Suzuki report calls for road user fees to reduce Metro congestion
The David Suzuki Foundation is calling for road pricing in Metro Vancouver to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
In Pricing it Right for Climate, a report released today, the foundation says that road pricing in designated areas could reduce carbon emissions from road transport by between two and 10 per cent. The report said road transport creates as much as 45 per cent of Vancouver's carbon footprint and warns changes must be made to curb climate change.
The report, for example, suggests setting up specific zones where higher-emissions vehicles are either banned or must pay a higher fee. It also calls for higher fuel taxes and charging a fee for every kilometre driven in the regional district.
The Suzuki report looks at other cities, including Singapore, London, Milan and Stockholm, which charge vehicle users a fee for entering so-called “cordon areas” during peak periods such as weekday rush hours.
Each city has a different focus for its fees — such as curbing pollution, easing congestion, or raising funds for infrastructure — but the fees all caused a drop in traffic volumes and an increase in public transit use.
“This looks at best practice in road pricing experiences around the world ... and the performance of different systems,” said Tom Green, who contributed to the report.
Vancouver city council voted in mid-November to adopt a climate emergency plan that aims to reduce carbon pollution by 50 per cent by 2030. City staff was told to report within two years with a feasibility plan for mobility, road, and congestion pricing.
In most of the cities studied, the report says, reducing road congestion had economic benefits. However, the report did acknowledge less is known about the economic effect of road pricing aimed specifically at heavy-duty and freight vehicles. Taxing the movement of goods could lower overall economic activity, but reducing congestion might improve the efficiency and reduce the cost of moving goods.
“Research in Metro Vancouver suggests that commercial drivers would value improvements in congestion and reliability of journey times, but would want a road pricing system to be transparent to communicate changes in delivery costs to customers,” it says.
The report notes there are ways for road pricing policy “to be fair and refrain from punishing already disadvantaged groups.”
For example, there could be exemptions for certain kinds of vehicles such as motorcycles, school buses and emergency services, and for specific groups such as low-income households, more vulnerable or smaller businesses, and those with less access to transit options.
The biggest hurdle, according to the report, is public opposition.
Green said it takes “political courage to put (road pricing) in place and after ... people become converts because they feel the benefits.”
While some cities have had success with road pricing, others such as New York, Hong Kong, Edinburgh and Manchester have rejected such proposals for a variety of reasons.
Singapore, for example, handled concern about privacy of personal travel data by removing individual identity information from payment cards. London and Milan offered exemptions to people with disabilities after seeing that users wanted a system with fairness for themselves and others.
In contrast, Hong Kong's failed proposal included exemptions for taxis and commercial vehicles, which backfired by leading to more opposition, according to the report.