Many in the transportation community, including elected officials, believe that tolling and road pricing (targeted or comprehensive) are unpopular with the public. Indeed, a portion of the public earnestly opposes these approaches and sincerely believes they are inappropriate. The facts that the recent New York City cordon pricing initiative did not proceed and that no previously untolled Interstates have been successfully converted to toll roads (despite the availability of federal waivers to allow states to do so) indicate that strong opposition to some forms of tolling and pricing in the United States continues.
Past public opinion studies often concluded that public acceptance of tolls and road pricing was low, but that sentiment may be changing. More recent research suggests that public support for tolling and pricing in urban areas (and under certain circumstances) has improved. A recent report that reviewed existing opinion surveys related to tolling and pricing found that although several surveys show less than majority support for tolling and pricing (particularly at a statewide level or in rural areas), other studies show at least a small majority support for tolling and road pricing when the tolling is being used or being proposed as a means to pay for new capacity in urban areas, when the public can see a more direct relation between what they are paying and the services they are receiving, and when the public has become more accustomed to paying tolls (i.e., in California, Texas, and Florida).51 The report goes on to note that public officials may underestimate public support for tolling and pricing because some opposition reflects a poor public understanding of the connection between raising additional transportation revenues through tolling and pricing and meeting transportation investment needs. (This is also true with respect to efforts to raise motor fuel taxes.) The report also notes that several surveys show weak public acceptance and poor understanding of congestion pricing.52
A significant observation from urban areas that have used tolling and pricing is that public approval grows with familiarity. In Stockholm, only 44 percent of the public approved of pricing prior to a trial, but approval increased to 57 percent after the trial, and the public subsequently voted to make the system permanent.53 Before London's congestion pricing system was put in place, only 39 percent of the public approved, but approval rose to nearly 60 percent after implementation.54 The growing approval, however, may not extend to all new pricing initiatives, as exemplified by the recent failed efforts to expand congestion pricing to other areas in the United Kingdom.
Clearly, public reticence to accept tolling and pricing may create major challenges to expanded use of targeted initiatives at the state and local level and to development and implementation of comprehensive pricing at the federal level. Changing to a comprehensive, nationwide pricing system would be a significant change for users accustomed to a simple and nearly invisible motor fuel tax system that requires limited decision making about travel choices and their associated costs. Even a road pricing system like Oregon's, where the payment system does not change, entails new information about the costs of traveling at certain times and on certain roads. This requires people to know more and to make more informed and more frequent decisions about travel. Public opinion is critical to the success of pricing initiatives, as an FHWA report on the value pricing pilot program found.55 Thus efforts to implement variable road pricing projects must emphasize measuring and understanding public opinion about pricing as well as shaping informational programs to address public concerns. | Changing to a comprehensive, nationwide pricing system would be a significant change for users accustomed to a simple and nearly invisible motor fuel tax system that requires limited decision making about travel choices and their associated costs. |