09/12/2010 1© 2010, VITO NV
Inge Mayeres (VITO)([email protected])Marie Vandresse (Federal Planning Bureau) ([email protected])
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