ABSTRACT

Road pricing is increasingly considered as an option to support transportation infrastructure costs, manage demand, and reduce emissions. However, the extent to which implementation of such approaches may impact transportation and health equity is unclear. In this scoping review, we examine the differential transportation and health effects of road pricing policies across population groups and geographic region. We conducted a systematic database search of Transport Research International Documentation, GEOBASE, Scopus, and Ovid Medline, supplemented by bibliographic review and internet searches. Fifteen studies were included in the review. The studies evaluated area and cordon road pricing systems in Singapore, London, Stockholm, Milan, and Gothenburg, and had a median follow-up period of 12 months. Outcomes evaluated include car commuting, mode shift to public transit, accessibility to destinations, affordability, welfare, social interactions, air pollution, traffic injuries and deaths, acute asthma attacks, and life expectancy. While more studies across diverse urban contexts and policy settings will be needed to strengthen the evidence base, the existing evidence suggests road pricing has mostly net positive effects related to a reduction in car trips, air pollution, asthma attacks, and road traffic collisions, and increases in life expectancy. Frequency and ease of social interactions were found to be negatively impacted, with fewer visits to family and friends. The population groups that generally fared better across transportation and health outcomes were those with higher incomes, men, and people between the ages of 35–55. Across space, there are benefits for both the areas inside and outside the cordon boundary, but to a greater degree for the area inside. Overall, the evidence base is limited by a narrow set of health-related outcomes and a lack of longer-term studies. We did not come across any studies assessing distributional effects of noise pollution, mode shifts to walking or cycling, or other morbidities in the general population that are not listed above. In addition, there are few evaluations that include non-work trips, therefore potentially missing effects for unemployed populations or women who are more likely to make non-work trips. We find that the limited body of evidence on area and cordon pricing policies suggests these policies are beneficial for a number of transportation and health outcomes, particularly for populations inside the cordon area, but that there may be some degree of inequities in the distribution of the benefits and burdens.

摘要

道路定价越来越被视为支持交通基础设施成本、管理需求和减少排放的一种选择。然而，这些方法的实施可能在多大程度上影响交通和健康公平尚不清楚。在本次范围审查中，我们研究了不同人群和地理区域的道路定价政策对交通和健康的不同影响。我们对运输研究国际文献、GEOBASE、Scopus 和 Ovid Medline 进行了系统的数据库检索，并辅以书目审查和互联网检索。该评价纳入了十五项研究。这些研究评估了新加坡、伦敦、斯德哥尔摩、米兰和哥德堡的区域和警戒线定价系统，中位随访期为 12 个月。评估的结果包括汽车通勤、向公共交通的模式转变、目的地的可达性、负担能力、福利、社会互动、空气污染、交通伤害和死亡、急性哮喘发作和预期寿命。虽然需要针对不同城市背景和政策环境进行更多研究来加强证据基础，但现有证据表明，道路定价主要具有与减少汽车出行、空气污染、哮喘发作和道路交通碰撞相关的净积极影响，以及预期寿命增加。研究发现，社交互动的频率和便利性受到负面影响，拜访家人和朋友的次数减少。在交通和健康状况方面普遍表现较好的人群是收入较高的人群、男性和 35 至 55 岁之间的人群。在太空中，警戒线边界内部和外部的区域都有好处，但内部区域的好处更大。总体而言，证据基础受到健康相关结果范围狭窄和缺乏长期研究的限制。我们没有遇到任何评估噪音污染、步行或骑自行车模式转变或上面未列出的一般人群中其他疾病的分布影响的研究。此外，很少有评估包括非工作旅行，因此可能遗漏了对失业人口或更有可能进行非工作旅行的女性的影响。我们发现，关于区域和警戒线定价政策的证据有限，表明这些政策有利于许多交通和健康结果，特别是对于警戒线区域内的人口，但在价格分配方面可能存在一定程度的不平等。好处和负担。