-187.
 
-Litman, T., (2012), "London congestion pricing: Implications for other cities": Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
 
-Milenković, M., Glavić, D., & Maričić, M. (2019), "Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability". Transport Policy, 82(C), pp.58-74.
 
-Nazemi, A., Noori, S., Feshari, M and Azhdareh, R, (2018), "Identifying the factors affecting the quality of public transport services from the perspective of different social groups", Journal of Transport Research, (In Persian).
 
-Phakiti, A., (2018), "Exploratory Factor Analysis". In The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology pp. 423-457, Springer.
 
-Pojani, D., & Stead, D., (2015), "Sustainable urban transport in the developing world: beyond megacities. Sustainability", 7(6), pp.7784-7805.
 
-Rouhani, O., (2016), "Next generations of road pricing: Social welfare enhancing. Sustainability", 8(3), pp.265-266.
-Schade, J., (2017), "Brief review about the public acceptability of road pricing strategies. Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique", 56(2), pp.139-148.
 
-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), pp.99-109.
 
-Simoni, M., (2013), "Congestion pricing schemes controlled by the gmfd: a comprehensive design and appraisal to bridge the engineering and economic perspective".
 
-Spiegelman, C., Park, E. S., & Rilett, L. R. (2016), “Transportation statistics and microsimulation: Chapman and Hall/CRC”.
 
-Sugiarto, S., Miwa, T., & Morikawa, T., (2018), "Recursive bivariate response models of the ex-ante intentions to link perceived acceptability among charge and refund options for alternative road pricing schemes". Transportation Letters, 10(1), pp.52-63.
 
-Sun, X., Feng, S., & Lu, J., (2016), "Psychological factors influencing the public acceptability of congestion pricing in China". Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 41, pp.104-112.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-Van der Laan, J. D. (1998). "Acceptance of automatic violation-registration systems": H. van Brug.
-Verhoef, E. T., Nijkamp, P., & Rietveld, P. (1997), "The social feasibility of road pricing: a case study for the Randstad area", Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, pp.255-276.
 
-Williams, R., (2018), “Ordered logit models—Basic & intermediate topics” University of Notre Dame.
 
-Zhang, W., Zhao, Y., Li, Y., Lu, J., & Ma, Y. (2016), “Research on Subjective Feasibility Evaluation of Congestion Pricing, Procedia engineering, 137, pp.124-131.
 
-Zheng, Z., Liu, Z., Liu, C., & Shiwakoti, N., (2014), "Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach". Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 70, pp.117-134.
 
-Zumbo, B. D., Gadermann, A. M., & Zeisser, C., (2007), "Ordinal versions of coefficients alpha and theta for Likert rating scales". Journal of modern applied statistical methods, 6(1), pp.4.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics