Those old enough to remember the early post-war years, or with a taste for early black and white films on television, will note how few vehicles were seen on the roads or parked in the streets. Since those relatively vehicular free days dramatic changes have taken place, not only in Britain, but world-wide. In 1950 there were just over 50 million vehicles world-wide. This may seem high, but nothing to what followed. By the late 1980s the world figure had leapt to a massive 555 million vehicles. A similar growth pattern was experienced in Britain, which had a mere 4 million vehicles in 1951. By the 1960s this had increased dramatically and there were 10 million private cars alone. In 1991 this figure leapt to almost 20 million private cars plus 4 million other vehicles crammed on the road network. The growth in concern over global warming and ozone depletion has helped to push the environment to the top of the agenda. Road vehicles in particular have been placed under the green microscope for a number of reasons: * They make a significant contribution to atmospheric pollution in terms of carbon dioxide (COs) emissions, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), particulates and hydrocarbons. Therefore they have an adverse effect on air quality and on the population's health. Recent research findings indicate a continuing rise in the Earth's temperature and progressive thinning of the ozone layer. If so, this means environmental issues will become increasingly important and road vehicles are likely to come under even closer scrutiny. * They are a major end-user of finite fuel resources. The possibility of fuel shortages in the next century suggests diesel and petrol will be premium priced. * Environmental problems are likely to be compounded by the predicted growth in road traffic. On a world-wide scale it has been estimated by the Washington based World Watch Institute that there will be over 1 billion vehicles in use within twenty years. In Britain a similar depressing picture emerges. According to the National Road Traffic Forecasts road traffic in Britain is estimated/ expected to increase by between 83%-143% by the year 2025. By imagining what today's roads would look like, with double the number of vehicles seeking space, it is easy to appreciate the potential scale of future congestion problems. In addition, other factors such as the opening of the Channel Tunnel, relaxing of road freight sabotage restrictions, much greater levels of UK-European trade and travel predicted, and less public money available for road building are likely to compound congestion problems in the future. The package of plans announced in June 1993, by the Transport Secretary John MacGregor, for a 14 lane M25 illustrates the magnitude of the traffic problem facing parts of Britain today and in the future. According to Mr MacGregor: 'Parts of the M25 are jammed to capacity and if something is not done traffic will divert into the local villages bringing noise, congestion and pollution and ruining the standard of life that residents have achieved since the motorway was first built'. In an island economy such as the UK, land is a scarce resource. Therefore land-take and environmental damage by the building of new roads has become a politically sensitive topic leading to many protests. For example, it has been estimated that between 1945-1990 the urbanisation of land in England has grown by over 700,000 hectares, much of this being taken up by roads; a land-take of more than the combined area of Berkshire, Hertfordshire, Oxfordshire and Greater London (The Regional Lost Land - Council for the Protection of Rural England July 1993). Increasing road congestion and the resulting atmospheric pollution has heightened public perception of vehicle-related problems. To an extent this explains the rush of environmental legislation and papers emanating from government circles during recent years. Not only is the government committed to an international agreement limiting C02 emissions, in line with the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Convention, but it is looking at ways of tackling the corresponding road traffic growth and congestion. One possible solution is the idea of introducing a system of charging road users. In road traffic terminology this is frequently referred to as 'toll-roads' or 'road pricing', but for convenience sake comes under the general umbrella title of 'road charging' in this publication. The distinction between toll-roads and road pricing is explained later in the text. British road freight hauliers or private motorists looking for evidence of the government's intentions towards the introduction of road charging can do no better than dip into some recent speeches made by Government Ministers. For some time Ministers have signalled that some form of road charging will be used to fight congestion and to improve air quality and environmental standards. Presently, the real issue on road charging is one of policy which has sparked a higher level of debate and awareness from all quarters on the concept. Throughout 1992/93' the Government gradually positioned itself on the matter. Speaking at an Institute of Civil Engineers conference in early 1992, Michael Heseltine, President of the Board of Trade, appeared to rule out new road building and hinted strongly at something else. He declared: 'We simply cannot provide for a growing number of cars within our urban areas. These areas are, as we all know, already overcrowded. New roads are very rarely an acceptable option in existing urban centres'. That 'something else' took on new meaning when in a later speech, given at an FTA conference, Kenneth Carlisle the Roads Minister, claimed: 'road pricing will come in by the end of this century in a significant form'. Carlisle went on to say that car drivers and hauliers should contribute to the cost of using roads. Since then the Transport Secretary John MacGregor has made numerous speeches on the subject. Last November he stated: 'An immobile city is the last thing which city traders need. Allocating road space on the basis of price could work much better than queuing. A better traffic flow and a more pleasant environment would benefit everyone'. At present the Department of Transport (DOT) is carrying out a comprehensive three year study into the feasibility of road pricing in urban London as a method of dealing with congestion. This full study on road pricing is due to be finished by late November 1994, by which time the government should be in a better position to make a judgement on the matter. Currently, a number of surveys are being carried out by the DOT to assess the attitude of the public, including hauliers, towards road pricing. The DOT is also researching relevant road pricing technology such as 'smart cards'. On 31 March 1993 the first of these surveys was completed with publication of a report by the University of Newcastle Upon Tyne, London Congestion Charging - A Review of Technology for Road Use Pricing in London. This report considered the feasibility of road pricing technology. At the launch, John MacGregor commented that road pricing in London will be technologically feasible by the end of the decade. The actual technological methods of road pricing relating to enforcement and revenue collection are already operational in several countries. For example, Singapore has had urban road pricing since 1975, when it introduced an Area Licence Scheme, the objective being to control morning peak entry by cars into the city centre. As a result, the total number of private cars entering the Area Licence Scheme territory during the morning restricted period fell by over 70% in 1975. Currently there are plans to extend the system and switch over from manual to electronic charging. A price will be levied on road users entering the city between 7.30am and 10.25am, and from 4.30pm to 6.30pm. Other countries are using similar schemes. In the early 1980s Hong Kong carried out in-depth technical and economic studies into the development of an electronic road pricing system with the aim of capping the level of road traffic on the network. Although a strong economic case was made for road pricing, the measures were not introduced due to: * A short term improvement in traffic congestion as a result of an increase in road and rail capacity and a reduction in demand during an economic downturn. * Concerns about the type of technology that was proposed. * The Government's refusal to pledge the revenue and guarantee its use to improve or maintain the transport infrastructure. Since then a scheme has been introduced in Norway with the stated aim of raising revenue for new transport infrastructure. Urban toll roads were introduced in Bergen in January 1986, Oslo in February 1990 and Trondheim in October 1991. In order to achieve political acceptability it was categorically stated when the road pricing scheme was introduced that it was not aimed at restricting demand and indeed very little reduction in traffic has resulted. As electronic charging technology is developed further, other European capitals are considering the concept in the struggle against traffic congestion. Such technology is now being given serious consideration for possible introduction into Britain. The London Congestion Charging document considers the prospect of charging within the M25. It points out that modern technology offers great flexibility in the design of schemes. For example: * Over the area of charging Charges could be limited to central London, or extend further out, perhaps all the way to the M25. * On the basis of charging Drivers might pay to cross a boundary or cordon, or charges might be linked to distance travelled or spent in an area. * Over time of day Vlll Charges could be higher at peak times and certain times or days of the week would be free. * By vehicle type Charges could vary by vehicle type. For example, with different rates for cars and lorries. Some vehicles could be exempt from charges. Local authorities are already gearing up to the possibility of road pricing. Cambridge, Bristol, Richmond and Edinburgh have commissioned studies looking at the potential of road pricing for their respective areas. Cambridge in particular has been in the headlines with its proposed electronic congestion metering system; Richmond will begin testing electronic road pricing equipment this year. In recent statements Government Ministers have welcomed such moves. For road users road pricing is both an emotive and controversial topic. To an extent this partially explains the Government's lengthy softening up process on the subject. It is reported in Government circles that a less emotive term would probably be used, such as 'congestion charging'. Road users, especially freight hauliers, will complain that they already pay more than enough in taxes and other charges towards the cost of roads. Many will resent incurring extra payments in road charges. Though such resentment is understandable it frequently misses the point of what road pricing is designed to do. Many also confuse road pricing with a system of toll roads though each is designed for different purposes. Perhaps it is worth explaining the distinction between toll roads and road pricing. Unlike numerous other countries Britain does not operate a system of toll roads - all roads are free at point of use. Those who have driven in Europe or the United States will be familiar with motorway toll-booths and being charged according to the distance travelled. The reasoning behind toll roads is to provide fast traffic access between towns and cities. People are encouraged to use the toll roads as a means of raising revenue, paying for road costs, controlling traffic and keeping other roads congestion free. On 26 May 1993 Transport Minister John MacGregor announced the publication of a Green Paper Paying for better motorways: issues for discussion. According to the Minister this: 'is designed to encourage a wide, informed and vigorous debate on motorway charging.' The document considers the possibility of the private and public sector entering a joint venture to build toll roads in Britain. The Transport Minister explained the thinking behind the Green Paper. 'The question the Green Paper poses is not whether any road user wants to pay more. It is whether charging for use of motorways should be introduced to make even faster improvements to the road network than we are already doing, in order to avoid our main arteries becoming clogged with congestion. For the fact is that road traffic is growing and will continue to grow.' The Green Paper points out that motorway charging has the potential to offer important benefits, but it raises a number of fundamental issues for discussion: * In the 1980s traffic on the British motorway network doubled. There is already peak-hour congestion on the busiest sections. Without further action, congestion will increase substantially as the economy grows. * Government expenditure on the national road network is already at record levels. But there is a need to keep firm control over public expenditure. Given the competing pressures it is not realistic to expect higher levels of funding from traditional sources. * Motorway charging is a possible solution. Motorways are expensive to build and maintain, and offer a premium level of service. Half of road users rarely or never use them. * Motorway charging could provide another source of finance for improving roads. This would improve the service to road users and enable the economy to benefit from a faster rate of expansion of transport capacity than would otherwise be possible. * Motorway charging would ensure that we make more effective use of the existing network; and it would help secure the efficiency and value for money that a market approach stresses. * Direct charging would create a stream of revenue which could open up new ways of involving the private sector, in particular in widening and upgrading existing motorways. In terms of technology Mr MacGregor emphasised that the Government had taken no decisions and had no blueprint, although they ruled out conventional tolling with plazas, toll booths and barriers on existing motorways as impractical. In the case of Britain it appears that the options would include electronic tolling and motorway permits. The Roads Minister Robert Key gave an insight into Government thinking on future British road toll charges during a speech in July 1993, at the Institute of Civil Engineers. The Minister claimed that he wished to dispel four myths about the Government's proposals on motorway charging: * That any charges imposed would be at a high level. * That they could cause large amounts of traffic to divert onto unsuitable roads. * That toll booths would spring up causing traffic jams on motorways. * That charging would necessarily raise costs to industry, which would be passed straight on to consumers. On motorway tolls the Minister pointed out that: x 'In France these average around Sp a mile and in Spain, 10p a mile. Many people expected us to suggest similar figures, but the green paper puts forward much lower costs - the highest figures are 1.Sp per mile for cars and 4.Sp for goods vehicles. The amount of revenue that we could generate at such low levels of charging, some £700 million a year, would allow us to speed up the motorway programme and bring significant benefits to road users.' Turning to urban road pricing, this is based on the principle that users are charged for the road space they occupy while travelling, according to the marginal costs they impose in terms of congestion and environmental pollution of noise and emissions. The system issued as an economic price mechanism to allocate and make more efficient use of the scarce resource of road space, depending upon the geographical area, time of day and degree of congestion experienced. According to economic theory if road drivers have to pay for the delay imposed on other drivers, road space would be used more efficiently. Peak times in particular are when roads are tested to their full capacity. If introduced, road pricing would probably apply to large conurbations, like London and historic congestion prone cities like Cambridge, Oxford and Edinburgh. During peak travel periods road users would incur higher pricing charges in a similar fashion to the way British Rail applies a higher fare structure to early morning commuters. In the case of London it is envisaged that road users may be charged on a cordon system, beginning as their vehicles cross a designated line, or a distance based scheme. At this early stage there is much speculation as to the rate of charge, with some suggestions of £3-£5 per vehicle at peak times, depending on future inflationary levels. A number of forces are helping increase the Government's commitment and attraction towards the concept of urban road pricing schemes. To the forefront is the mounting concern being expressed by industry, environmentalists and the public in general at the costs and problems generated by unprecedented road traffic growth. For example, average traffic speeds have steadily dropped since the 1960s to just over 10mph today. This is not much better than the London of the last century with horse drawn transport. Recent statistics suggest that the decline in urban speeds is not just confined to London, but also to outer zones, indicating that the problem of road congestion may be increasing both in terms of time and geographical spread. Given predicted traffic growth rates it is obvious that road space, especially in city conurbations, will be at a premium. Many people, including freight hauliers, are realistic enough to recognise and accept that legislative measures of some sort will be required in the 1990s to stem the growth of road traffic, especially in urban areas. As such, this fits in neatly with the Government's declared intentions as laid out in the White Paper This common inheritance. In line with other EC countries the government is keen to be seen to take positive environmental measures. Targets have been set on improving air quality standards, reducing pollution levels and tightening up on vehicles emissions and noise levels. Environmental pressure groups are quick to point out why this may be necessary. Today, road transport accounts for 20% of carbon dioxide emissions, 30% of hydrocarbons and 80% of carbon monoxides. The 1992 second volume of the This common inheritance points out that transport is the fastest growing source of C02 emissions. Furthermore: 'emissions from nitrogen oxides from vehicles increased by 38% between 1986 and 1991, causing a 35% increase in average concentrations of nitrogen dioxide over the country and, in London during December 1991, the worst episode of nitrogen dioxide ever recorded in the UK. Diesel vehicles have taken over from domestic fires as the main source of urban smoke and traffic is approaching industry as the main source of volatile organic compounds.' For freight hauliers caught up in this debate, and desperately trying to survive during this recessionary period, it brings little comfort in knowing that over 70% of C02 emissions are produced by cars; or that cars are the main source of congestion and road accidents. At the end of the day, irrespective of contribution made to environmental pollution, road pricing will probably be applied both to cars and commercial vehicles. There is more. In addition to determining which areas to apply road pricing and the type of charging technology, other factors are now being considered. For example, Britain's road infrastructure around many towns and cities tend to be of a different layout than that in other countries. From personal experience we all know alternative routes, the backstreets and short-cuts. If a pricing cordon is imposed on, say London, a wide assortment of questions immediately arise. Will vehicles be charged as they pass a designated point on an inward/outward route? If so, does this mean that traffic already based within the cordon do not pay; or will there be a metering system that charges everyone within the cordon? In other words will the result be traffic displacement; will the flow pattern deviate as drivers seek alternative routes through residential areas to avoid charges, thereby spreading congestion problems to back streets? Someone has described the situation as similar to squeezing down a balloon; wherever you apply the pressure a lump will appear elsewhere. In response, will local authorities introduce road width restrictions, chicanes, and a series of measures to ban certain routes - all designed to filter traffic towards charging meters? Another factor for consideration will be the overall impact on road users as these are not a homogenous group. As a result any impact from road pricing will not be uniformly spread. Obviously, provision will be made to exempt essential service vehicles (ambulances, fire engines, police etc.) from any pricing scheme. It is also unlikely buses and coaches will be charged as the Government's policy will be to encourage greater use of public transport. Informed opinion suggests the main targets will be private cars and commercial vehicles. Whether this will be based upon time of travel, distance travelled, size/weight of vehicle is unknown at this stage. The current three-year DOT research programme is attempting to assess how different road users may respond to the introduction of road pricing. This has resulted in a flurry of speculation. In the case of private car users they have a number of options on offer; car sharing, re-scheduling their travel times or seeking alternative modes. To an extent this suggests that car users may have a relatively elastic demand for road space in the sense if the charge is pitched at a high level they will not use their car and vice versa. The same range of options does not apply to the commercial vehicle sector, suggesting less elasticity for hauliers to road pricing compared to car users. In other words, because of the nature of the road distribution industry, lorries would continue to use road space, irrespective of price charged. Freight hauliers are subject to unique features limiting their availability of options. Firstly, lorries are subjected to stringent legislative controls in terms of their movements, route and height bans, and operate under a tachograph and 0-licence system. Over the years increasing numbers of hauliers have found their daily operating window reduced as licensing authorities have prohibited early morning or late deliveries. To comply with conditions imposed on an 0-licence hauliers may have no option other than to travel during peak periods. Modern road distribution is very sophisticated in terms of its use of computer technology, just-in-time GIT) delivery methods and electronic-point-of-sale (EPOS) technology. Cities and industry require daily deliveries of essentials and re-stocking on a massive scale. Drivers' wages constitute a considerable part of operating costs. In future careful consideration may have to be given to a trade-off between peak and non-peak time deliveries in avoidance of road charges and overtime rates. Often clients dictate to the freight haulier the point and time of delivery. Given the: length of the present recession the marketplace has become extremely competitive. In such a competitive market road freight distribution companies operate to tight deadlines, legal constraints, allocated delivery slots and penalising clauses. Commercial necessity and survivability may dictate the use of the road according to customer demands. For example, those road haulage companies who are doing contract work for the major supermarket chains usually have to make deliveries during early morning hours - the peak time of travel for many other road users. This again limits the hauliers range of options as to when to use the road. Haulier flexibility is also limited because of market segmentation into perishable and non-perishable products. Today, a high percentage of road freight such as newspapers, fresh and chilled foods, market garden and dairy produce has a short life span. Frequently, this results in hauliers' vehicles being on the road during peak periods. Finally, during the post-war period and the growth of the UK's road network many distribution companies located their regional and national distribution centres, depots and warehouses close to major road and motorway junctions, often in close proximity to conurbations. In strategic terms such locations were considered to be good assets. In time they may turn out to be liabilities if situated on the edge of a road pricing zone or if motorway toll charges are introduced. If in the wrong location freight hauliers may find themselves being priced every time their vehicle leaves or returns to the depot during periods. This is a factor many distribution companies did not build into their cost equation when building or locating their warehouses. Indeed, in the next decade the whole question of depot location may take on new meaning. Hub and spoke operators and those with large fleets active during peak hours and making extensive use of motorways could be faced with hefty financial costs. Those with short-distanced multi-drop operations within an urban area could also find road pricing an expensive business. Between now and its eventual introduction there is no doubt that much heated and speculative debate will take place over the introduction of any road charging system. Many questions will be raised: will road charging result in less congestion? Will trip times for commercial vehicles become quicker and more reliable? Will more thought have to be given to the present and future location of distribution centres? How have other countries coped with road charging? Where can more information be obtained about the technology of road charging? More thought provoking still is the question of how much revenue road charging will raise, and what the Government will do with it? In the corning months and years a flood of questions will be asked as the subject of road charging becomes more topical. A clue to recent Government thinking was given by John MacGregor speaking to an international audience in London, on 23 June 1993, when he said: 'It is interesting that the debate in the UK on the issues relating to motorway charging, which we started last year, has been increasingly taking place all over Europe since then. Last weekend the European Council established certain common rules which could apply to all charging systems in the Community.' The reader will find in this publication an invaluable and up to date reference source. It not only examines the possibilities and implications of road charging on British roads but enables comparisons to be made with other countries' experiences on policy and technologies. As to the future, one thing is now obvious for Britain's road users; the debate will not be on the question if road charging is introduced, but when, where, how and whom will it affect. (Author/publisher)
Abstract