USING PUBLIC POLICY TOOLS
TO SHAPE TRAVEL PATTERNS
AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
IN EUROPE
Prof. John Pucher
Rutgers University
pucher@rci.rutgers.edu
http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher.htm
“Finance: The Critical Link”
UCLA Arrowhead Conference
October 19-21, 2003
Passenger cars and light trucks per 1000 inhabitants
United States
748
Canada
630
Italy
563
Germany
521
Denmark
521
Austria
Source: EU Energy and Transport in Figures,
accessible online at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/etif/lis
ts/transport.html#Passenger%20Transport; and
Federal Highway Administration, Highway
Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: US Department
of Transportation, 2003).
506
France
463
Belgium
458
Sweden
451
United Kingdom
419
Finland
413
Netherlands
411
0
200
400
600
Vehicles per 1000 inhabitants
800
Percentage of Urban Trips by Walking, Cycling, and Public Transport
in the USA, Canada and Europe, 1995
60
55
Walk
50
45
40
30
Bicycle
25
20
15
10
Public Transport
Denmark
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
Sweden
Germany
Italy
France
Canada
0
England & Wales
5
USA
Percent
35
Source: Transportation Research
Board, Making Transit Work: Insights
from Western Europe, Canada, and
the United States (Washington, DC:
National Research Council, 2001),
Table 2-2.
Passenger km of car use per capita in the USA,
Canada, and Western Europe in 2000
United States
23102
Canada
18482
12469
Denmark
France
11553
Italy
11532
Finland
10763
Sweden
10487
United Kingdom
10469
Belgium
10363
Netherlands
Source: EU Energy and Transport in Figures,
online at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/etif/l
ists/transport.html#Passenger%20Transport;
and Federal Highway Administration, Highway
Statistics 2002 (Washington, DC: US
Department of Transportation, 2003).
9522
Germany
8805
Austria
8647
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
Passenger km per person per year
25000
Public Policies Affecting Travel Behavior in Europe
•High sales taxes and fees on new car purchases
•Restricted parking supply, limited parking duration, and high parking prices
•High cost and difficulty of getting driver’s license
•Limitations on all sorts on auto use (lower speeds, traffic calming, auto-free
zones, no through traffic, turn restrictions, residents-only streets, etc.)
•Very high gasoline taxes and prices
•Congestion pricing experiment (in central London)
•Large subsidies to public transport for decades, resulting in high-quality, stateof-the-art systems with attractive fares for regular users
•Traffic priority for public transit over private car
•Superb facilities for walking and cycling
•Commutation subsidies for all travel modes, including walking and cycling,
based on distance from home to work (Germany)
Taxes and Fees on New Car Purchases
in Europe and USA, 2002
(on standard subcompact car)
Denmark
164%
Finland
89%
Netherlands
50%
Austria
28%
Sweden
26%
Belgium
22%
France
20%
Italy
20%
United Kingdom
17%
Germany
16%
United States
Source: EU Energy and Transport in Figures,
accessible online at:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/etif/trans
port_means_road/motorization.html
6%
0%
50%
100%
150%
200%
Public Policies Affecting Travel Behavior in Europe
•Very high sales taxes and fees on new car purchases
•Restricted parking supply, limited parking duration, and high
parking prices
•High cost and difficulty of getting driver’s license
•Limitations on all sorts on auto use (lower speeds, traffic calming, auto-free
zones, no through traffic, turn restrictions, residents-only streets, etc.)
•Very high gasoline taxes and prices
•Congestion pricing experiment (in central London)
•Large subsidies to public transport for decades, resulting in high-quality, stateof-the-art systems with attractive fares for regular users
•Traffic priority for public transit over private car
•Superb facilities for walking and cycling
•Commutation subsidies for all travel modes, including walking and cycling,
based on distance from home to work (Germany)
Hourly Parking Fees in Selected European Cities, 2003
Average
Range
Muenster
1,00 €
0,50 to 2,50
€
Dresden
1,00 €
0,50 to 1,80
€
Ulm
1,20 €
0,50 to 1,50
€
Koeln
1,50 €
1,00 to 2,00
€
Freiburg
1,50 €
0,80 to 1,80
€
Hamburg
2,00 €
1,60 to 4,50
€
Zuerich
2,00 €
1,60 to 2,25
€
Munich
3,00 €
2,00 to 6,00
€
Wien
3,20 €
2,20 to 3,50
€
Source: http://www.parkinfo.com/
Public Policies Affecting Travel Behavior in Europe
•Very high sales taxes and fees on new car purchases
•Restricted parking supply, limited parking duration, and high parking prices
•High cost and difficulty of getting driver’s license
•Limitations on all sorts on auto use (lower speeds, traffic calming,
auto-free zones, no through traffic, turn restrictions, residents-only
streets, etc.)
•Very high gasoline taxes and prices
•Congestion pricing experiment (in central London)
•Large subsidies to public transport for decades, resulting in high-quality, stateof-the-art systems with attractive fares for regular users
•Traffic priority for public transit over private car
•Superb facilities for walking and cycling
•Commutation subsidies for all travel modes, including walking and cycling,
based on distance from home to work (Germany)
Gasoline Prices in US Dollars/liter (2002)
Norway
$1.12
$1.10
United Kingdom
$1.08
Netherlands
Denmark
$1.04
Finland
$1.01
Germany
Sweden
$0.96
France
$0.96
Belgium
$0.92
Switzerland
$0.83
Austria
$0.82
Italy
$0.81
$0.50
Canada
$0.41
United States
$0.00
Source: Energy Prices and Taxes,
2nd Quarter 2003 (Paris:
International Energy Agency,
OECD, 2003), pp. 316-317.
$0.99
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
US Dollars
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
Percentage of Taxes in Gasoline Prices (2002)
United Kingdom
77.5%
France
73.7%
Germany
73.4%
Netherlands
70.9%
Norway
70.0%
Finland
70.0%
Denmark
69.7%
Sweden
69.6%
Belgium
69.2%
Source: Energy Prices and Taxes,
2nd Quarter 2003 (Paris:
International Energy Agency,
OECD, 2003), pp. 291-292.
68.4%
Italy
Switzerland
64.3%
Austria
64.1%
39.6%
Canada
24.8%
United States
0%
20%
40%
60%
Percentage
80%
100%
Public Policies Affecting Travel Behavior in Europe
•Very high sales taxes and fees on new car purchases
•Restricted parking supply, limited parking duration, and high parking prices
•High cost and difficulty of getting driver’s license
•Limitations on all sorts on auto use (lower speeds, traffic calming, auto-free
zones, no through traffic, turn restrictions, residents-only streets, etc.)
•Very high gasoline taxes and prices
•Congestion pricing experiment (in central London)
•Large subsidies to public transport for decades, resulting in high-quality, stateof-the-art systems with attractive fares for regular users
•Traffic priority for public transit over private car
•Superb facilities for walking and cycling
•Commutation subsidies for all travel modes, including walking and cycling,
based on distance from home to work (Germany)
Congestion Pricing in Central London since February 2003
•Purpose: to counter severe congestion in central London (8 mph
average speed)
•Charge of £5 ($8) for vehicles in inner zone from 7 am to 6:30 pm, paid
by about 100,000 vehicles per day
•Payable until 10 pm on day of travel by internet, phone, retail outlets,
mobile phones, etc.— penalties for late payments
•Surveillance by digital cameras to photograph license plates
•Congestion pricing raised avg. speed by 31% overall but by 40% for
buses, eliminated 150,000 car trips per day in inner zone, no significant
congestion from diverted traffic outside the zone
•50%-70% of ex-car users rode transit instead
•Raises revenues of £130 million per year to be invested in improved
and expanded public transit (already 300 new buses added)
•Equity impact: 90% of car drivers into central London come from
richest households
Area of Congestion Pricing in Central London
Public Policies Affecting Travel Behavior in Europe
•Very high sales taxes and fees on new car purchases
•Restricted parking supply, limited parking duration, and high parking prices
•High cost and difficulty of getting driver’s license
•Limitations on all sorts on auto use (lower speeds, traffic calming, auto-free
zones, no through traffic, turn restrictions, residents-only streets, etc.)
•Very high gasoline taxes and prices
•Congestion pricing experiment (in central London)
•Large subsidies to public transport for decades, resulting in highquality, state-of-the-art systems with attractive fares for regular
users
•Traffic priority for public transit over private car
•Superb facilities for walking and cycling
•Commutation subsidies for all travel modes, including walking and
cycling, based on distance from home to work (Germany)
European and Canadian Cities are Much More
Compact than American Cities
•Comparing only large cities, Kenworthy (2002) found
that in 1995, European cities were about twice as dense
as Canadian cities and almost four times denser than
American cities (55 vs 26 vs 15 persons per hectare).
•European and Canadian cities are also less polycentric
than American cities, with central cores that have
remained vibrant and far more dominant over their
metropolitan regions than American cities.
German Regulations and Planning Policies Affecting Land
Development Patterns
•Exclusion of vast amounts of agricultural land, forests, parkland,
and other open space around metropolitan areas for any
commercial development
--Restricts supply of land and raises land price
--Forces compact development to save on land costs
•Integrated federal, state, regional, and local land-use plans which
are detailed, enforced, and highly restrictive of new commercial
and residential development
•Coordination of land-use plans with environmental and transport
plans at each government level, especially at regional level
•Limited land-use competition among localities, since land-use
plans are coordinated among communities within a region, and
tax base is shared
Public Finance Policies Affecting Land Development
Patterns in Germany
•Fees assessed by all local governments on private developers to
finance public infrastructure costs of sewers, sidewalks, lighting,
utility lines, streets in new suburban developments
•Both vertical and horizontal sharing of all three tax bases (income,
sales, and property taxes) among governments—much less fiscal
competition among local governments than in USA
•Tax revenues distributed by federal and state governments to regions
and cities to favor dense urban centers that provide a wide range of
public services to their surrounding regions
•Most school construction costs and all teacher salaries are paid by
the state government, not local communities—school financing thus
independent of local fiscal capacity, but best schools are generally in
the city center, not in the suburbs, as in USA
•Homeowner subsidies are only for low and moderate-income
households, only once per lifetime
Policy Implications of European Experience for the USA
•Strong government controls, high taxes, large subsidies, land
scarcity, and coordinated land-use and transport planning in
Europe have been largely responsible for the much more compact
development and lower levels of car ownership and use compared
to USA.
•Only in crisis situations have Americans been willing to accept
such extreme government intervention in land use and
transportation, with much more reliance on market outcomes,
private preferences, and short-term rather than long-term
considerations.
•Main approach to solving our transport problems has been
technological rather than behavioral, as in Europe, and has focused
on supply-side strategies rather than demand-side restrictions.
•American states that have been most innovative in land use and
transport planning have been prompted by severe problems
(pollution, congestion, lack of space) and/or by very strong
environmental movements.
For any questions or further information, please feel free to
contact:
Prof. John Pucher
Rutgers University
Email:pucher@rci.rutgers.edu
http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher.htm
For free PDF and Word downloads of publications, see either
of the two Rutgers University websites:
http://policy.rutgers.edu/tpi/articles.html
or
http://policy.rutgers.edu/papers