The use of transferable permits in transport policy
Introduction
Local and regional airborne pollutants produced by automobiles can be harmful to human health. The continuous rapid growth in vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) is tending to offset improvements in fuel quality and vehicle emission standards in most member states of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the rapidly growing use of older in developing countries is a major source of air pollution in urbanized areas of the developing world (Onursal and Gautam, 1997). In most industrialized countries the transport sector is one of the major greenhouse gases (GHG) emitters, particularly of CO2 (generating for instance 34% of CO2 in France in 1999 and 30% of CO2 in the US in 1997). Moreover, transport is the second highest growth sector in terms of GHG emissions in the OECD area, with its share of CO2 emissions increasing from about 25% in 1995 to 30% in 2020 (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2000a).
Numerous synthesis studies have already considered how transport activity could be made less harmful to the environment (European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 1997; Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2000b). An important finding of this type of work is that transport emission reduction strategies should involve multiple technological, economic and societal measures, including slowing down the growth of VKT. Among the wide range of policy instruments available for managing transport activity, transferable (or tradable) permits (TPs) are attracting interest. However, although several proposals for the application of TPs in specific fields of transport have been made, there has hardly been any implementation.
Section snippets
Why transferable permits in the transportation sector?
The economic theory behind pollution permit markets can be traced back to the work of Coase (1960) on external costs, followed by that of Dales (1968) on regulating water use, and the formalization of pollution permit markets by Montgomery (1972). According to a general definition given by Godard (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2001), transferable permits cover a variety of instruments that range from the introduction of flexibility into traditional regulation to the
Ecopoint program in Austria
Ecopoint is a program for limiting pollution and noise from truck traffic passing through Austria. It involves quotas, but these are of the `cap but no trade' type, since they are not transferable.
Through Austria pass the north–south route between Italy and Germany and one of the major links between countries of Eastern Europe and Western Europe. Austria's mountainous geography funnels north–south traffic into ecologically fragile Alpine valleys, notably the Brenner Valley. The morphology of
Conclusions
The Ecopoint system has shown that it is technically possible to apply a quota-based system of permits to mobile sources within a defined area, at an acceptable financial cost. It therefore goes some way towards quelling objections that administrative costs of permit systems for mobile sources will be too high. However the region of application must be one where points of entry and exit are few and readily controllable. A trade-off has to be made between the number of points to be controlled
Acknowledgments
This paper has benefited from comments made by those taking part in the OECD informal experts workshop on domestic tradable permits in September 2001 and subsequent anonymous reviewers. Valuable comments by Kenneth Button are also acknowledged.
References (35)
The diffusion of cleaner vehicles in CO2 emission trading designs
Transportation Research Part D
(2000)- et al.
Automobile ownership and government policy: the economics of Singapore's vehicle quota scheme
Transportation Research Part A
(1997) A pareto optimum congestion reduction scheme
Transportation Research B
(1995)- et al.
The vehicle quota system in Singapore: an assessment
Transportation Research Part A
(1994) Markets and licenses and efficient pollution control programs
Journal of Economic Theory
(1972)- et al.
Congestion pricing and road space rationing: an application to the San Francisco Bay Bridge corridor
Transportation Research Part A
(2002) Transaction costs and tradable permits
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
(1995)Cost savings of using a marketable permit system for regulating light duty vehicle emissions
Transport Policy
(1994)- et al.
The Theory of Environmental Policy
(1988) - Burke, A.F., Kurani, K.S., Kenney, E.J., 2000. Study of the secondary benefits of the ZEV Mandate. Report for the...
The problem of social cost
Journal of Law and Economics
Land, water and ownership
Canadian Journal of Economics
Designing more efficient markets: lessons from Los Angeles Smog Control
Journal of Law and Economics
Cited by (78)
Effects of second-best tradable credit scheme on transportation network for travel mobility management
2024, Transportmetrica A: Transport ScienceTrading activity and market liquidity in tradable mobility credit schemes
2023, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesCongestion reduction via personalized incentives
2023, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging TechnologiesDesign and classification of tradable mobility credit schemes
2023, Transport PolicyStrategies for applying carbon trading to the new energy vehicle market in China: An improved evolutionary game analysis for the bus industry
2022, EnergyCitation Excerpt :Some empirical studies have analyzed the impacts of carbon trading schemes on individuals in the last decade, and it is now considered an effective incentive to reduce carbon emissions in the household sector [12,52,53]. Due to the burden of emission reduction in transport sector and the high suitability of carbon trading system to this sector [54], scholars such as Harwatt [55], Raux [54,56,57], and Wadud [58] have preliminarily explored the scheme to introduce carbon credits and carbon trading on vehicle driving, discussing some practical issues like the implementation potential, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, and equity. The differences and feasibility of implementing this scheme in the upstream (fuel producers) [59,60], midstream (vehicle manufacturers) [61,62] or downstream (vehicle owners) [63–65] of transport sector is another topic of ongoing debate among scholars [66,67].