Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Traffic accidents and the London congestion charge

Electronic data

  • Congestion_Charge_PURE

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Public Economics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Public Economics, 133, 2015 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2015.10.005

    Accepted author manuscript, 547 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Traffic accidents and the London congestion charge

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>01/2016
<mark>Journal</mark>Journal of Public Economics
Volume133
Number of pages12
Pages (from-to)11-22
Publication statusPublished
Early online date6/11/15
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

In a rare effort to internalize congestion costs, London recently instituted charges for traveling by car to the central city during peak hours. Although the theoretical influence on the number and severity of traffic accidents is ambiguous, we show that the policy generated a substantial reduction in both the number of accidents and in the accident rate. At the same time, the spatial, temporal and vehicle specific nature of the charge may cause unintended substitutions as traffic and accidents shift to other proximate areas, times and to uncharged vehicles. We demonstrate that, to the contrary, the congestion charge reduced accidents and the accident rate in adjacent areas, times and for uncharged vehicles. These results are consistent with the government's objective to use the congestion charge to more broadly promote public transport and change driving habits.

Bibliographic note

This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Public Economics. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Public Economics, 133, 2015 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2015.10.005