If New York City had planned to charge most cars entering downtown Manhattan $15, it would have eased traffic, cut pollution and raised billions for public transit. But Gov. Cathy Cole suspended congestion pricing indefinitely just before 11 a.m., leaving a $15 billion gap in the city’s transit upgrade plan. Cole, a Democrat, cited the slow economic recovery from the pandemic and the burden of tolls on low-income residents, but According to sources, she was also scared. It has raised doubts among voters that could determine the outcome of a key election this fall.
Most people are repulsed by the idea of paying more for anything, and congestion pricing is no exception. Only about a quarter of New Yorkers support the measure. According to one poll,with Support among residents of suburban districts falls Staten Island, but the widespread opposition and the political turmoil it can create is a feature of these efforts, not a bug. Almost every city that has adopted congestion pricing Including London and StockholmIt wasn’t very popular at first.
“Of course, if people didn’t have to pay the congestion charge before, no one would say, ‘Yes, I want to pay more,’” says Alina Turk, strategy and planning manager at Transport for London, the government agency responsible for London’s vast transport system.
But surprisingly, Public favorability has increased In almost every city, people have adapted to the policy and, more importantly, have seen real improvements. For example, most Londoners were vehemently opposed to the idea before it was introduced in 2003. But six in 10 saw almost immediate benefits and supported it in the first year. Now most people don’t even think about it.
“It’s pretty much business as usual because we’ve been doing it for over 20 years,” Turk said.
Transportation experts say that to change public attitudes, it must be proven that fees actually reduce traffic, improve air quality and fund climate-friendly transportation. Supporters of New York’s congestion pricing plan, which goes into effect on June 30, claim it would ease traffic by 17 percent. Reduce fine dust pollution and greenhouse gas emissions In urban areas, they increased by more than 12% and 11% respectively, generating $1 billion annually for public transit. (That money would have been bonded or invested to generate $15 billion in improving public transit infrastructure.)
But that’s not always enough. Because there’s something more important: a tricky bit of human psychology called the status quo bias. People tend to prefer the status quo to big changes, regardless of the expected benefits. And Jonas Eliasson, head of transport accessibility at the Swedish National Transport Agency, says that’s often what makes people oppose congestion pricing in the first place.
But the tendency works both ways. When change happens, people often learn to accept the new situation and eventually see it more positively. In other words, they just get used to it. And once they get used to it, the concept “isn’t weird anymore,” Eliasson said.
According to Poll from Siena College In April, only 25 percent of New York voters supported the proposed pricing plan, while 63 percent opposed it. Many opponents worried that cars would avoid downtown and increase pollution in suburban areas. Others expressed concerns about the impact on low-income residents. Powerful interests, including New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and the state trucking association, filed a lawsuit to stop it.
Ollie Scarf / Getty Images
The backlash is eerily similar to the initial opposition seen overseas, before London’s policy came into effect in early 2003. 40 percent Residents supported it and Mayor Ken Livingstone said:A desperately bloody day” Before implementation. In Stockholm, Two-thirds of the residents He also opposed the six-month trial, which was announced in 2002 and began in 2006. “I was really surprised by the intensity of the backlash and the longevity of the protests,” Eliason said. “This was in the news virtually every day during this entire time.”
Opponents raised many of the same objections that New Yorkers raised, so it was surprising when public attitudes turned overwhelmingly positive shortly after congestion charging was introduced. In London, it was almost 60 percent A few months after the policy was introduced, only 25% of people supported congestion charging, but Stockholm saw an even more dramatic change. About 70% support Until 2011. (Voters Congestion charges will be imposed permanently (via referendum in 2007)
Many of the skeptics were influenced by the results. London has undergone dramatic changes: Downtown traffic congestion was reduced by 30%. Overall traffic decreased by 15%.The city also added 300 buses to central London routes on days when fares are charged, encouraging a shift from driving to public transport.
“Bus ridership increased by about a third, and 10 percent of people switched from driving to transit, walking or biking,” Turk said. “That helped build a positive attitude toward the project because people could see what they were getting out of it.”
Stockholm also saw impressive improvements in city centre traffic. Down more than 22% Vehicle emissions were reduced by up to 15%.
Both cities used the revenue to invest heavily in transit and other transportation infrastructure, including roads, bridges, sidewalks, and bike lanes. But one of the biggest gains has been a shift in cultural norms about charging for transit and public goods. “People have now accepted, on a subconscious level, that street space is something you can actually put a price on, just like you can have traffic lights, speed limits, and parking fees,” Eliasson said. “You can debate whether it should be higher or lower or adjusted, but the moral question of whether you can put a price on streets is no longer an issue.”
Benefits aside, researchers have found that status quo bias is one of the biggest reasons why attitudes change over time. In one way, people accept the idea and come to terms with it. In one German study, drivers who believed that congestion charges were imminent more likely to be viewed positivelyPartly because people find it uncomfortable to deny their current reality. Another study conducted in Gothenburg, Sweden, found that The status quo bias played the biggest role Support for the city’s congestion charging scheme grew after it was introduced, and similar trends have emerged in Stockholm and other cities around the world, Eliasson said.
“If there were no congestion pricing, there is a psychological tendency to say, ‘Well, things are relatively good the way they are. I don’t want to change them,’” said Eliasson and others who co-authored the study on the subject in Gothenburg. But once the policy is in place, people think, ‘Well, we have congestion pricing, and things are fine the way they are. Why change everything?’ Because of the human nature of preferring the status quo, policymakers “will always face this resistance to changing anything,” said Eliasson.
This means that strong political leadership and the willingness to endure inevitable short-term opposition are essential to the success of bold moves like congestion pricing. Livingstone has provided crucial support in London, while in Stockholm, the Swedish Social Democrats and other centre-left parties have backed the proposal.
That level of support has disappeared in the Empire State and the Big Apple. When Hochul balked at supporting the cause, New York City Mayor Eric Adams I supported her decision. And the city said it will look for other ways to fund the now-postponed transportation infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, some 700,000 vehicles continue to flood into Manhattan Every weekday.
