Acceptability of Beijing congestion charging from a business perspective

Beijing is China’s national capital, a major economic center, and home to nearly 22 million people. The city currently suffers from serious traffic congestion and extreme air pollution. Beijing’s metropolitan government is currently considering implementation of a congestion charging system intended to discourage the use of private motor vehicles and encourage a shift to public transportation. Nearly 1500 Beijing-area business managers responded to a survey asking their opinions about the system. The data was analyzed using multinomial logit modeling and cluster analysis to identify the major sources of support and non-support for the proposed system, and to create profiles of “typical” businesses that support, are neutral to, or oppose the system. These results indicate that support for the system is highest among small businesses located in the city’s central business district, where there is significant traffic congestion and good access to public transportation. Support is weakest among large businesses located in outer suburbs with relatively limited public transit. Business managers’ level of understanding of congestion charging and the extent to which they think it will successfully reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality were major factors in support or non-support for the proposed system. The results indicate that providing clear and credible information about the way the proposed system will work, how the revenue from congestion charging will be used, and the transportation and environmental benefits of the system are essential to gaining support from the business community.

[1]  Cecilia Jakobsson,et al.  A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of car owners' acceptance of road pricing , 2004 .

[2]  Davide Fiorello,et al.  DIFFERENT user reaction and efficient differentiationof charges and tolls - Report onImpacts of charge differentiation for HGV andmotorway toll differentiation to combat time spacecongestion. Deliverable D8.3-9.2 , 2008 .

[3]  Linda Steg,et al.  FACTORS INFLUENCING THE ACCEPTABILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSPORT PRICING. IN: ACCEPTABILITY OF TRANSPORT PRICING STRATEGIES , 2003 .

[4]  Ralf Becker,et al.  WILLINGNESS TO SUPPORT TRAFFIC POLICY MEASURES: THE ROLE OF JUSTICE. IN: ACCEPTABILITY OF TRANSPORT PRICING STRATEGIES , 2003 .

[5]  Brendan Bartley,et al.  Mobility impacts, reactions and opinions : traffic demand management options in Europe : the MIRO Project , 1995 .

[6]  B S Frey,et al.  Why Are Efficient Transport Policy Instruments so Seldom Used , 2003 .

[7]  Peter Loukopoulos,et al.  Acceptability of Road Pricing , 2008 .

[8]  M. Quddus,et al.  The impact of the congestion charge on the retail business in London: An econometric analysis , 2007 .

[9]  W. Harrington,et al.  OVERCOMING PUBLIC AVERSION TO CONGESTION PRICING , 2001 .

[10]  Tom Rye,et al.  Public Acceptability of Road User Charging: The Case of Edinburgh and the 2005 Referendum , 2007 .

[11]  Wafaa Saleh,et al.  Impacts of congestion charging on shopping trips in Edinburgh , 2005 .

[12]  Peter Bonsall,et al.  Factors affecting the amount of effort expended in responding to questions in behavioural choice experiments , 2009 .

[13]  James E. Larsen,et al.  Correcting for Errors in Statistical Appraisal Equations , 1988 .

[14]  J. Elíasson A cost–benefit analysis of the Stockholm congestion charging system , 2009 .

[15]  N. Rudholm,et al.  Congestion charges and retail revenues: Results from the Stockholm road pricing trial , 2009 .

[16]  Michael G.H. Bell,et al.  Impact of Congestion Charge on Retail: London Experience , 2006 .

[17]  J. Schade,et al.  PUBLIC ACCEPTABILITY OF TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT IN EUROPE , 2000 .

[18]  L. Steg,et al.  Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm , 2010 .

[19]  Peter Bonsall,et al.  Road User Charging and Social Exclusion: The Impact of Congestion Charges on at-Risk Groups , 2005 .

[20]  Ken Livingstone,et al.  The challenge of driving through change: Introducing congestion charging in central London , 2004 .

[21]  H. Link,et al.  HOW ACCEPTABLE ARE TRANSPORT PRICING MEASURES? EMPIRICAL STUDIES IN NINE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES , 2001 .

[22]  Nirajan Shiwakoti,et al.  Understanding public response to a congestion charge : a random-effects ordered logit approach , 2014 .

[23]  John M. Quigley,et al.  Political and Public Acceptability of Congestion Pricing: Ideology and Self Interest , 2009 .

[24]  J. Schade,et al.  Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies , 2003 .

[25]  J. Elíasson,et al.  Equity effects of congestion pricing: Quantitative methodology and a case study for Stockholm , 2006 .

[26]  J. Schade,et al.  Reactance or acceptance? Reactions towards the introduction of road pricing , 2007 .

[27]  Edward B. Royzman,et al.  Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion , 2001 .

[28]  M. Richards,et al.  Congestion Charging in London: The Policy and the Politics , 2005 .

[29]  J. MacQueen Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations , 1967 .

[30]  Peter Jones,et al.  Acceptability of Road User Charging: Meeting the Challenge , 2003 .

[31]  Introduction to Congestion Charging: A Guide for Practitioners in Developing Cities , 2015 .

[32]  Tim Ryley,et al.  Newspaper response to the Edinburgh congestion charging proposals , 2006 .

[33]  B. Schaller New York City's Congestion Pricing Experience and Implications for Road Pricing Acceptance in the United States , 2010 .

[34]  K. Brundell-Freij,et al.  The development of public attitudes towards the Stockholm congestion trial , 2009 .

[35]  Brian D. Taylor,et al.  Addressing Equity in Political Debates over Road Pricing , 2010 .

[36]  Edward Chung,et al.  PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR ROAD PRICING , 1997 .

[37]  T. Gärling,et al.  Determinants of private car users' acceptance of road pricing , 2000 .

[38]  S. Jaensirisak,et al.  Explaining Variations in Public Acceptability of Road Pricing Schemes , 2005 .

[39]  Angela Francke,et al.  Responses to differentiated road pricing schemes , 2013 .