Public attitudes to TDM measures: a comparative study Neil Thorpe a, * , Peter Hills a , Sittha Jaensirisak b,1 a Transport Engineering Group, Department of Civil Engineering, Newcastle University, UK b Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, UK Received 1 April 1999; revised 1 March 2000; accepted 1 March 2000 Abstract This paper presents the results of a range of data analyses of users' attitudinal responses to various travel-demand management measures in two case-study cities in the UK: Cambridge and Newcastle upon Tyne. The analyses focus on several important aspects of implementing TDM measures, including the relationship between the perceived effectiveness and public acceptance of alternative TDM measures and how the generated net bene®ts, in particular the revenues raised from road-user charging and increased parking charges, are used. A number of key issues are identi®ed for the implementation of TDM measures that are both acceptable to the public and also capable of achieving their stated objectives. q 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Public acceptance; Travel demand management; Road-user charging 1. Introduction It is now widely held that a consensus exists in the UK on the need to introduce some form of direct road-user char- ging to manage more effectively the anticipated growth in vehicle-use, in particular that of private cars, on certain sections of our urban and inter-urban road network. Substantial resources have been targeted world-wide at developing and testing various technological approaches, not only for charging motorists a fee for using key sections of the motorway and trunk road network, but also for driv- ing into and within urban areas. The belief that such a consensus exists was one of the major factors in encoura- ging the current UK Government to set out in the recent White Paper on Integrated Transport its strongest commit- ment to date to the introduction of road-user charging in the UK (Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, 1998a,b). The White Paper and supporting `daugh- ter' documents describe the Government's intention to provide local authorities with the necessary legislative powers to introduce charging, with the onus now on these authorities to design, develop and evaluate alternative char- ging systems to tackle speci®c transport problems. This will require many authorities to consider seriously, perhaps for the ®rst time ever, the precise features of possible charging scenarios. These features will include: ² the spatial and temporal coverage (for example, the identi®cation of potential charging points and charging periods); ² the approach to calculating charges (for example, on the basis of distance travelled or time spent driving within a charged area); ² those classes of vehicle which will have to pay the charges and those (if any) which will be exempt; and ² how the generated bene®ts of released road space and net revenues are to be distributed. Only then will the public be in a position to assess the impact of the alternative charging schemes (in terms of how, when and where they will have to pay) and to calculate how much their charges might be (say) on a weekly basis. During this process, the current level of support apparent for road- user charging may be eroded (Goodwin, 1989). It is prob- able that individuals will `vote with their wallets' and those who realise that they will have to pay more than they consider acceptable may, as a result, withdraw their support. There will, of course, be those who will fare rather better than they had expected. This raises the possibility that some initial opponents of road-user charging may in fact change into active supporters of a proposed scheme. This is likely therefore to be an important political element in the design of possible road-user charging systems. Transport Policy 7 (2000) 243±257 PERGAMON 0967-070X/00/$ - see front matter q 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S0967-070X(00)00007-X www.elsevier.com/locate/tranpol * Corresponding author. Tel.: 144-191-222-6547; fax: 144-191-222- 8352. 1 Part of this research was undertaken whilst Mr Jaensirisak was a post- graduate MSc student in the Transport Engineering Group at Newcastle University.