How exposure to policy tools transforms the mechanisms behind public acceptability and acceptance—The case of the Gothenburg congestion tax

ABSTRACT

An increasing body of literature suggests that acceptance of environmental policy instruments tends to change along with increased experience of the same. Among the more popular examples of this is the growing number of congestion pricing initiatives emerging around the world. In several cases, the acceptability of these projects among the public has been relatively low before implementation, but then acceptance has increased as experience of the project has grown. The question is just how, and in particular, why? That is, what is it really that experience does to people's propensity to accept initially quite unpopular measures? In this article, we analyze how the relationship between political trust, policy-specific beliefs (PSBs), and public support for policy tools is moderated or affected by people's personal experiences of those policy tools. On the basis of the experience of previous research, we test the way in which PSBs, institutional trust, and the legitimacy of the political decision-making process affect public attitudes toward a policy tool. In addition—and consistent with other studies—we expect these effects to be significantly reduced post-implementation, as people gain first-hand experience of a policy tool. More specifically, we theorize that the often emphasized process legitimacy is only valid as a factor driving support before implementation, and that the effect of general institutional trust is replaced by the level of trust specific to the implementing institutions after the introduction of the policy tool. We tested these hypotheses using a natural experiment; that is, by studying public attitudes toward the introduction of congestion fees in the Swedish city of Gothenburg both before and after their introduction. By doing so, we were able to comprehensively analyze both the drivers behind public sentiments toward congestion charges and how these mechanisms transform as people are exposed to the costs and benefits of the policy tool in practice. Among other things, we found that with regard to fairness and environmental effectiveness, there is a clear symmetry in our results. The level of acceptance increased most noticeably among those who experienced that the environment was improved by the implemented tax, or that the system turned out to be fairer than expected. However, the opposite is also the case. Thus, among those experiencing that the environment was not improved, or that the system appeared to be less fair than expected, the level of acceptance decreased significantly after implementation. These results may have important policy implications.

KEYWORDS:

• Acceptability
• acceptance
• congestion charge
• congestion pricing
• congestion tax
• policy-specific beliefs
• public opinion
• trust

Funding

This research was made possible by two grants, 421-2011-1844 and 421-2010-1984, from the Swedish Research Council.

Notes

¹ Every passage in or out of the central parts of Gothenburg costs SEK 9, 16, or 22, depending on the time and date. The maximum total amount per day/vehicle is SEK 60.

² A few vehicles are exempt from the congestion tax: emergency vehicles, vehicles adapted for use by disabled persons, buses with weight exceeding 14 tons, cars with diplomatic plates, motorcycles, military vehicles, tractors, cranes, and other heavy construction vehicles. Since January 2015, taxes have also been levied on foreign-registered vehicles.

³ The first wave of data collection took place in June 2012, and the second wave in December 2012, that is, five months after the first wave and approximately three weeks before the implementation of the congestion tax. The third wave of data collection took place five months after the implementation of the congestion tax, in May 2013, so as to measure the differences in public attitudes before and after implementation. Data collection encompassing fewer observations and questions, along with a significant drop in response rate, continued in waves in November 2013, June 2014, and September 2014, just before the referendum on the tax. The last wave was carried out in October 2014, just after the referendum.

⁴ Exact phrasing: “How acceptable is the Gothenburg CPM to you?”.

⁵ Cronbach's alpha (a), or internal consistency reliability, measures the correlations between the items making up each index, and thus whether the items included measure the same general construct. The coefficient varies between 0 and 1 and increases as the correlation between items increases. A scale reliability score above 0.6 is commonly agreed to indicate acceptable reliability.

⁶ Exact phrasing: “How democratic was the decision-making process?”; “How open was the decision-making process?”; “How unfair/fair was the decision-making process?”.

⁷ Alternatively, one could have used ordered logit or probit, but the qualitative results are the same in OLS and easier to display, particularly as we are dealing with the effects of experience-driven change in both the dependent and independent variables. Ordered logit or probit results are available on request. Collinearity, heteroskedacity, and normality of the residuals are tested for in all regressions and the specifications presented are non-problematic with regard to this issue.

⁸ It should be noted that the more positive one is about the possibilities of getting by on one's disposable household income and the more negative one is about the congestion tax. This might seem counter-intuitive, but it is possible that the frequency of car ownership and intercity employment increases with income, thus making this group more affected by a congestion tax.

⁹ This is not to say that there is a strong majority voting for the CPM. It is quite the contrary. On September 14, 2014, a local referendum was held in the region and the result was unequivocal: 57% voted against the continuation of the congestion tax. Thus, at present, the destiny of the CPM remains to be seen. However, the referendum was only consultative and, with funding from the CPM, the city has committed itself to contributing financially to the large infrastructural development currently taking place in the region. Without the revenues from the CPM, the local authorities might have to increase the municipality tax—a decision that would hardly be significantly more appreciated by the general public.