Use of latent variables representing psychological motivation to explore citizens’ intentions with respect to congestion charging reform in Jakarta

References

• BPS. (2010). Statistical yearbook of Jakarta. Indonesia: Statistics Bureau of the Republic of Indonesia.
   Google Scholar
• Buehn, A., & Schneider, F. (2008, January). MIMIC Models, cointegration and error correction: An application to the French shadow economy ( IZA Discussion Paper, 3306).
   Google Scholar
• Castro, M., Paleti, R., & Bhat, C. R. (2012). A latent variable representation of count data models to accommodate spatial and temporal dependence: Application to predicting crash frequency at intersections. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46, 253–272.10.1016/j.trb.2011.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chain, A. (2005). Achieving majority public support for urban road pricing: Preserving the driver’s right to choose. Transportation Research Record, 1932, 119–128.
   Google Scholar
• Cools, M., Brijs, K., Tormans, H., Moons, E., Janssens, D., & Wets, G. (2011). The socio-cognitive links between road pricing acceptability and changes in travel-behavior. Transportation Research Part A, 45, 779–788.
   Google Scholar
• Cracknell, J. A. (2000). Experience in urban traffic management and demand management in developing countries. London: World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review, Department for International Development.
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson, J., & Mattsson, L. G. (2006). Equity effects of congestion pricing: Quantitative methodology and a case study for Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A, 40, 602–620.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., & Nordlund, A. M. (2006). Acceptability of travel demand management measures: The importance of problem awareness, personal norm, freedom, and fairness. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 15–26.10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., & Nordlund, A. M. (2008). Acceptability of single and combined transport policy measures: The importance of environmental and policy specific beliefs. Transportation Research Part A, 42, 1117–1128.
   Google Scholar
• Falzarano, S. (2009). Region wide congestion pricing study in Chicago: Stated preference survey purpose, approach and outcomes. The 88th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, January 11–15, 2009, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, S., & Saleh, W. (2005). Road-user charging and the modelling of revenue allocation. Transport Policy, 12, 431–442.10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francke, A., & Kaniok, D. (2013). Responses to differentiated road pricing schemes. Transportation Research Part A, 48, 25–30.
   Google Scholar
• Gaunt, M., Rye, T., & Allen, S. (2007). Public acceptability of road user charging: The case of Edinburgh and the 2005 referendum. Transport Reviews, 27, 85–102.10.1080/01441640600831299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gehlert, T., Nielsen, O. A., Rich, J., & Schlag, B. (2008). Public acceptability change of urban road pricing schemes. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Transport, 161, 111–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goh, M. (2002). Congestion management and electronic road pricing in Singapore. Journal of Transport Geography, 10, 29–38.10.1016/S0966-6923(01)00036-9
   Google Scholar
• Green, C. P., Heywood, J. S., & Navarro, M. (2014). Traffic accidents and the London congestion charge. Economics Working Paper Series. Lancaster: Lancaster University Management School.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, W. H., & Hensher, D. A. (2010). Modeling ordered choice: A primer. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511845062
   Google Scholar
• Hensher, D. A., Rose, J. M., & Greene, W. H. (2005). Applied choice analysis. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511610356
   Google Scholar
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.10.1080/10705519909540118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ison, S. (2000). Local authority and academic attitudes to urban road pricing: A UK perspective. Transport Policy, 7, 267–277.
   Google Scholar
• Jaensirisak, S., Wardman, M., & May, A. D. (2005). Explaining variation in public acceptability of road pricing scheme. Journal of Transport Economic and Policy, 39, 127–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsson, C., Fujii, S., & Garling, T. (2000). Determinants of private car user’s acceptability of road pricing. Transport Policy, 7, 133–158.
   Google Scholar
• Joreskog, G. K., & Goldberger, S. A. (1975). Estimating of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 631–639.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JUTPI. (2012). Jabodetabek urban transportation policy integration project. Jakarta: Ministry of Economic Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia & JICA.
   Google Scholar
• Kompas. (2015, March 2). Ahok akan terus desak dishub jalankan ERP tahun ini (in Indonesian). Retrieved from http://megapolitan.kompas.com/read/2015/02/17/1357098/Ahok.Akan.Terus.Desak.Dishub.Jalankan.ERP.Tahun.Ini
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J., Schmocker, J., Fujii, S., & Noland, B. R. (2013). Attitudes towards road pricing and environmental taxation among US and UK students. Transportation Research Part A, 48, 50–62.
   Google Scholar
• Langmyhr, T., & Sager, T. (1997). Implementing the improbable urban road pricing scheme. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 31, 139–158.10.1002/atr.v31:2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leape, J. (2006). The London congestion charge. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 157–176.10.1257/jep.20.4.157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Z., & Hensher, D. A. (2012). Congestion charging and car use: A review of stated preference and opinion studies and market monitoring evidence. Transport Policy, 20, 47–61.10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Link, H., & Stewart-Ladewig, L. (2005). Basic road pricing solutions. Research in Transportation Economics, 11, 9–26.10.1016/S0739-8859(05)80005-8
   Google Scholar
• Litman, T. (2002). Module 2b: Mobility management in sustainable transport: A sourcebook for policy makers in developing cities. Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ).
   Google Scholar
• Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Loukopulos, P., Jakobsson, C., Garling, T., & Fujii, S. (2006, August 16–21). Determinants of public acceptability and car use change goal: The Stockholm road pricing field trial. Proceeding of the 11th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research, Kyoto.
   Google Scholar
• Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A., & Swait, J. D. (2000). Stated choice methods analysis and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511753831
   Google Scholar
• Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511810176
   Google Scholar
• Odioso, M., & Smith, M. (2009). Perception of congestion charging: Lesson for U.S. cities from London and Stockholm. The 88th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, January 11–15, 2009, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Olszewsi, P., & Xie, L. (2006). Modeling the effects of road pricing on traffic in Singapore. Transportation Research Part A, 39, 755–772.
   Google Scholar
• Phang, S. Y., & Toh, R. S. (1997). From manual to electronic road congestion pricing: The Singapore experience and experiment. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 33, 97–106.10.1016/S1366-5545(97)00006-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prayudyanto, N. M., Tamin, Z. O., Driejang, R., & Umami, D. (2013). Will Jakarta road pricing reduce fuel consumption and emission? Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 9, September 9–12, 2013, Taipei, Taiwan.
   Google Scholar
• Rentziou, A., Milioti, C., Gkritza, K., & Karlaftis, G. M. (2011). Urban road pricing: Modeling public acceptance. Journal of Urban Planning & Development, 137, 56–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sato, H., Sugiarto, Miwa, & Morikawa, T. (2014). Comparison analysis on acceptability of road pricing policy between Jakarta and Nagoya. Journal of the City Planning Institute of Japan, 49, 441–446.
   Google Scholar
• Schade, J., & Schlag, B. (2003). Acceptability of urban transport pricing strategies. Transportation Research, Part E, 3, 45–61.
   Google Scholar
• Schaller, B. (2010). New York’s congestion pricing experience and implications for road pricing acceptance in the United States. Paper Presented at the 89th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Schuitema, G., Steg, L., & Forward, S. (2010). Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A, 44, 99–109.
   Google Scholar
• SITRAMP. (2004). The study on integrated transportation master plan for Jabodetabek. Jakarta: National Development Planning Agency of the Republic of Indonesia & JICA.
   Google Scholar
• Steg, L., & Schuitema, G. (2007). Threats from car traffic to the quality of urban life. In T. Garling & L. Steg (Eds.), Behavioral responses to transport pricing: A theoretical analysis (Ch. 19, pp. 347–366). Bingley: Emerald.
   Google Scholar
• Sugiarto, Miwa, T., Sato, H., & Morikawa, T. (2014a). Transportation expenditure frontier models in Jakarta metropolitan area. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 138, 148–158.10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.190
   Google Scholar
• Sugiarto, Miwa, T., Sato, H., & Morikawa, T. (2014b). Congestion charging: Influence of public consciousness on acceptability in Jakarta metropolitan area (scientific paper). Proceedings of 21st World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems, September 7–11, 2014, Detroit.
   Google Scholar
• Tempo. (2014, July 24). Jakarta starts ERP trial today. Retrieved from http://en.tempo.co/read/news/2014/07/15/057593135/Jakarta-Starts-ERP-Trial-Today
   Google Scholar
• TfL. (2004). Central London congestion charging. Impacts monitoring-second annual report. London: Transport for London.
   Google Scholar
• Thorpe, N., Hills, P., & Jaensirisak, S. (2000). Public attitudes to TDM measures: A comparative study. Transport Policy, 7, 243–257.10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00007-X
   Google Scholar
• VTPI. 2014. Road pricing: Congestion pricing, value pricing, toll roads and HOT lanes. TDM encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm35.htm
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, S. (2013). 10 years of London’s congestion charge – A success or disappointment? Retrieved March 2, 2015, from http://roadpricing.blogspot.jp/2013/02/10-years-of-londons-congestion-charge.html
   Google Scholar
• Winkelmann, R., & Boes, S. (2009). Analysis of microdata. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Yagi, S., & Mohammadian, A. (2009). An activity-based microsimulation model of travel demand in the Jakarta metropolitan area. Journal of Choice Modelling, 3, 32–57.
   Google Scholar
• Yagi, S., Nobel, D., & Mohammadian, A. (2013). Policy applications of an activity-based travel demand model to electronic road pricing in Jakarta. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 9, September 9–12, 2013, Taipei, Taiwan.
   Google Scholar