An integrated approach composed of a random utility-based multi-regional input–output model and a road transport network model was developed for evaluating the application of a fee to heavy-goods vehicles (HGVs) in Spain. For this purpose, a distance-based charge scenario (in euros per vehicle kilometer) for HGVs was evaluated for a selected motorway network in Spain. Although the aim of this charging policy was to increase the efficiency of transport, the approach strongly identified direct and indirect impacts on the regional economy. Estimates of the magnitude and extent of indirect effects on aggregated macroeconomic indicators (employment and gross domestic product) are provided. The macroeconomic effects of the charging policy were found to be positive for some regions and negative for other regions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChlanA.Development of the Transport Infrastructure in the Czech Republic.Proc., 3rd Conference on Finance Transport Infrastructure, Paris, 2008.
2.
KnoflacherH.Problems Caused by the Motorway/Railroad Freight Traffic Share in the Tyrol. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 215, No. 1, 2001, pp. 45–51.
3.
SuterS., and WalterF.Environmental Pricing—Theory and Practice: The Swiss Policy of Heavy Vehicle Taxation. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2001, pp. 381–397.
4.
VassalloJ. M., GómezJ., SaldañaP., SierraJ., and Di CiommoF.Estudio Económico de la Tarificación de las Infraestructuras de Carreteras de España.Centro Español de Excelencia y Conocimiento de la Colaboración Público Privada, Madrid, Spain, 2012.
5.
LairdJ., and MackieP.Review of Economic Assessment in Rural Transport Appraisal. In Transport Research Series, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, 2009.
6.
GkritzaK., SinhaK. C., LabiS., and ManneringF. L.Influence of Highway Construction Projects on Economic Development: An Empirical Assessment. Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 42, No. 3, 2007, pp. 545–563.
7.
Transport Research and Training, Shipping and Transport College Group, Wagener & Herbst Management Consultants GmbH, and TRADEMCO Consulting, Research, and Development Ltd. Handbook Transport Planning and Transport Modeling.Transport Research and Training, Rijswijk, Netherlands, 2010.
8.
de JongG., GunnH., and WalkerW.National and International Freight Transport Models: An Overview and Ideas for Further Development. Transport Reviews, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2004, pp. 103–124.
9.
HancockK. L.Conference Proceedings 40: Freight Demand Modeling: Tools for Public-Sector Decision Making. Summary of a Conference, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008.
10.
HamH., TschangoJ. K., and BoyceD.Assessment of Economic Impacts from Unexpected Events with an Interregional Commodity Flow and Multimodal Transportation Network Model. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 39, No. 10, 2005, pp. 849–860.
11.
TschangoJ. K., HamH., and BoyceD.Economic Impacts of Transportation Network Changes: Implementation of a Combined Transportation Network and Input–Output Model. Papers in Regional Science, Vol. 81, 2002, pp. 223–246.
12.
CombesF., and LeurentF.Advances in Freight Transport Demand Modelling: An Assessment with Research Perspectives.Proc., European Transport Conference, Noodwijkerhout, Netherlands, 2007.
13.
LeontiefW.Input–Output Economics, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, New York, 1986.
14.
Marcial Echenique & Partners Ltd, WSP Group, University of Westminster, Katalysis Ltd., Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Oxford Systematics, Rand Europe, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas Consultant, MDS Transmodal, and Imperial College. Review of Freight Modelling Final Report.Integrated Transport and Economic Appraisal Division, Department of Transport, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2002.
15.
DuchinF., and SteengeA. E.Mathematical Models in Input–Output Economics. In Working Papers in Economics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y., 2007.
16.
WegenerM.Transport Geography and Spatial Systems: Overview of Land-Use Transport Models. In Handbook in Transport (ButtonK. J., and HensherD. A., ed.), Pergamon/Elsevier Science, Kidlington, United Kingdom, 2004, pp. 127–146.
17.
KockelmanK. M., JinL., ZhaoY., and Ruíz-JuriN.Tracking Land Use, Transport, and Industrial Production Using Random-Utility Based Multizonal Input–Output Models: Applications for Texas Trade. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2005, pp. 275–286.
18.
Ruiz JuriN., and KockelmanK. M.Extending the Random-Utility-Based Multiregional Input–Output Model: Incorporating Land-Use Constraints, Domestic Demand and Network Congestion in a Model of Texas Trade. Presented at 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2004.
19.
KockelmanK. M., and HuangT.The Introduction of Dynamic Features in a Random-Utility-Based Multiregional Input–Output Model of Trade, Production, and Location Choice. Presented at 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2007.
20.
MarzanoV., and PapolaA.A Multi-Regional Input–Output Model for the Appraisal of Transport Investments in Europe.Proc., European Transport Conference, Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands, Association for European Transport, Henley-in-Arden, United Kingdom, 2008.
21.
EcheniqueM.Econometric Models of Land Use and Transportation. In Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems, Handbook 5 of the Handbooks in Transport Series (HensherD. A., ButtonK. J., HaynesK., and StopherP., eds.), Elsevier Science Ltd., Kidlington, United Kingdom, 2004, pp. 185–202.
22.
CascettaE., and Di GangiM.A Multi-Regional Input–Output Model with Elastic Trade Coefficients for the Simulation of Freight Transport Demand in Italy.Proc., European Transport Conference, Uxbridge, United Kingdom, Association for European Transport, Henley-in-Arden, United Kingdom, 1996.
23.
CascettaE., MarzanoV., and PapolaA.Multi-Regional Input–Output Models for Freight Demand Simulation at a National Level. In Recent Developments in Transport Modelling: Lessons for the Freight Sector (Ben-AkivaM., MeersmanH., and Van de VoordeE., eds.), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, London, 2008, pp. 93–116.
24.
DuX., and KockelmanK. M.Tracking Transportation and Industrial Production Across a Nation: Applications of RUBMRIO Model for U.S. Trade Patterns. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2269, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 99–109.
25.
Di CiommoF., GuzmanA. F., and VassalloJ. M.Multiregional Input–Output Table Approach to Evaluate Impact of Charging Trucks on Employment Across Spanish Regions. Presented at 91st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2012.
26.
KockelmanK. M., and ZhaoY.The Random-Utility-Based Multi-regional Input–Output Model: Solution Existence and Uniqueness. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 38, No. 9, 2004, pp. 789–807.
27.
MarzanoV., and PapolaA.Modelling Freight Demand at National Level: Theoretical Developments and Application to Italian Demand.Proc., European Transport Conference, Strasbourg, France, Association for European Transport, Henley-in-Arden, United Kingdom, 2004.
28.
FilipovL., and DavidkovB.Development of Network Data Model for Urban Transportation System in GIS Environment for the City of Plovdiv, Bulgaria.Proc., International Conference on Cartography and GIS, Borovets, Bulgaria, 2006.
29.
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, PB Consult, AECOM Consult, Urbitran Associates Inc., Urbanomics, Alex Anas & Associates, NuStats International, and George Hoyt & Associates Inc. New York Best Practice Model. Final draft. New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, New York, 2005.
30.
HorowitzA.NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 358: Statewide Travel Forecasting Models.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006.
31.
Southeast Regional Planning Model 6.5.Corradino Group, Miami, Fla., 2008.
32.
Encuesta Permanente de Transporte de Mercancías por Carretera 2010. Serie Estadísticas y Presupuestos, Vol. 1. Ministerio de Fomento, Madrid, Spain, 2011.
33.
Observatorio del Ferrocarril en España-Informe.Fundación de los Ferrocarriles Españoles, Madrid, Spain, 2010.
34.
Consorcio DESTINO, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña, CSIC-IRNASA, CYLSTAT S.A., and Grupo Enarcar S.A. Proyecto DESTINO—Desarrollo de Metodologías de Evaluación del Impacto Económico del Sistema de Transportes Mediante Tablas Input–Output Interregionales.Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Madrid, Spain, 2011.
35.
Encuesta Permanente de Transportes de Mercancías por Carretera.Ministerio de Fomento, Madrid, Spain, 2008.
36.
VassalloJ. M., and LópezE.Using Input–Output Tables to Estimate the Effect of Charging Heavy Goods Vehicles on CPI. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2010, p. 14.
37.
KockelmanK. M.Documentation for Application of Kockelman, et al.'s Random-Utility-Based Multi-Regional Input-Output (RUBMRIO) Model.Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas, Austin, 2008.
38.
Holguín-VerasJ., ThorsonE., and ZorrillaJ. C.Commercial Vehicle Empty Trip Models with Variable Zero Order Empty Trip Probabilities. Networks and Spatial Economics, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2008, pp. 241–259.
39.
GutierrezJ., Condeço-MelhoradoA., MartinJ. C., and RománC.Impacto de la Tarificación en Carreteras en el Acceso a los Mercados: El Caso de la Euroviñéta.Proc., XVII Congreso Panamericano de Ingeniería de Tránsito, Transporte y Logística, Santiago, Chile, 2012.
40.
Mapa de Tráfico 2007.Dirección General de Carreteras, Ministerio de Fomento, Madrid, Spain, 2007.
41.
YeX.Accelerated Procedure of Multiclass Highway Traffic Assignment for Maryland Statewide Transportation Model. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2176, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 84–91.
42.
Travel Model Improvement Program. Travel Model Validation and Reasonability Checking Manual, 2nd ed. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2010.
