LinksGlossaryMessagesSitemapHelp


Home

Policy Instruments

Select
Search
Filter
 Fuel taxes
SummaryFirst principles assesmentEvidence on performancePolicy contributionComplementary instrumentsReferences
Policy contribution

Contribution to objectives and alleviation of problems

Objective

Tromso*

California

Efficiency

2

2

Liveable streets

-

1

Protection of the environment

-1

2

Equity and social inclusion

1

-1

Safety

-1

1

Economic growth

2

2

Finance

-

2
1= Weakest possible positive contribution,5= strongest possible positive contribution
-1= Weakest possible negative contribution-5= strongest possible negative contribution
0= No contribution

*The assessment here does not separate the contribution of the tax from that of the infrastructure funded by the tax.

Contribution to alleviation of key problems

Problem

Tromso*

California

Congestion-related delay

-

2

Congestion-related unreliability

-

2

Community severance

2**

2

Visual intrusion

-1

1

Lack of amenity

-

-

Global warming

-1

2

Local air pollution

-1

2

Noise

-1

1

Reduction of green space

-1

-

Damage to environmentally sensitive sites

-1

1

Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility impairments

-

-

Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic groups

1

-1

Number, severity and risk of accidents

x

1

Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area

2

1
1= Weakest possible positive contribution,5= strongest possible positive contribution
-1= Weakest possible negative contribution-5= strongest possible negative contribution
0= No contribution

*The assessment here does not separate the contribution of the tax from that of the infrastructure funded by the tax.

**Whilst car use may have increased, the severance caused by fijords has been significantly reduced.  Appropriate contexts

Appropriate area types is not relevant here, although it is worth noting that those in areas with few alternatives to the car, and/or long journey distances due to low density development may suffer a greater tax burdeon than others.

Adverse side-effects

There is potential for a number of adverse side effects from the application of fuel taxes. Those who depend on a car for accessibility, be it due to the nature of their work (e.g. shift work), residential location (e.g. some rural areas), or mobility impairment may be unfairly penalised if adequate alternatives are not available and rebates/exemptions are not offered. The effects will be most severe for those on low incomes. Existing public transport users will also be penalised if rebates/exemptions are not offered to the operators and price increases are passed on to the customer. Alternatively, if savings are made through cut backs, public transport users will suffer in other ways.

There is also the possibility of wider adverse economic effects if freight and commercial traffic is significantly penalised and no alternatives are available. Whilst costs can be passed on to customers this is likely to have an inflationary effect and reduce spending across the economy. Although, if reductions in congestion are sufficient to make valuable time savings, these negative effects on the economy could be negated.

Top of the page

Text edited at the Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT