Evaluating the equity effects of road-pricing in the European urban context - The Madrid Metropolitan Area

The paper identifies the potential spatial and social impacts of a proposed road-pricing scheme for different social groups in the Madrid Metropolitan Area (MMA). We appraise the accessibility of different districts within the MMA in terms of the actual and perceived cost of using the road infrastructure ‘before’ and ‘after’ implementation of the scheme. The appraisal framework was developed using quantitative survey data and qualitative focus group discussions with residents. We then simulated user behaviours (mode and route choice) based on the empirical evidence from a travel demand model for the MMA. The results from our simulation model demonstrated that implementation of the toll on the orbital metropolitan motorways (M40, M30, for example) decreases accessibility mostly in the districts where there are no viable public transport alternatives. Our specific study finding is that the economic burden of the road-pricing scheme particularly affects unskilled and lower income individuals living in the south of the MMA. The focus groups confirmed that low income drivers in the south part of the MMA would reduce their use of tolled roads and have to find new arrangements for these trips: i.e. switch to public transport, spend double the time travelling or stay at home. More generally, our research finds that European transport planners are still a long way from recognising the social equity implications of their policy decisions and that more thorough social appraisals are needed to avoid the social exclusion of low income populations when road tolling is proposed.

Evaluating the spatial and social equity effects of road pricing in the European urban context: the Madrid Metropolitan Area.

The paper explores the spatial and social impacts arising from implementation of a road-pricing scheme in the Madrid Metropolitan Area (MMA). Our analytical focus is on understanding the effects of the scheme on the transport accessibility of different social groups within the MMA. We define an evaluation framework to appraise the accessibility of different districts within the MMA in terms of the actual and perceived cost of using the road infrastructure "before" and "after" the implementation of the scheme. The framework was developed using quantitative survey data and qualitative data from focus group discussions with residents. We then simulated user behaviors (mode and route choice) based on the empirical evidence from a travel demand model for the MMA. The results from our simulation model demonstrated that implementation of the toll on the orbital metropolitan motorways (M40, M30, for example) decreases accessibility, mostly in the districts where there are no viable public transport alternatives. Our key finding is that the economic burden of the road-pricing scheme particularly affects unskilled and lower income individuals living in the south of the MMA. Consequently lower income people reduce their use of tolled roads and have to find new arrangements for these trips: i.e. switch to the public transport, spend double the time for their commuter trips or stay at home. The results of our research could be applicable more widely for anyone wishing to better understand the important relationship between increased transport cost and social equity, especially where there is an intention to introduce similar road-pricing schemes within the urban context.

Exploring users inter-temporal preferences for measuring transport social equity effects

There exist different ways for defining a welfare function. Traditionally, welfare economic theory foundation is based on the Net Present Value (NPV) calculation where the time dependent preferences of considered agents are taken into account. However, the time preferences, remains a controversial subject. Currently, the traditional approach employs a unique discount rate for various agents. Nevertheless, this way of discounting appears inconsistent with sustainable development. New research work suggests that the discount rate may not be a homogeneous value. The discount rates may change following the individual’s preferences. A significant body of evidence suggests that people do not behave following a constant discount rate. In fact, UK Government has quickly recognized the power of the arguments for time-varying rates, as it has done in its official guidance to Ministries on the appraisal of investments and policies. Other authors deal with not just time preference but with uncertainty about future income (precautionary saving). In a situation in which economic growth rates are similar across time periods, the rationale for declining social optimal discount rates is driven by the preferences of the individuals in the economy, rather than expectations of growth. However, these approaches have been mainly focused on long-term policies where intergenerational risks may appear. The traditional cost-benefit analysis (CBA) uses a unique discount rate derived from market interest rates or investment rates of return for discounting the costs and benefits of all social agents included in the CBA. However, recent literature showed that a more adequate measure of social benefit is possible by using different discount rates including inter-temporal preferences rate of users, private investment discount rate and intertemporal preferences rate of government. Actually, the costs of opportunity may differ amongst individuals, firms, governments, or society in general, as do the returns on savings. In general, the firms or operators require an investment rate linked to the current return on savings, while the discount rate of consumers-users depends on their time preferences with respect of the current and the future consumption, as well as society can take into account the intergenerational well-being, adopting a lower discount rate for today’s generation. Time discount rate of social actors (users, operators, government and society) places a lower value in a future gain, but the uncertainty about future income strongly determines the individual preferences. These time and uncertainty depends on preferences and should be integrated into a transport policy formulation that may have significant social impacts. The discount rate of a user cannot be the same than the operator’s discount rate. The preferences of both are different. In addition, another school of thought suggests that people, such as a social group, may have different attitudes towards future costs and benefits. Particularly, the users have different discount rates related to their income. Some research work tried to modify user discount rates using a compensating weight which represents the inverse of household income level. The inter-temporal preferences are a proxy of the willingness to pay during the time. Its consideration is important in order to make acceptable or not a policy or investment