Duration-based or time-based congestion toll pricing?

Authors

  • Amir Reza Mamdoohi Associate Professor, Department of Transportation Planning, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5339-9807
  • Elnaz Irannezhad Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation (rCITI), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales, UNSW Sydney, Australia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6298-6042
  • Hamid Rezaei Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3725, Miami, FL, 33174, USA
  • Hamid Mirzahossein Associate Professor, Ph.D. Department of Civil - Transportation Planning and Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1615-9553
  • Xia Jin Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Florida International University, 10555 W. Flagler Street, EC 3725, Miami, FL, 33174, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8660-3528

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6093/1970-9870/9739

Keywords:

Congestion pricing, Odd-even scheme, Travel behavior, Mode choice, Generalized mixed logit model, Error component logit model

Abstract

Pricing and traffic rationing have become popular and economically viable ways to reduce traffic congestion in major cities' central business districts (CBDs). Time-based and duration-based pricing rules affect travel behavior in Tehran, Iran's capital. To figure out the consequences, 1388 congestion pricing zone and 983 odd-even traffic rationing zone travelers were surveyed in 2018–2019. The stated preference survey and error component logit model modeled trip variations in modal shift, route choice, and time of travel in a day. A generalized mixed logit model examined mode choice behavior using revealed and stated preferences. The error component logit model suggests that the duration-based scenario will lead to a modal shift, trip alteration, and trip cancellation, whereas the time-based scenario will change the time or destination. A generalized mixed logit model and revealed and stated preference data imply that duration-based pricing is more successful than time-based pricing in shifting private vehicle trips to other modes. Also, results show public transit is the most common demand deviation, and the time-based scenario is more successful than the duration-based scenario. The mode shift to Snap is lower than other transport modes in both scenarios, suggesting that on-demand ride-hailing is a less vital competitor in zones.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aboudina, A., Abdelgawad, H., Abdulhai, B. & Habib, K. N. (2016). Time-dependent congestion pricing system for large networks: Integrating departure time choice, dynamic traffic assignment and regional travel surveys in the Greater Toronto Area. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94, 411-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.005

Abulibdeh, A. & Zaidan, E. (2018). Analysis of factors affecting willingness to pay for high-occupancy-toll lanes: Results from stated-preference survey of travelers. Journal of Transport Geography, 66, 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jtrangeo.2017.11.015

Abulibdeh, A. (2022). Planning for congestion pricing policies in the middle east: public acceptability and revenue distribution. Transportation Letters, 14 (3), 282-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2020.1857908

Arunotayanun, K. & Polak, J. W. (2011). Taste heterogeneity and market segmentation in freight shippers’ mode choice behaviour. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 47 (2), 138-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.tre.2010.09.003

Baghestani, A., Tayarani, M., Mamdoohi, A. R., Habibian, M. & Gao, O. (2023). Travel Demand Management Implications during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case Study of Tehran. Sustainability, 15 (2), 1209. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su15021209

Bagloee, S. A. & Sarvi, M. (2017). A modern congestion pricing policy for urban traffic: subsidy plus toll. Journal of Modern Transportation, 25, 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40534-017-0128-8

Bakhtiari, A., Moshtaghzadeh, M. & Mardanpour, P. (2023). Optimized Kresling origami-inspired structures using Artificial Neural Network and Monte Carlo Method. In AIAA SCITECH 2023 Forum (p. 1767). https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2023-1767.

Bakhshi Lomer, A. R., Rezaeian, M., Rezaei, H., Lorestani, A., Mijani, N., Mahdad, M., ... & Arsanjani, J. J. (2023). Optimizing emergency shelter selection in earthquakes using a risk-driven large group decision-making support system. Sustainability, 15 (5), 4019. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054019

Basso, L. J. & Jara-Díaz, S. R. (2012). Integrating congestion pricing, transit subsidies and mode choice. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46 (6), 890-900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.02.013

Ben-Akiva, M., Morikawa, T. & Shiroishi, F. (1992). Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data. Journal of business research, 24 (2), 149-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(92)90058-J

Bhat, C. R. (2000). Incorporating observed and unobserved heterogeneity in urban work travel mode choice modeling. Transportation science, 34 (2), 228-238. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.34.2.228.12306

Börjesson, M. (2008). Joint RP–SP data in a mixed logit analysis of trip timing decisions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 44 (6), 1025-1038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2007.11.001

Börjesson, M., Eliasson, J. & Hamilton, C. (2016). Why experience changes attitudes to congestion pricing: The case of Gothenburg. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 85, 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.12.002

Brown, V., Moodie, M. & Carter, R. (2015). Congestion pricing and active transport–evidence from five opportunities for natural experiment. Journal of Transport & Health, 2 (4), 568-579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.002

Brownstone, D., Bunch, D. S. & Train, K. (2000). Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 34 (5), 315-338.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(99)00031-4

Brownstone, D., Ghosh, A., Golob, T. F., Kazimi, C. & Van Amelsfort, D. (2003). Drivers’ willingness-to-pay to reduce travel time: evidence from the San Diego I-15 congestion pricing project. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 37 (4), 373-387.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(02)00021-6

Chen, W. Y., Hua, J., Liekens, I. & Broekx, S. (2018). Preference heterogeneity and scale heterogeneity in urban river restoration: A comparative study between Brussels and Guangzhou using discrete choice experiments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 173, 9-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.01.010

Chiou, Y. C. & Fu, C. (2017). Responses of drivers and motorcyclists to congestion charge. Transportation research procedia, 25, 2957-2969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.197

De Jong, G., Daly, A., Pieters, M., Vellay, C., Bradley, M. & Hofman, F. (2003). A model for time of day and mode choice using error components logit. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 39 (3), 245-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(02)00037-6

Dissanayake, D. & Morikawa, T. (2001). A Combined RP/SP Nested Logit Model to Investigate Household Decisions on Vehicle Usage, Mode Choice and Trip-Chaining in Developing Countries. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 4 (2), 235-244.https://doi.org/10.1061/40630(255)83

Dueker, K., Rao, R. L., Cotugno, A., Lawton, K. & Walker, R. (1985). The Impact of EMME-2 on Urban Transportation Planning: A Portland Case Study.

Ecola, L. & Light, T. (2009). Equity and congestion pricing. Rand Corporation, 1-45.

Eliasson, J. (2014). The role of attitude structures, direct experience and reframing for the success of congestion pricing. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67, 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.06.007

Fakhrmoosavi, F., Zockaie, A. & Abdelghany, K. (2021). Incorporating travel time reliability in equitable congestion pricing schemes for heterogeneous users and bimodal networks. Transportation Research Record, 2675 (11), 754-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981211019737

Feldman, P., Li, J. & Tsai, H. T. (2022). Welfare implications of congestion pricing: Evidence from SF park. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 24 (2), 1091-1109. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2021.0995

Fiebig, D. G., Keane, M. P., Louviere, J. & Wasi, N. (2010). The generalized multinomial logit model: accounting for scale and coefficient heterogeneity. Marketing science, 29(3), 393-421.https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1090.0508

Fifer, S., Rose, J. & Greaves, S. (2014). Hypothetical bias in Stated Choice Experiments: Is it a problem? And if so, how do we deal with it? Transportation research part A: policy and practice, 61, 164-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2013.12.010

Ge, Y. E., Stewart, K., Sun, B., Ban, X. G. & Zhang, S. (2016). Investigating undesired spatial and temporal boundary effects of congestion charging. Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics, 4 (2), 135-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/21680566. 2014.961044

Ghosh, A. (2001). Valuing time and reliability: commuters' mode choice from a real time congestion pricing experiment. University of California, Irvine.

Greene, W. H. & Hensher, D. A. (2010). Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models. Transportation, 37, 413-428.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9259-z

Grisolía, J. M., López, F. & de Dios Ortúzar, J. (2015). Increasing the acceptability of a congestion charging scheme. Transport Policy, 39, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.01.003

Gu, Z., Liu, Z., Cheng, Q. & Saberi, M. (2018). Congestion pricing practices and public acceptance: A review of evidence. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 6 (1), 94-101.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2018.01.004

Guo, J., Feng, T. & Timmermans, H. J. (2020). Modeling co-dependent choice of workplace, residence and commuting mode using an error component mixed logit model. Transportation, 47 (2), 911-933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9927-y

Hasnine, M. S., Aboudina, A., Abdulhai, B. & Habib, K. N. (2020). Mode shift impacts of optimal time-dependent congestion pricing in large networks: A simulation-based case study in the greater toronto area. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 8 (2), 542-552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2019.11.007

Hensher, D. A. (2012). Accounting for scale heterogeneity within and between pooled data sources. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46 (3), 480-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2011.11.007

Hensher, D. A. (2010). Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay. Transportation Research Part B: methodological, 44 (6), 735-752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2009.12.012

Hensher, D. A. & Greene, W. H. (2011). Valuation of travel time savings in WTP and preference space in the presence of taste and scale heterogeneity. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP), 45 (3), 505-525.

Hensher, D. A., Rose, J. M. & Greene, W. H. (2008). Combining RP and SP data: biases in using the nested logit ‘trick’–contrasts with flexible mixed logit incorporating panel and scale effects. Journal of Transport Geography, 16 (2), 126-133.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2007.07.001

Hensher, D. A., Rose, J. M. & Greene, W. H. (2015). Attribute processing, heuristics and preference construction.

Hensher, D., Louviere, J. & Swait, J. (1998). Combining sources of preference data. Journal of Econometrics, 89 (1-2), 197-221.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00061-X

Hess, S., Ben-Akiva, M., Gopinath, D. & Walker, J. L. (2009, January). Taste heterogeneity, correlation and elasticities in latent class choice models. In Transportation Research Board 88th Annual Meeting (pp. 1-24).

Hess, S. & Train, K. (2017). Correlation and scale in mixed logit models. Journal of choice modelling, 23, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2017.03.001

Hossain, I., Saqib, N. U. & Haq, M. M. (2018). Scale heterogeneity in discrete choice experiment: An application of generalized mixed logit model in air travel choice. Economics Letters, 172, 85-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet. 2018.08.037

Janusch, N., Kroll, S., Goemans, C., Cherry, T. L. & Kallbekken, S. (2021). Learning to accept welfare-enhancing policies: an experimental investigation of congestion pricing. Experimental Economics, 24, 59-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-020-09650-2

Jouzdani, J., Sadjadi, S. J. & Fathian, M. (2013). Dynamic dairy facility location and supply chain planning under traffic congestion and demand uncertainty: A case study of Tehran. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37 (18-19), 8467-8483.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.03.059

Karlström, A. & Franklin, J. P. (2009). Behavioral adjustments and equity effects of congestion pricing: Analysis of morning commutes during the Stockholm Trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 43 (3), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2008.09.008

Kazemi Garajeh, M., Laneve, G., Rezaei, H., Sadeghnejad, M., Mohamadzadeh, N. & Salmani, B. (2023). Monitoring Trends of CO, NO2, SO2, and O3 Pollutants Using Time-Series Sentinel-5 Images Based on Google Earth Engine. Pollutants, 3 (2), 255-279. https://doi.org/10.3390/pollutants3020019

Krabbenborg, L., Molin, E., Annema, J. A. & van Wee, B. (2021). Exploring the feasibility of tradable credits for congestion management. Transportation planning and technology, 44 (3), 246-261. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2021.1883226

Kragt, M. E. (2013). The effects of changing cost vectors on choices and scale heterogeneity. Environmental and Resource Economics, 54, 201-221.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-012-9587-x

Li, Y. & Lu, J. (2019). Investigating the impacts of congestion pricing on travel mode choice behavior combing the automobile use habit heterogeneity. In CICTP 2019 (pp. 5413-5425). https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784482292.466

Link, H. (2015). Is car drivers’ response to congestion charging schemes based on the correct perception of price signals? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 71, 96-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.11.004

Linn, J., Wang, Z. & Xie, L. (2016). Who will be affected by a congestion pricing scheme in Beijing? Transport Policy, 47, 34-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.12.006

Liu, B. Q. & Huang, C. C. (2014). Time-based toll design for a cordon-based congestion pricing scheme for a transportation network with speed limits and movement prohibitions. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 140 (6), 04014019. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000659

Mamdoohi, A. R. & Zarei, H. (2016). An Analysis of Public Transit Connectivity Index in Tehran. The Case Study: Tehran Multi-Modal Transit Network. TeMA - Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 59-76. https://doi.org/10.6092/1970-9870/3940

Mamdoohi, A. R., Rezaei, H., Irannezhad, E., Saffarzadeh, A. & Abbasi, M. (2022). Hour and period based congestion pricing, case of Tehran mode choice. Quarterly Journal of Transportation Engineering, 14 (1), 2233-2247. https://doi.org/10.22119/jte.2022.285329.2532.

Manville, M. & King, D. (2013). Credible commitment and congestion pricing. Transportation, 40, 229-249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9430-9

Milenković, M., Glavić, D., Maričić, M. (2019). Determining factors affecting congestion pricing acceptability. Transport Policy 82, 58–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.08.004.

Nohekhan, A., Zahedian, S. & Sadabadi, K. F. (2021). Investigating the impacts of I-66 Inner Beltway dynamic tolling system. Transportation Engineering, 4, 100059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.treng.2021.100059

Özgenel, M., Günay, G. (2017). Congestion pricing implementation in Taksim zone: a stated preference study. Transportation Research Procedia 27, 905–912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.12.065

Palma, A. D. & Lindsey, R. (2009). Traffic congestion pricing methods and technologies. HAL Working Papers.

Pandey, V., Boyles, S.D. (2018). Dynamic pricing for managed lanes with multiple entrances and exits. Transportation Research Part C : Emerging Technologies, 96, 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.09.017

Ramos, R., Cantillo, V., Arellana, J. & Sarmiento, I. (2017). From restricting the use of cars by license plate numbers to congestion charging: Analysis for Medellin, Colombia. Transport Policy, 60, 119-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol. 2017.09.012.

Rezaei, H., Irannezhad, E. & Mamdoohi, A. R. (2021). Heterogeneous analysis of mode choice behavior using latent class model. Journal of Transportation Research, 18 (3), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.22034/tri.2021.115402.

Rezaei, H., Macioszek, E., Derakhshesh, P., Houshyar, H., Ghabouli, E., Bakhshi Lomer, A. R., ... & Esmailzadeh, A. (2023). A Spatial Decision Support System for Modeling Urban Resilience to Natural Hazards. Sustainability, 15(11), 8777.https://doi.org/10.3390/su15118777.

Rouhani, O. M. (2018). Beyond standard zonal congestion pricing: A detailed impact analysis. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems, 144 (9), 04018052.1–13. https://doi.org/10.1061/JTEPBS.0000151.

Saffarzadeh, M., Mirzahossein, H. & Amiri, E. (2021). Congestion toll pricing and commercial land-use: clients' and vendors' perspective. TeMA - Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 14 (1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.6092/1970-9870/7355

Saffarzadeh, M., Rezaei, H. & Majidi, M. Z. (2022). a Pricing Model for Freeway Tolls Based on the Share of Mode Shift, Route Shift, Travel Time Change and Users' Willingness to Pay (Case study: Tehran_Saveh Freeway). Journal of Transportation Research, 19 (3), 359-370. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.17353459.1401.19.3.21.6

Sarker, M. A. A., Asgari, H. & Jin, X. (2023). Aging Population and Automated Mobility: Exploring the Impacts of Land Use Patterns and Attitudes. Transportation Research Record, 03611981231160548. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611 981231160548

Sarker, M. A. A., Rahimi, A., Azimi, G. & Jin, X. (2022). Investigating Older Adults’ Propensity toward Ridesourcing Services. Journal of transportation engineering, Part A: Systems, 148 (9), 04022054. https://doi.org/10.1061/JTEPBS.0000715

Siddique, M. A. B. & Choudhury, C. F. (2017). Modelling the behavioural response to congestion pricing in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Transportation in Developing Economies, 3, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40890-017-0052-y

Simeonova, E., Currie, J., Nilsson, P. & Walker, R. (2021). Congestion pricing, air pollution, and children’s health. Journal of Human Resources, 56 (4), 971-996. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.56.4.0218-9363R2

Soltaninejad, M., Soltaninejad, M., Moshizi, M. K., Sadeghi, V. & Jahanbakhsh, P. (2021). Environmental-friendly mortar produced with treated and untreated coal wastes as cement replacement materials. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 23, 2843-2860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02204-x

Tan, Z. & Gao, H. O. (2018). Hybrid model predictive control based dynamic pricing of managed lanes with multiple accesses. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 112, 113-131.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2018.03.008

Tehran Municipality Urban Planning & Research Center, 2019. New pricing approach based on entrance and exit time. Tehran.

Tillema, T., Van Wee, B. & Ettema, D. (2010). The influence of (toll-related) travel costs in residential location decisions of households: A stated choice approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44 (10), 785-796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2010.07.009

Titiloye, I., Sarker, M. A. A., Jin, X. & Watts, B. (2023). Examining channel choice preferences for grocery shopping during the Covid-19 pandemic. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst. 2023.03.006

Train, K. E. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge university press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(04)90100-9

Vosoughi, S. & Aminzadeh, B. (2021). Analysis of factors affecting the general tolerability of traffic pricing schemes: the case of Tehran (2018-19). Motaleate Shahri, 10 (37), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.34785/J011.2020.781

Wali, B. & Khattak, A. J. (2020). Harnessing ambient sensing & naturalistic driving systems to understand links between driving volatility and crash propensity in school zones–A generalized hierarchical mixed logit framework. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 114, 405-424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.01.028

Whitehead, J., Franklin, J. P. & Washington, S. (2014). The impact of a congestion pricing exemption on the demand for new energy efficient vehicles in Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 70, 24-40. https://doi.org /10.1016 /j.tra.2014.09.013

Whitehead, J. C. & Lew, D. K. (2020). Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data. Empirical Economics, 58, 2009-2029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-019-01646-z

Wicki, M., Fesenfeld, L. & Bernauer, T. (2019). In search of politically feasible policy-packages for sustainable passenger transport: Insights from choice experiments in China, Germany, and the USA. Environmental Research Letters, 14 (8), 084048. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab30a2

Yamamoto, T., Fujii, S., Kitamura, R. & Yoshida, H. (2000). Analysis of time allocation, departure time, and route choice behavior under congestion pricing. Transportation research record, 1725 (1), 95-101.https://doi.org/10.3141%2F1725-13

Yan, X., Levine, J. & Zhao, X. (2019). Integrating ridesourcing services with public transit: An evaluation of traveler responses combining revealed and stated preference data. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 105, 683-696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.07.029

Yang, J., Purevjav, A. O. & Li, S. (2020). The marginal cost of traffic congestion and road pricing: evidence from a natural experiment in Beijing. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12 (1), 418-453. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170195

Ye, Y. & Wang, H. (2018). Optimal design of transportation networks with automated vehicle links and congestion pricing. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3435720

Zhang, W., Zhao, Y., Li, Y., Lu, J. & Ma, Y. (2016). Research on Subjective Feasibility Evaluation of Congestion Pricing. Procedia engineering, 137, 124-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.01.242

Zheng, Z., Liu, Z., Liu, C. & Shiwakoti, N. (2014). Understanding public response to a congestion charge: A random-effects ordered logit approach. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 70, 117-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.tra.2014.10.016

Zhong, S., Gong, Y., Zhou, Z., Cheng, R. & Xiao, F. (2021). Active learning for multi-objective optimal road congestion pricing considering negative land use effect. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 125, 103002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2021.103002

Downloads

Published

2023-12-30

How to Cite

Mamdoohi, A. R., Irannezhad, E., Rezaei, H., Mirzahossein, H., & Jin, X. (2023). Duration-based or time-based congestion toll pricing?. TeMA - Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 16(3), 499–522. https://doi.org/10.6093/1970-9870/9739

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 3 (2023): The city challenges and external agents. Methods, tools and best practices

Section

Focus

License

Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following:

1. Authors retain the rights to their work and give in to the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons License - Attribution that allows others to share the work indicating the authorship and the initial publication in this journal.

 

2. Authors can adhere to other agreements of non-exclusive license for the distribution of the published version of the work (ex. To deposit it in an institutional repository or to publish it in a monography), provided to indicate that the document was first published in this journal.


3. Authors can distribute their work online (ex. In institutional repositories or in their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and it can increase the quotations of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access)