UCLA’s Eric Morris, writing over at Freakonomics makes the case for pricing our roads.
For decades, economists and other transportation thinkers have advocated imposing tolls that vary with congestion levels on roadways. Simply put, the more congestion, the higher the toll, until the congestion goes away.
To many people, this sounds like a scheme by mustache-twirling bureaucrats and their academic apologists to fleece drivers out of their hard-earned cash. Why should drivers have to pay to use roads their tax dollars have already paid for? Won’t the remaining free roads be swamped as drivers are forced off the tolled roads? Won’t the working-class and poor be the victims here, as the tolled routes turn into “Lexus lanes”? …
Ultimately, there’s no free lunch; instead of paying with money, you pay with the effort and time needed to acquire the good … [D]elay is an externality imposed by drivers on their peers … In the end, of course, everybody pays, because as we impose congestion on others, others impose it on us …
Markets work best when externalities are internalized: i.e., you pay for the hassle you inflict on others … Using tolls to help internalize the congestion externality would somewhat reduce the number of trips made on the most congested roads at the peak usage periods; some trips would be moved to less congested times and routes, and others would be foregone entirely. This way we would cut down on the congestion costs we impose on each other.
He’s absolutely right. It’s a big win-win really - better for individuals who can get from point A to point B faster (also, recall being stuck in traffic is one of life’s least enjoyable activities) and generate higher overall productivity by increasing mobility and connectivity, and replacing wasted (stuck-in-traffic) time with more productive endeavor. What better time to start than with the new stimulus package.
January 8th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Markets are already internalized with bad traffic. That’s ridiculous.
If I’m trying to get into DC on a workday morning, heading eastbound on I-66, my being there with the other 65% of people trying to get into DC has an impact on them and myself. My punishment is the massive amount of time it takes me to get there.
Had I gone in much earlier, or used Metro, I’d be punished less because I could have gotten there faster.
Paying for congestion is illogical because people have ALREADY decided that the lose of their time is worth it. They are in fact already paying.
Using my example, if people valued their sleep less, or the “ease” of commuting in their call less, then they’d get to work faster.
January 8th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Interestinly, everybody’s favorite governor, Rod Blagojevich, is implementing a system like this on Illinois’ tollway. There will be one express lane that is congestion priced (as well as free for politicians’ favorite people, Prius drivers).
From my Chicago experience, the trouble is usually on the freeways. I don’t think that it would be very easy (or popular, or even legal) to convert freeways to tollways, which would be the first step towards congestion pricing.
January 8th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Quote: “Simply put, the more congestion, the higher the toll, until the congestion goes away.”
Does it go away because of better alternatives, such as public transport?
Or because companies abandon the congested area and move to Montana?
Or because companies encourage employees to stay home and tele-commute?
Which would you advocate, Richard?