无障碍、健康、安全、包容和可持续性的价值:公众愿意付出的实验

IF 3.4 3区 工程技术 Q1 ECONOMICS
Martijn Olivier de Vries , José Ignacio Hernández , Niek Mouter
{"title":"无障碍、健康、安全、包容和可持续性的价值:公众愿意付出的实验","authors":"Martijn Olivier de Vries ,&nbsp;José Ignacio Hernández ,&nbsp;Niek Mouter","doi":"10.1016/j.retrec.2025.101605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many countries use Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an ex-ante evaluation method to support transport decision-making. A critique on CBA is that it favours policies which produce easy to monetize impacts (e.g. travel time savings), whereas it disfavours policies which produce difficult to monetize impacts (e.g. minimum level of accessibility for people with a disability and environmental effects). Public willingness to pay (WTP) experiments have been introduced to value difficult to monetize policy impacts. This paper investigates how citizens of the Transport Authority Amsterdam value nine social impacts of transport policies through five Public WTP discrete choice experiments. In the experiments, respondents were asked to choose between transport policies, trading of social impacts against a uniform tax increase. We show that participants particularly value that people can reach key facilities within 15 min and assigned a relatively low value to preventing delays. This suggests that citizens prioritize accessibility over mobility. We also observe that participants assign a significant value to all the nine social impacts and identify Public WTP metrics for all the impacts. This suggests that the Public WTP approach has to potential to resolve the critique on CBA that not all impacts can be monetized.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47810,"journal":{"name":"Research in Transportation Economics","volume":"113 ","pages":"Article 101605"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of accessibility, health, safety, inclusion and sustainability: a public willingness to pay experiment\",\"authors\":\"Martijn Olivier de Vries ,&nbsp;José Ignacio Hernández ,&nbsp;Niek Mouter\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.retrec.2025.101605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Many countries use Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an ex-ante evaluation method to support transport decision-making. A critique on CBA is that it favours policies which produce easy to monetize impacts (e.g. travel time savings), whereas it disfavours policies which produce difficult to monetize impacts (e.g. minimum level of accessibility for people with a disability and environmental effects). Public willingness to pay (WTP) experiments have been introduced to value difficult to monetize policy impacts. This paper investigates how citizens of the Transport Authority Amsterdam value nine social impacts of transport policies through five Public WTP discrete choice experiments. In the experiments, respondents were asked to choose between transport policies, trading of social impacts against a uniform tax increase. We show that participants particularly value that people can reach key facilities within 15 min and assigned a relatively low value to preventing delays. This suggests that citizens prioritize accessibility over mobility. We also observe that participants assign a significant value to all the nine social impacts and identify Public WTP metrics for all the impacts. This suggests that the Public WTP approach has to potential to resolve the critique on CBA that not all impacts can be monetized.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Transportation Economics\",\"volume\":\"113 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101605\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Transportation Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885925000885\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Transportation Economics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885925000885","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多国家都采用成本效益分析(CBA)作为事前评价方法来支持运输决策。对CBA的批评是,它支持那些容易产生货币化影响的政策(例如,节省旅行时间),而不赞成那些难以产生货币化影响的政策(例如,最低限度的残疾人可达性和环境影响)。公众支付意愿(WTP)实验的引入是为了评估难以货币化的政策影响。本文通过五个公共WTP离散选择实验,调查了阿姆斯特丹交通管理局的公民如何评价交通政策的九种社会影响。在实验中,受访者被要求在交通政策、社会影响交易和统一增税之间做出选择。我们表明,参与者特别重视人们可以在15分钟内到达关键设施,并赋予相对较低的价值,以防止延误。这表明市民优先考虑可达性而不是移动性。我们还观察到,参与者为所有九个社会影响分配了重要的价值,并为所有影响确定了公共WTP指标。这表明,公共WTP方法有潜力解决对CBA的批评,即并非所有影响都可以货币化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The value of accessibility, health, safety, inclusion and sustainability: a public willingness to pay experiment
Many countries use Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) as an ex-ante evaluation method to support transport decision-making. A critique on CBA is that it favours policies which produce easy to monetize impacts (e.g. travel time savings), whereas it disfavours policies which produce difficult to monetize impacts (e.g. minimum level of accessibility for people with a disability and environmental effects). Public willingness to pay (WTP) experiments have been introduced to value difficult to monetize policy impacts. This paper investigates how citizens of the Transport Authority Amsterdam value nine social impacts of transport policies through five Public WTP discrete choice experiments. In the experiments, respondents were asked to choose between transport policies, trading of social impacts against a uniform tax increase. We show that participants particularly value that people can reach key facilities within 15 min and assigned a relatively low value to preventing delays. This suggests that citizens prioritize accessibility over mobility. We also observe that participants assign a significant value to all the nine social impacts and identify Public WTP metrics for all the impacts. This suggests that the Public WTP approach has to potential to resolve the critique on CBA that not all impacts can be monetized.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
59
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Research in Transportation Economics is a journal devoted to the dissemination of high quality economics research in the field of transportation. The content covers a wide variety of topics relating to the economics aspects of transportation, government regulatory policies regarding transportation, and issues of concern to transportation industry planners. The unifying theme throughout the papers is the application of economic theory and/or applied economic methodologies to transportation questions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信