www.curacaoproject.eu CURACAO - coordination of urban road-user charging organisational issues Funded by the EU
Urban Road User Charging Online Knowledge Base
Which Objectives Are Currently Considered
What do we know from the European Road Pricing Experiences?
Figure 2 2 summarises the principal objectives specified for the urban road user charging schemes existing today, which can be considered as fundamental objectives. Congestion relief is almost always mentioned as an objective. Environmental protection was a key objective in Stockholm. Revenue generation to support other strategy elements was important in London and Stockholm and was the principal objective of Norwegian schemes.
What do we know from PROGR€SS and CUPID?
PRoGR€SS (PROGRESS, 2004) and CUPID (2005) were research projects sponsored by the European Commision that investigated the main objectives of road pricing in great detail. Several fundamental objectives were clearly identified as in Figure 2 2. In addition PRoGR€SS and CUPID provided a body of knowledge on these objectives, in terms both of description and measurement.
However, whilst the fundamental objectives of efficiency, environment, equity and revenue growth are well known, new considerations are emerging. As shown in Figure 2 3, these include support for economic growth (particularly through relief of congestion and environmental impacts), enhancement of health (through reductions in pollution and encouragement of non-motorised modes), enhanced liveability and urban quality, improved safety, increased equity and greater social inclusion, and protection of the needs of future generations.
Which objectives are considered by the CURACAO City User Group?
One of the main focuses of CURACAO is to consider how to promote road user charging schemes to decision-makers. In order to do so, CURACAO launched a new user needs assessment questionnaire (UNAQ). The user needs assessment was conducted in partnership with decision makers from 21 cities in Europe. The questionnaire placed great attention on the objectives of road pricing. Respondents were asked to indicate the five principal objectives their cities would aim to meet by implementing a road pricing scheme.
Figure 2-4 indicates the number of times that each objective was ranked first, second, third, fourth or fifth. Figure 2-5 rates the objectives by assigning a score to each position in the respondents’ ranks (1st = 5). Efficiency, environment and liveability emerged as the most important objectives, with economic growth fourth. Unfortunately revenue generation was not included.
Table 2-1 summarises the results for these 21 cities and for those included in PROGRESS (PROGRESS, 2004) and in cities with existing schemes.
|© 2006 - 2007 CURACAO | The information on this site is subject to the EU disclaimer and a copyright notice
Web site developed and maintained by the REC
Project funded by the 6th framework programme