National Academies Press: OpenBook

Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing (2008)

Chapter: Chapter One - Introduction

« Previous: Summary
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 4
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 5
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 6
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14151.
×
Page 7

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5STUDY MOTIVATION This study summarizes public opinion on tolling and road pricing. Although often used interchangeably, tolling and road pricing reflect different concepts. Both concepts relate to the collection of direct charges for road use. “Tolling” is typically applied to finance transportation, whereas “pricing” is gener- ally used to achieve other broader policy functions. The United States has experienced both a historical tradition of tolling and a growing interest in the economic arguments in support of road pricing to achieve policy objectives. Many states in the United States are experiencing short- falls in transportation funding, along with growing needs for surface transportation system improvements to manage con- gestion. In addition, evaluations of tolling and road pricing projects implemented to date have indicated that travelers are willing to pay for new facilities and faster travel, and that pricing can lead to more efficient use of existing highway capacity (1). Still, many motorists and policy makers have expressed concerns about tolling and road pricing; not know- ing how it will affect them. Therefore, tolling and road pricing have risen to the top of the political agenda in many states, regions, cities, and coun- tries. Diverse attempts to introduce tolling and road pricing have been successfully implemented, whereas others have failed politically. The viability of these efforts depends not only on public support but also on elected officials’ percep- tions of that public support. In many parts of the United States, a gulf exists between elected officials’ perceptions of what the public believes about tolling and road pricing and what the public actually believes. Therefore, even within the context of legislative support, political acceptability remains a challenge. This study focuses on public opinion and provides a sys- tematic review of how the public feels about tolls and road pricing. What is overall public opinion concerning charging for the use of roads? Is there widespread support or focused opposition? What factors are associated with its acceptance or rejection? Webster’s dictionary defines public opinion as “a belief or sentiment shared by most people; the voice of the people.” Polls and surveys are the most common ways to measure public opinion; therefore the synthesis focuses primarily on such quantitative data. However, qualitative data (such as focus groups) have been reviewed and cited when they are informative. National data are reviewed and presented, but with the caveat that tolling and road pricing opinion is often best measured and analyzed in the context of a particular project or program. Whereas the focus is on U.S. experi- ence, some international data are included when it is deemed to be useful and instructive to U.S. practitioners. The syn- thesis examines how outcomes are affected by the situation in which the poll or survey was conducted—timing, back- ground, and other factors—and the methods used to conduct the survey or poll. Public Opinion, Public Acceptance, and Policy Making “Today’s public opinion, though it may appear light as air, may become tomorrow’s legislation—for better or worse.” Earl Newsom, American Petroleum Institute Newsletter (1963) “Most people don’t think about most issues most of the time,” Nelson Polsby and Aaron Wildavsky once wrote in a famous analysis of American public opinion (2). As noted by these sociologists, the public may have little daily contact with many issues on the public agenda, yet their opinions greatly influence policy makers’ priorities and behavior. One of the principles of a democratic society is that people’s opinions must be reflected in the way that society is managed (3). Public opinion, therefore, has formed a part of American politics ever since the authors of the Federalist Papers declared that “all gov- ernment rests on opinion” (4). This idea was one of the pri- mary factors that led to an industry with the sole purpose of gauging public opinion. The rapid growth of opinion polling since the mid-1930s, and the increasing use of polls and other measures of public opinion by politicians and policy makers in recent decades, suggests that people believe that public opinion is, and should be, an influencing factor in politics and policy making. An early pioneer in the science of public opinion measurement, George Gallup suggested that, with measurement of public opinion, politicians “will be better able to represent . . . the general public by avoiding the kind of distorted picture sent to them by telegram enthusiasts and overzealous pressure groups who claim to speak for all the people, but actually speak for themselves” (5). CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

Thus, a primary reason for producing this synthesis is to provide an empirical analysis of public opinion on charging for the use of roads to better inform public officials, policy makers, and others involved in the tolling and road pricing debate. The crux of analyzing or synthesizing public opinion is the consideration of public rather than of opinion. Instead of a well-defined, distinct public, many publics exist; the state of public opinion depends on which particular public one is interested in. Constituents of the public include various issue groups—special interest groups of citizens who care passion- ately about a particular issue. Abortion, crime, gun control, protection of the environment, health care reform, campaign finance reform, and increasingly tolling and road pricing have emerged as issues with their own advocates and detractors. Typically, interest group members hold very strong and well-defined opinions on their own issue, whereas the gen- eral public has, at best, a passing interest in political issues. Although the role of public opinion in the policy-formulation process may be limited, it is nonetheless true that political leaders serve at the pleasure of their constituents. From the president to city council members, elected officials are care- ful to cultivate a high degree of public approval for their own or their party’s re-election; therefore, they must pay attention to public opinion on policy issues. Who controls the quality of the measures of public opin- ion that are communicated to public officials and policy makers? The quality of scientific research is typically con- trolled through the process of publication and replication. On the other hand, the way in which survey research or pub- lic opinion polls are reported often miss the checks and bal- ances developed as part of the scientific process. Unlike other scientific endeavors, public opinion polls can be (and often are) conducted quickly with relatively little financial investment. Studies are conducted and released essentially without review or context. Media outlets often publish results as received without scrutiny. Many of these “direct to the media” polls are conducted conscientiously and meet exact- ing standards of science. Others do not. The public, public officials, and policy makers have no way to consistently evaluate the survey research published about tolling and road pricing. And yet, the power of surveys and polls to illuminate the attitudes and behaviors of citizens means that these results are often used as the foundation for decision making and/or policy making. Although public opinion (correctly and incorrectly) has been and continues to be linked to policy making, public acceptance is often cited as the key to program implementa- tion. Public acceptance generally refers to the seeking of col- lective consensus from the members of society about a certain issue, and it is premised on their support for the issue con- cerned. Thus, public acceptance must reflect the public opin- ion and vice versa. However, public acceptance is not a clear- cut concept. Harsman argues that “if some individuals in the collective perceive a policy measure as acceptable but others 6 do not, what criteria should be used to decide if it is accept- able or not for the collective” (6). Should majority rule be applied? Should the most vocal be the arbiters of what is pub- licly acceptable? What if only a minority finds the measure acceptable, but by some objective criteria it is determined that more than half of those affected would be better off with the measure? Any and all of the aforementioned metrics have been applied at one time or another to advance or hinder the progress of a road pricing concept or project. There is also a time-related aspect to acceptance. Changing values, new knowledge, or a new “state of the world” may make a formerly unacceptable policy acceptable and vice versa. Public opinion, public acceptance, and policy making are mutually bound and interdependent. This study focuses on the public opinion side of the equation. The public opin- ion landscape of tolling and road pricing encompasses many complex issues—political leadership, economics, media cov- erage, new knowledge, and new technologies—that tend to influence opinion formation, consistency, and maintenance. As the next section indicates, this landscape is ever changing. Changing Context of Tolls and Road Pricing It is difficult to locate a person in the United States today who has not had to pay a toll to use a road or bridge. Toll roads or priced facilities are ubiquitous in the eastern United States and are becoming more widespread elsewhere in the country. History indicates that during most of the nineteenth century toll roads were commonplace in the United States. The first major toll road (a private road) was built in the late 1790s (7). At the time, toll roads advanced social and eco- nomic goals, primarily in terms of bringing goods from farm to market (8). However, competition for movement of goods from other modes of transportation (e.g., canals and rail- roads) affected the demand for toll roads and by the turn of the twentieth century private toll roads had almost entirely disappeared. With mass production and growing use of the automobile, faster and higher capacity roads were needed starting in the 1920s. Limited access highways appeared in the congested corridors of the northeast and mid-Atlantic states. Following World War II, major toll roads and toll road systems were established in New York, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey. Most of the toll roads were oper- ated by state highway departments or by quasi-governmental authorities that issued toll revenue bonds to raise funds for construction and/or operation. An era of extensive super highways began in the 1950s when the federal Interstate Highway Program was established. The federal government, for primarily military reasons, began building tax-supported high-quality roads across the nation, giving little incentive for states to expand their turnpike sys- tems (9). Highways were built on a pay-as-you go basis as

7public funds mostly from fuel taxes were available to states and localities. Funding rules initially restricted collection of tolls on new federally funded roadways, bridges, and tunnels. In some situations, expansion or rebuilding of a toll facility using Interstate Highway Program funding resulted in the removal of existing tolls. It is important to consider that most respondents in current opinion polls or surveys grew up trav- eling on these tax-supported highways. During most of the twentieth century, the pricing of road space was an ivory-tower idea debated by economists (10). In 1975, Singapore was one of the first large cities to adopt congestion pricing. This experiment attracted much attention but limited practical replication until the 1990s. Interest in congestion pricing grew significantly, not only in the United States but around the world, as communities faced increasing congestion and limited capacity. Several factors stimulated the attention given to road pricing. One was federal support through the Congestion Pricing Pilot Program established in 1991 by ISTEA, and reauthorized in 1998 as the Value Pric- ing Pilot Program in TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU in 2005. The FHWA supported state and local efforts to plan, test, and evaluate value (or congestion) pricing projects. Another fac- tor was the deployment during the 1990s of technologies for electronic toll collection that essentially eliminated motorist delays at toll booths. At the same time that congestion pricing was rising to the forefront of transportation policy, states were facing growing (or anticipated) revenue shortfalls from fuel taxes and other traditional sources of funding surface transportation infra- structure. Debt financing (typically tolled highways) emerged as a tool to allow states or other quasi-governmental author- ities to fund new infrastructure projects so they could be deliv- ered faster than pay-as-you-go highway construction. These projects also avoided the higher construction costs that existed with long-term staged construction projects. Early practice in debt financing had morphed into a myriad of tools and pro- grams under the banner of “innovative financing” that were first codified as the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995. Then, with the passage of SAFETEA-LU in 2005, fed- eral highway law provided states with an increased flexi- bility to use tolling, not only to manage congestion, but to finance infrastructure improvements as well. The new tools included private activity bonds for highways and surface freight transfer facilities, enhanced authority to use tolling to finance construction of Interstate highways, increased flex- ibility in using design–build contracting, streamlined envi- ronmental processes, and improvements to existing innova- tive finance programs, including Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act and State Infrastructure Bank programs (11). As states are considering using as well as actu- ally applying these new tools to fund needed transportation infrastructure projects, the public debate has increased as well. This state of the world has intensified the interest of policy makers and decision makers in the public’s response to tolling and road pricing proposals and projects. PURPOSE AND SCOPE Purpose The purpose of this synthesis is to provide a comprehen- sive view of public opinions on tolling and road pricing that have significant value to policy makers and practitioners. Specifically, it • Compiles existing data from completed public opinion research; • Presents an interpretive framework for understanding differences in outcomes from various data sources; • Analyzes each data source for situational context (e.g., type of project, targeted market, nature of questions and the alternatives presented, the conditions where projects are deemed acceptable and unacceptable, the patterns that led to public support of or opposition to tolling and road pricing); • Identifies common themes, trends, and factors that influ- ence public acceptance or rejection of tolling or road pricing projects; • Documents public opinion on tolling and road pricing in comparison with other potential revenue sources, such as general taxation; and • Identifies future research needs that address gaps in current understanding of public opinion on tolling and road pricing. Scope The scope of this synthesis report is limited to the compila- tion of public opinion data on tolling and road pricing. It does not address behavioral data, such as impacts on travel pat- terns, route choice, or mode choice. This synthesis docu- ments the results of public opinion polls and surveys and pro- vides the context for the survey results from the information present in the source materials. The analysis provides trends and themes in public opinion, as well as an interpretation of the factors that influence public opinion. Given that the pub- lic response to tolling and road pricing is influenced signifi- cantly by the context in which the public opinion is being measured and that the context of tolling and road pricing is changing significantly, this synthesis focuses primarily on reviewing public opinion data since 2000. This more con- temporary data will provide more insight and utility to cur- rent practitioners, policy makers, and other decision makers facing tolling or pricing issues. In documenting public opinion, the study focused on breadth of information rather than depth of information. It does not document case studies. The information gathering process sought to cast as wide a net as possible to better

represent the range of public support and/or opposition as measured by public opinion research. ORGANIZATION This synthesis is organized into five chapters. The remainder of chapter one describes the balance of the report and identi- fies the intended audiences for the synthesis. Chapter two describes the methods used for the literature review and for a survey of tolling and road pricing agencies. It also describes analysis techniques. This chapter is not intended to be a detailed discussion, but rather to provide a general understanding of the study’s methods. Chapter three is the core of the synthesis—the raw data. We have defined data in this case as polls, surveys, inter- views, or focus groups that were executed to capture public opinion about tolling, road pricing, and related issues. In total, 104 data points are presented. The amount of informa- tion provided about each was dependent on the content of the source materials. A source for each data point is provided in the Reference section. Chapter four presents the results of our data analysis. It identifies common themes, trends, and factors that influence public opinion on tolling and road pricing. Chapter five offers conclusions drawn from the findings and makes suggestions for future research in the area of pub- lic opinion about tolling and road pricing. 8 Two appendices complement the synthesis. Appendix A is a copy of the original survey as sent to practitioners. Appen- dix B provides data tables that describe the survey or polls presented in chapter three. AUDIENCES This synthesis is intended to serve as a resource for the fol- lowing several types of individuals and organizations: • Public and elected officials who must make difficult deci- sions about infrastructure policy and projects. • State departments of transportation (DOTs) that are in various stages of considering, planning, implementing, and operating tolled facilities. • Metropolitan planning organizations that are responsible for developing and selecting projects to finance in urban areas’ long-range transportation plans where tolled facil- ities are being considered. • Tolling authorities and operators who finance, construct, operate, and manage priced roads. • Public relations, public education, or marketing profes- sionals charged with communicating with the public or other stakeholders. • Consultants, academics, and other researchers interested in empirical research on this important and timely trans- portation issue. Although it is largely based on practice in the United States, it is expected that the synthesis would be of interest to audi- ences outside the country for adoption to their local contexts.

Next: Chapter Two - Methods for Compiling and Analyzing Data »
Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 377: Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing explores how the public feels about tolls and road pricing, examines public opinion concerning charging for the use of roads, and highlights factors associated with the acceptance or rejection of road pricing.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!