In Gauteng
Province (South Africa) an ambitious and expensive toll road scheme has been
put on indefinite hold 2-days before its launch due to popular, trade union,
business leader, and Automobile Association protest according to The Economist
(It doesn’t toll for thee 2012.05.12). This will have significant financial repercussions for the road
authority and the government. In easy hindsight, there is little surprise this
happened.
Road
operators are in desperate need for funding the world over. And roads get more congested every day.
But installing a one-size-fits-all tolling system on a pre-existing road
network does not go down easily. However necessary for any number of reasons,
this indeed “represents the state’s bullying power” as The Economist bluntly put
it.
Image from article in The Economist. Copyright:The Economist |
To have
acceptance, you have to make the individuals subject to tolling better off than
they were without tolling. Drivers don’t buy into tedious economic arguments
about highway funding and congestion and pricing and the tragedy of the commons.
They ask: “What’s in it for me?”
Here is an
alternative.
Phase in
gradual fuel duty increases over a few years expressly to pay for new or
repaired roads. Preannounce the full plan to give users time to adjust (move, renegotiate
contracts, different vehicle, etc.). This will be difficult enough.
Concurrently
provide a voluntary choice: pay the
newly increased fuel tax or use an autonomous, in-vehicle, time-and-place of
use meter to trade road tolls for a fuel tax rebate (calculated by the same
meter). Arrange the road prices (stored in the personal in-vehicle meter’s “pricemap”)
to have drivers who avoid congestion save
money with the meter and other drivers to pay about the same as the fuel tax. Then
be sure that the smart in-vehicle meter offers several additional features that
those self-selected drivers would like (reduced insurance premiums, parking
conveniences and discounts, etc).
The trick is (again according to behavioral economists) to provide at
least twice the perceived value to the driver than the perceived cost
(nuisance, money, trouble) of using the meter. This is technically easy to do
(including privacy, security and reliability), but needs policy that encourages
usage-based insurance and permits wireless parking management and perhaps behavioral
rewards for safety, emissions, and the like. Without associated value-added services
and incentives with benefits that counterbalance this type of increasingly
needed tolling, governments are not offering a vote-worthy solution.
What we are
missing are policies to incent innovation and permit voluntary migration. We need
a telemetrics-payment ecosystem that allows driver services to move metering away
from one-size-fits-all gantries for users with a variety of needs.
No comments:
Post a Comment