www.curacaoproject.eu                      CURACAO - coordination of urban road-user charging organisational issues                   Funded by the EU

Road Pricing Context

OBJECTIVES

SCHEME DESIGN

TECHNOLOGY

BUSINESS SYSTEMS

Prediction

PREDICTION

TRAFFIC EFFECTS

ENVIRONMENT

ECONOMY

EQUITY

Appraisal

APPRAISAL

Decision Making

ACCEPTABILITY

TRANSFERABILITY

Implementation and Evaluation

EVALUATION

IMPLEMENTATION

Case Studies

Bergen

Bologna

Bristol

Cambridge

Durham

Dutch National Case

Edinburgh

London

Manchester

Milan

Nord-Jaeren

Oslo

Rome

Stockholm

The Hague

Trondheim



Urban Road User Charging Online Knowledge Base

What Are The Research Gaps?

Based on the experiences presented above, we conclude that the primary target areas for future research on this topic should be the following:

Although there seems to be consensus that revenue should be earmarked for transport in order to increase acceptance, the effects of earmarking for specific parts in the sector (investment vs. operation and maintenance, public transport vs. road) seem to be under-researched. In addition, the advantages or disadvantages of various legal provisions for “ownership” of revenues at a local, regional or national level could be further investigated.

Research has often found that there is a questionable link between political knowledge demand and knowledge use (Bergström et al, 2008). Research into decision support for URUC implementation may help to develop tools that can bridge those gaps.

Even if implementation of URUC is site and country specific, further emphasis on comprehensive implementation research will contribute to preparing potential user cities for the wide spectrum of implementation dimensions they will need to face. Therefore, it is important not only to evaluate e.g. network or technical performance but also to assess the introduction process itself, analyse the interdependencies between different elements and understand implementation successes and failures from a theoretical perspective. An increasing number of URUC schemes in practice, will provide a platform for comparative analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of different implementation strategies, resulting in more conclusive policy recommendations. For example, the CUPID project suggested that an area that merits further research was the relative advantages of different sequences of policy measures. CUPID suggested these would be based on desk studies, but comparative analysis may in the future give empirical ground for such recommendations