Title: ROAD PRICING AND THE SOCIAL DIMENSION OF SUSTAINABILITY
Abstract: With national road pricing (RP) now being referred to by transport ministers in the UK as a matter of ‘when and how’ rather than ‘if’, there is political interest in a number of aspects of making road pricing a reality. One such aspect is how far RP schemes might have different consequences for different social groups, and whether these differences might amount to significant changes in social justice. The identification of changes would be important both in terms of determining the contribution of RP to greater social inclusion and in influencing public opinion in general about the fairness and equity of RP, and hence its overall acceptability as a policy overall. The present paper applies Jones’ (2004) distinction between social equity and spatial equity considerations in examining the extent to which studies to date inform the debate as to whether RP increases or reduces social justice. Evidence is reviewed which supports the possibility of either outcome, depending on circumstances, but with the few examples of reduced equity arising from a combination of social and spatial factors which may be hard to disaggregate in practice. 1. Introducing the social dimension of sustainability into the road pricing debate Road pricing is now very widely promoted as a means of reconciling both economic and environmental objectives for less congestion and lower emissions in the roads sector. However, there is a general risk that the social dimension of sustainability – whether couched in terms of inter or intra-generational equity - is overlooked by policy processes focussed on overcoming sharp economic-environmental trade-offs and contradictions (Green and Wegener, 1997; Feitelson, 2002). Evidence that there is a group of citizens in the UK for whom achieving a transport policy which is both identified as ‘sustainable’, but is also in practice just, may imply them travelling more, rather than less, was provided by the influential Social Exclusion Unit report (SEU, 2003). The report highlighted that those on low incomes often live in the most congested areas, and as a result suffer disproportionately from the ill effects of congestion, including poorer air quality and higher levels of traffic noise. In contrast, the benefits of reducing congestion through applications of RP are typically taken to include more reliable bus journeys, improved air quality, and reductions in traffic noise and community severance. The SEU report also indicates that motoring costs account for 24 per cent of the weekly expenditure of households in the lowest quartile who have cars, compared with 15 per cent for all households in the UK. A RP feasibility study for the UK (Department for Transport, 2004) noted that RP schemes should seek to promote social inclusion and accessibility, and concluded that RP could provide a number of benefits for different population groups suffering from social exclusion and/or limited accessibility to services. However, the study also concluded that more work is needed to understand fully the potential impacts on different types of road user. For example, evidence is required on how changes in the costs of motoring might differently influence people’s choices about how, when and where to travel, and what the wider implications for any changes in travel behaviour might be, such as in terms of people’s ability to access work, schools, high quality food shopping and health facilities. Normative investigation of equity issues is important, as it cannot be assumed that issues will necessarily emerge in an ad hoc way in the context of specific consultation exercises. Consultation in respect of American toll lanes (the I-15 Congestion Pricing Project in San Diego, California), provides an example of this type of credibility gap. Here, statutory requirements necessitated feedback from the low income/minority segments of the affected public. However, the public
Publication Year: 2007
Publication Date: 2007-01-03
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot