Mattias JUHÁSZMSc in Civil Eng.

Departmental Eng., PhD student

Department of Transport Infrastructure, Széchenyi István University

2013.09.27.

Mattias Juhász – Tamás Mátrai – Gergely Gál

The possibility of introducing congestion charging in Budapest - assessment of the theoretical alternatives

XV Conference of the Italian Association of Transport Economics and Logistics (SIET) "Transport, Spatial Organization and Sustainable Economic Development"

Venice - September 18-20, 2013

Budapest and its agglomeration• Capital of Hungary (since 1873):

– 525 km2, 1.700.000 inhabitants– Geography:

Buda hills – Danube – Pest plateau– 2 level municipal governance:

23 districts + Municipality of Budapest– Political, commercial, financial and

cultural center of Hungary

• Agglomeration (81 settlements):– 2538 km2

– 800.000 inhabitants

1

Transport system of Budapest• Modal Split in the city: 60% PT / 40% car

• Road network:– Full length of the road network: 4500 km– Length of the main road network: 1200 km– 9 Danube crossings for road (including M0 bridges)– Over 1000 traffic signaled intersections– 1.700.000 car trips/day (600.000 from the aggl.)

• Public transport network:– Underground (3+1), suburban railway (5), tram (32),

trolley bus (16), bus (206), night bus (38), boat (3), other (3)– Length of the public transport network: 1100 km– Number of stops and stations: ~4700– Rolling stock: app. 3000 vehicles– 1,39 billion passengers/year, 5,16 billion pkm/year

2

Main problems• Unpredictable financing

– Lag in PT fleet renewal– Unsecured funding for maintenance– Lack of investments

• Growing motorization– Deterioration of public transport system– Road congestion in the city centre– Air quality problems

• Too centralized road network (bridges)• „We got used to …”

– Residential parking problems– PT fare reductions

• Limited strategic planning

3

4

Reasons why the idea of congestion charging arose in Budapest?

• Significant increase in the number of vehicles (+25%)• Deterioration of public transportation (80% > 60%)• Centralized transport network• Limited space in the city centre• Urban sprawl (250.000 people in 25 years)• Decrease in the average speed (35 >> 20 km/h)• External cost from road congestion has become one of the

largest transport-related cost in Budapest (Erhart, 2007)

5

6

Internalization of external costsAvoid a social trap…

The story of congestion charging in Budapest

• Studies in 1992 and 2001• 2007: we should try congestion charging

(experiences from London and Stockholm + peak of traffic volumes)

• Studies in 2008 and 2009 (pre-feasibility study)• 2009: resolution of the European Commission on the EU

subsidy of metro line M4(congestion charging as a supplementary measure in order to achieve environmental targets)

• 2010: a thoughtless political campaign (CC for free PT)• 2011-2013: detailed feasibility study

7

Ahead of an awkward decision

• 2013 – the feasibility study is ready with detailed suggestions

• Municipal elections in 1 year• It would be very difficult to accept the proposal

(acceptance is around 25-30%)• But it would be also unpleasant to reject it

(M4 metro resolution)• However, the deadline is quite hazy

(“end of the 2007-2013 programming period”)• „Negotiating with the EU about prerequisites” seems to

be the political solution for some time

8

Feasibility analysis

• Politically- and publicly-wanted analysis(Shall we introduce it? How much is it?)

• Difficulties as there wasn’t any goals but there were some hard restrictions

• „Complex goal” (revenue, congestion, environment)led to a very comprehensive analyses of the theoretical alternatives and kept every detail open

• MCA, CBA, CEA, transport modeling

9

Feasibility analysis

• Zonal, cordon pricing and complex solutions• Investment cost:

8-35 mEUR + additional investments (10-200 mEUR)• Operational cost: 8-30 mEUR / year• Estimated revenue: 25-180 mEUR / year• Economic BCR: 3.5-6• Revenue / cost: 5-9

10

Official results

• Cordon charging in the line of the Outer Ring Road (Hungária-gyűrű) and the Buda Ring (Budai körút)[C3 alternative in the paper]

• A gradual introduction is also possible [e.g. C0 (bridges) as a first step and C3 or Z3 as a second]

• Keywords: simplicity and cost-efficiency– daily charge– monitoring the inbound traffic – modeled on “Area C” (Milan)– further possibilities in

time-based differentiation

11

12

Effect on road traffic

13

Effect on public transport

14

Results of our assessments

• It depends on the goal…• General priority could be:

– Cordon charging on the inner bridges [C0 alternative]– Cordon (or zonal) charging in the line of the Outer Ring Road

(Hungária-gyűrű) and the River Danube [C2 or Z2 alternative]– Cordon (or zonal) charging in the line of the Inner Ring Road

(Nagykörút) and the River Danube [C1 or Z1 alternative]– Cordon (or zonal) charging in the line of the Outer Ring Road

(Hungária-gyűrű) and the Buda Ring (Budai körút) [C3 or Z3 alternative]

• Gradual introduction of congestion charging would be useful (e.g. 1. C0, 2. C2, 3. C3., 4. time-differentiation)

15

C0 alternative

• Affected daily traffic:360.000 between 7:00-19:00

• Investment cost:around 8 mEUR

• Additional investment need:around 10 mEUR

• Annual operational cost:around 8 mEUR

• Estimated revenue:25-60 mEUR depending on the fees

• Time diffentiation could make it fair• Further development would be easier from the revenue• However, there are socail issues…

16

Conclusions• Road congestion cannot be eliminated by physical

measures alone (Eliasson, 2010)• Even it won’t be solved by the credit crunch• Traffic calming isn’t enough, structural reforms needed• User or polluter pays principle• Congestion charging is one of the possible measures• Anyway… we cannot expect that congestion charging

will solve everything

17

Lessons learnt

• It is indispensable to have an explicit and relevant goal • Formulating goals and restrictions is a job for policy-

makers (in cooperation with transport professionals), while designing the charging system is a job for experts

• System design is not working with impossible restrictions or with conflicting interests

• After setting the goal(s) decision-makers have to consistently take the responsibility for it

• It needs time to plan and implement a congestion charging scheme, so plan the political process accordingly

• Communication + conscious and well-timed stakeholder involvement are essential

18

References• BKK Centre for Budapest Transport - TRENECON-COWI Ltd. (2013): Fővárosi személyforgalmi behajtási

díj bevezetése, döntéstámogató tanulmány (Introduction of congestion charging in Budapest, Decision-support study)

• Eliasson, J. (2010): So you’re considering introducing congestion charging? Here’s what you need to know - An FAQ based on Stockholm’s experiences. ITF/OECD round table, discussion paper no. 2010-4

• Erhart, Sz. (2007): A budapesti közlekedési dugók okai és következményei (Reasons and consequences of road congestions in Budapest). Közgazdasági Szemle LIV. pp. 435–458.

• Juhász, M. (2012): Budapest főváros XI. kerület (Újbuda) városközpont közlekedésfejlesztési kérdései – A Hamzsabégi út fejlesztésének vizsgálata (Transport development issues of the city centre of Budapest XI. District (Újbuda) – Examination of the development of Hamzsabégi Road). MSc thesis. Széchenyi István Egyetem.

• Monigl, J. & Berki, Zs. (2001): Modelling the impacts of road pricing in Budapest. Transman Consulting.• Orosz, Cs. & Pásti, B. (2002): Kielégíthetetlen közlekedési kereslet – fejlesztési és finanszírozási

lehetőségek Budapesten – útdíjakkal vagy nélkülük? (Insatiable transport demand – development and financing possibilities in Budapest – with or without road charges?) Városi közlekedés 2002/4.

• Pápay, Zs., Lukovich, P. & Orosz, Cs. (1992): Útdíjfizetési rendszer alkalmazásának lehetõségei Budapesten (The possibilities in the application of a road pricing system in Budapest). BME Innotech Ltd.

• Smeed, R. J. (1949): Some statistical aspects of road safety research. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (General), Vol. 112.

• Smeed, R. J. (1964): Road pricing: the economic and technical possibilities. HMSO.• Városkutatás Ltd. (2008): Efficient transport management in Budapest (Hatékony közlekedés-

menedzsment Budapesten)• Városkutatás Ltd. (2009): A fővárosi személyforgalmi behajtási díj előzetes megvalósíthatósági vizsgálata

(Pre-feasibility study of the congestion charging in Budapest)

19

Acknowledgement

This research was realized in the frames of TÁMOP 4.2.4. A/2-11-1-2012-0001 „National Excellence Program – Elaborating and operating an inland student and researcher personal support system convergence program” The project was subsidized by the European Union and co-financed by the European Social Fund

20

Thank you for your kind attention!

Mattias Juhász

mjuhasz@sze.hu