We analyze several scenarios of transport reforms for the city of Bordeaux (France) using a model that takes into account the interaction between transport and the housing market. We find that road pricing schemes are significantly more effective when they are accompanied by an increase in housing supply in locations where demand increases. This allows households to consider their options for relocation in the medium and long term. Our analysis is based on an aggregate model with a nested decision structure that includes both transport and housing. We provide a full description of the model structure and the calibration steps and make the source code available for those who wish to analyze other cases.
MayeresI.ProostS.Marginal Tax Reform, Externalities and Income Distribution. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 79, No. 2, 2001, pp. 343–363.
2.
MayeresI.ProostS.Should Diesel Cars in Europe Be Discouraged? Discussion Papers Series 00.18. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Center for Economic Studies, Leuven, 2000.
3.
ParryI. W.SmallK. A.Should Urban Transit Subsidies Be Reduced?American Economic Review, Vol. 99, No. 3, 2009, pp. 700–724.
4.
de PalmaA.ProostS.van der LooS.Assessing Transport Investments–Towards a Multi-Purpose Tool. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 44, No. 7, 2010, pp. 834–849.
5.
KilaniM.ProostS.van der LooS.Road Pricing and Public Transport Pricing Reform in Paris: Complements or Substitutes?Economics of Transportation, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2014, pp. 175–187.
6.
MirabelF.Impact du péage urbain sur la répartition modale et la structure temporelle du trafic automobile. Revue d’Économie Régionale & Urbaine, Vol. 3, 2001, pp. 457–478.
BehrensK.DurantonG.Robert-NicoudF.Productive Cities: Sorting, Selection, and Agglomeration. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 122, No. 3, 2014, pp. 507–553.
9.
WegenerM.Overview of Land Use Transport Models. In Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems (HensherD. A.ButtonK. J.HaynesK. E.StopherP. R., eds.), Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, 2004, pp. 127–146.
10.
WegenerM.Land-Use Transport Interaction Models. In Handbook of Regional Science (FischerM. M.NijkampP., eds.), Springer, Berlin, 2021, pp. 229–246.
11.
WagnerP.WegenerM.Urban Land Use, Transport and Environment Models: Experiences with an Integrated Microscopic Approach. DisP – The Planning Review, Vol. 43, No. 170, 2007, pp. 45–56.
12.
WaddellP.BorningA.NothM.FreierN.BeckeM.UlfarssonG.Microsimulation of Urban Development and Location Choices: Design and Implementation of UrbanSim. Networks and Spatial Economics, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2003, pp. 43–67.
13.
YapW.JanssenP.BiljeckiF.Free and Open Source Urbanism: Software for Urban Planning Practice. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 96, 2022, Article 101825.
14.
CapelleT.SturmP.VidardA.MortonB. J.Calibration of the Tranus Land Use Module: Optimisation-Based Algorithms, Their Validation, and Parameter Selection by Statistical Model Selection. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 77, 2019, Article 101146.
15.
BouananY.ZerguiniS.GaussierN.Agent-Based Modelling of Urban Land-Use Development: Modelling and Simulating Households and Economic Activities Location Choice. International Journal of Service and Computing Oriented Manufacturing, Vol. 3, No. 4, 2018, pp. 253–273.
16.
ZerguiniS.GaussierN.MUST-B: Un modèle LUTI multidisciplinaire au service de la complexité du phénomène urbain. Canadian Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 43, No. 2, 2020, pp. 50–59.
17.
ProostS.Van DenderK.Optimal Urban Transport Pricing in the Presence of Congestion, Economies of Density and Costly Public Funds. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 42, No. 9, 2008, pp. 1220–1230.
18.
KilaniM.HouassaF.La réforme de la mobilité urbaine en présence de modes de transport semi-collectifs: Le cas de la ville de Sousse. Revue d’Economie Regionale Urbaine, Vol. 4, 2018, pp. 805–828.
19.
WeymarkJ. A.Money-Metric Utility Functions. International Economic Review, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1985, pp. 219–232.
20.
MayoS. K.Theory and Estimation in the Economics of Housing Demand. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1981, pp. 95–116.
21.
SheppardS.Hedonic Analysis of Housing Markets. In Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics (CheshireP. C.MillsE. S., eds.), Vol. 3. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1999, pp. 1595–1635.
22.
BranstonD.Link Capacity Functions: A Review. Transportation Research, Vol. 10, 1976, pp. 223–236.
23.
KellerW. J.A Nested CES-Type Utility Function and Its Demand and Price-Index Functions. European Economic Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1976, pp. 175–186.
24.
RutherfordT.Lecture Notes on Constant Elasticity Functions. University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 2002.
25.
CERTU. Enquête Ménages Déplacements réalisée dans l’agglomération Bordelaise en 2008–2009. La Communauté Urbaine de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 2012.
26.
SmallK. A.VerhoefE. T.The Economics of Urban Transportation. Routledge, London, 2007.
27.
KilaniM.First-Best Congestion Pricing. In International Encyclopedia of Transportation (VickermanR., ed.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2021, pp. 209–215.
28.
DavidQ.KilaniM.Transport Policies in Polycentric Cities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 166, 2022, pp. 101–117.
29.
De BorgerB.GlazerA.Support and Opposition to a Pigovian Tax: Road Pricing with Reference-Dependent Preferences. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 99, 2017, pp. 31–47.
30.
TretvikT.Urban Road Pricing in Norway: Public Acceptability and Travel Behaviour. In Acceptability of Transport Pricing Strategies (SchadeJ.SchlagB., eds.), Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, 2003, pp. 77–92.
31.
AnasA.TimilsinaG. R.Offsetting the CO2 Locked-In by Roads: Suburban Transit and Core Densification as Antidotes. Economics of Transportation, Vol. 4, No. 1–2, 2015, pp. 37–49.
32.
de PalmaA.KilaniM.ProostS.Discomfort in Mass Transit and Its Implication for Scheduling and Pricing. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 71, 2015, pp. 1–18.
