Urban Transport Strategy. Management in Developing Countries John A Cracknell, страница 10

Regulatory control on use of vehicles - a number of developing cities have sought to alleviate congestion by restrictions on vehicle use on various days defined by vehicle number plates, at its simplest by prohibiting vehicle use on alternate days defined by "odd-even" number plates but other variants have been used (2 days per week, peak hours only, selected roads only etc.  Such measures exist or have existed in the past, in Lagos, Mexico City, Bogota, Santiago de Chile, Seoul, Manila and Sao Paulo.  The measures cannot be regarded as a long term solution as they are likely to encourage second vehicle ownership, generate increased trips by permitted vehicles and are undermined by concessions and growth in vehicle ownership over time.  However, the basic measures are relatively simple to implement, generally well observed and there are short term de-congestion benefits.  Provided the period when schemes are effective can be used to develop more comprehensive and sustainable measures, the measures may be worthwhile, particularly when they are aimed at emergencies such as air pollution alleviation (Mexico City, Santiago etc).

Physical control on vehicle use - measures such as pedestrian areas, environmental cells and road space reallocation to buses have been considered as demand management policies.  As traffic management measures, bus priority and pedestrian schemes have great merit in increasing urban transport efficiency, promoting public transport and improving the urban environment but as "incentives", do not impose direct restraint on car use and are unlikely to affect car demand greatly.  Bus priority and pedestrian measures should be pursued as traffic management measures in their own right; their role in demand management is likely to be complementary to other measures.)

Pricing - charges on vehicle use and ownership - measures such as general fuel prices or urban fuel price surcharges (to limit use) and vehicle registration and other ownership taxes (to limit car numbers) are often proposed.

Fuel prices - fuel consumption is proportional to distance travelled and thus, to some extent, the price paid for fuel reflects vehicle use and price increases could affect demand.  However, (i) there are probably practical limits to which fuel prices can be raised and (ii) fuel consumption is only marginally related to use of vehicles at congested times and in congested locations whereas prices affect all users - urban and non-urban alike.  Thus, fuel price is a "blunt instrument" and does not address urban congestion directly.  Fuel taxes are (i) important sources of revenue for public investment, including transport, and specific urban fuel surcharges may raise significant revenues for transport improvements (as used in Colombia) and (ii) have some re-distributive effect as car users tend to be most affluent.  However, fuel price is not an efficient or targeted instrument to alleviate urban traffic congestion which is often located in specific areas and at specific times.

Ownership taxes - some countries have applied taxes to vehicle registrations designed to affect ownership or finance public transport, e.g. differential taxes by engine size on vehicles in UK to encourage fuel efficient vehicle or metro bonds coupled to car purchase in Korea.  However, Singapore is probably the only country which applies registration or licence charges high enough to control growth in the vehicle fleet (the “Vehicle Quota System” in which bids are made for a pre-determined number of registration licenses).  It seems unlikely that the locational and institutional circumstances which allow Singapore to operate the system could be replicated in most other countries and the practical levels of ownership taxes are not likely to be solution to urban traffic congestion particularly, as with general fuel prices, vehicle ownership taxes are indiscriminate instruments in dealing with urban congestion