Urban Pricing in Paris: Lessons to Be Learned from Abroad
C Lemoine, Institut d'Aménagement et d'Urbanisme, FR
Urban pricing experiences had proven that pricing can be an effective transport policy tool. This paper explores the key issues associated with implementing an urban pricing scheme in Paris, based on ongoing experiences.
Urban pricing includes all forms of road user charges or fees applied in urban areas. In practice, application methods are variable and depend on the main objectives. Experiences from abroad had proven that urban pricing can work to get extra revenue sources, to reduce traffic, to improve modal shift, to improve air quality and to develop a sustainable transport system. Successful experiences such as Oslo, London and Stockholm had led to widespread consideration of the adoption of urban pricing schemes.
Urban pricing can be classified in three categories according to their main transport policy goal : funding pricing, congestion pricing and environmental pricing. Funding pricing schemes in large urban areas have been implemented in the middle eighties in Norwegian cities in order to finance road and public transport investments and to cut out traffic congestion. On the other hand, the main aim of Singapore?s, London?s and Stockholm?s urban pricing schemes is to regulate road demand and tackle congestion without increasing supply. The environmental pricing schemes such as Milan and London LEZ are based on the polluter-pays principle: the main objective is to reduce negative impact of road user choices on the environment.
This paper presents an overview of key characteristics and results of cases cited above and explores the key issues associated with implementing an urban pricing scheme in Paris. Even if urban pricing is not yet allowed by the French legislation, this paper attempts to show that implementation can not be modelled on the successful experiences cited above because of the differences in urban structures.
Association for European Transport