09/12/2010 1© 2010, VITO NV

Inge Mayeres (VITO)(Inge.Mayeres@vito.be)Marie Vandresse (Federal Planning Bureau) (vm@plan.be)

THE IMPACTS OF DIFFERENT THEORETICAL ROAD PRICING SCHEMES IN BELGIUM

09/12/2010 2© 2010, VITO NV

Outline

» PLANET model

» Long run transport projections for Belgium: reference scenario

» Passenger transport

» Freight transport

» Congestion and emissions

» Comparison between taxes and marginal external costs

» Evaluation of the impact of various theoretical pricing schemes

09/12/2010 3© 2010, VITO NV

The PLANET model

» Characteristics

» Long run (time horizon 2030)

» Simultaneous modelling of passenger and freight transport

» Cost-benefit analysis of transport policies

» Does not include a network model

» Federal Planning Bureau & SPF Mobilité et Transports, Perspectives à long terme de l’évolution des transports en Belgique: projection de référence, Planning Paper 107 (www.plan.be).

» Federal Planning Bureau & SPF Mobilité et Transports, Analyse de l’impact de différents schémas théoriques d’une taxe routière en Belgique, Working Paper 14-09 (www.plan.be).

» Extension of model in LIMOBEL project (financed by Belgian Science Policy)

09/12/2010 4© 2010, VITO NV

Reference scenario - passengers(I)

Purpose

2005(pkm, billion)

Evolutionbetween2005 and

2030

SchoolWorkOther

83483

+29%+18%+35%

Total 125 +30%

6%8%

52%

58%

32%

26%

6% 4%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005 2030

Moto

Bus, tram, metro

Covoiturage

Voiture en solo

Train

Marche à pied/vélo

09/12/2010 5© 2010, VITO NV

Reference scenario - freight (II)

72%67%

3%

3%

13%

14%

12%15%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005 2030

Rail

Navigation intérieure

Camionnette

Camion

2005(tkm, billion)

Evolutionbetween2005 and

2030

NationalExportImportTransit

31141410

+40%+73%+99%+52%

Total 70 +60%

09/12/2010 6© 2010, VITO NV

Reference scenario (III)

» Congestion:

reduction of average speed on road network:

» -31% between 2005 and 2030 in peak period

» -17% between 2005 and 2030 in off-peak period

Shift from peak to off-peak

» Emissions:

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

CO

Gaz à effet de serre

NOx

PM

COVNM

SO2

index 2005 =

100

09/12/2010 7© 2010, VITO NV

Reference scenario (IV)Taxes versus marginal external costs

Tax/external costs

2005 2020 2030

Peak CarTruckVan

25%18%8%

10%8%3%

7%6%2%

Off-peak CarTruckVan

133%72%42%

70%51%22%

50%37%15%

2005 2020 2030

Tax External cost

Tax External cost

Tax External cost

Rail PassengersFreight

€/pkm€/tkm

-4.6-0.3

0.030.12

-4.4-0.3

0.030.09

-4.4-0.3

0.020.1

Inland navigation €/tkm 0 0.4 0 0.3 0 0.3

09/12/2010 8© 2010, VITO NV

Internalisation scenario

Other modes Accompanying measures

Environmental tax freight rail and inland navigation

Abolishment subsidies public passenger transport

Abolishment-Eurovignette-Traffic tax-Registration tax-Employers’ contributionfor public transport-Revenue recycling

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2020 2020 2030 2030

Peak Off-peak Peak Off-peak

eu

roce

nt/

vkm

Truck

Van

Car

09/12/2010 9© 2010, VITO NV

Alternative scenarios

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Truck Van Car

eu

roce

nt/

vkm

Peak

Off-peak

Scenario HDV

Scenario HDV+LDV

Scenario HDV+LDV+CAR

For these 3 scenarios:

Abolishment for

concerned vehicles of

- Eurovignette

- Registration tax

-Traffic tax

+ Revenue recycling

+ For the

HDV+LDV+CAR

scenario:

Abolishment of

- Subsidies public

passenger transport

- Employers’ contribution

for public transport

09/12/2010 10© 2010, VITO NV

Impacts on passenger transport (2030, % change w.r.t. reference scenario)

INTERNALI-SATION

HDV HDV+LDV HDV+LDV+CAR

Passenger km -4% -5%

PeakOff-peak

-6%+2%

-7%+3%

On foot/bicycleRailCar soloCar poolBus/tram/metroMotor

+42%-11%-14%+21%-42%+5%

+42%-49%-4%

+10%-51%+3%

09/12/2010 11© 2010, VITO NV

Impacts on freight transport (2030, % change w.r.t. reference scenario)

Scenario INTERNALI-SATION

HDV HDV+LDV HDV+LDV+CAR

Ton km +3% 0% +2% +1%

Peak vkmOff-peak vkm

-8%-2%

-1%+2%

-9%+1%

-5%-1%

Ton km TruckVanInland navigationRail

+3%-6%+7%-1%

-2%+2%+4%+2%

+1%-2%+5%+3%

+1%-3%+2%+1%

09/12/2010 12© 2010, VITO NV

Impacts on congestion, environment, tax revenues (2030, % change w.r.t. reference scenario)

Scenario INTERNALI-SATION

HDV HDV+LDV HDV+LDV+CAR

Peak road speed Off-peak road speed

+48%+3%

0%0%

+3%0%

+19%0%

Marginal external congestion costsPeakOff-peak

-59%-7%

-2%+1%

-7%+1%

-32%-2%

Environmental damage -6% 0% 0% -2%

Transport tax revenuePassenger transportFreight transport

+239%+203%+423%

+6%0%

+39%

+30%0%

+182%

+117%+104%+184%

09/12/2010 13© 2010, VITO NV

Impact on social welfare (NPV, mio euro2000)

197759

4142

26404

89677

-100000

-50000

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

INT HDV HDV+LDV HDV+LDV+CAR

Reduction labour taxes

Tax revenue freight transport

Tax revenue passenger transport

Environment

Producers

Consumers

Total welfare impact

09/12/2010 14© 2010, VITO NV

Conclusions (I)

» Internalisation of external costs leads to important welfare gains

» Positive effects:

» Reduction of congestion

» Environmental benefit (but relatively small)

» Additionnal tax revenues

» Negative effects:

» Welfare reduction for transport users

» Operational costs

» Full internalisation difficult to implement

09/12/2010 15© 2010, VITO NV

Conclusions (II)

» Scenario HDV

» Small impact on congestion, small but negative impact on environmental quality (shift to vans)

» Welfare impact is small and sign depends on use of revenues

» Scenario HDV+LDV

» Positive welfare impact, size depends on use of revenues

» Scenario HDV+LDV+CAR

» 45% of welfare gain of full internalisation

» Scenario includes lower exploitation subsidies for public passenger transport in order to avoid capacity problems

» Use of revenues is important