为何对拥挤收费说“不”——对爱丁堡全民公决结果的事后剖析  

Why Say “No” to Congestion Pricing: Post-mortem on the Edinburgh Referendum Results

作　　者：邓涛涛[1] 冯苏苇[2] 

机构地区：[1]上海财经大学城市与区域科学学院 [2]上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院

出　　处：《国际城市规划》2014年第3期103-109,共7页Urban Planning International

基　　金：国家自然科学基金"‘公交优先’战略下快速公交系统实施绩效的评价体系与方法研究"(41201102);上海市哲学社会科学规划一般课题"基于非市场价值估计理论的城市交通政策绩效评价"(2009BCK002)

摘　　要：推行拥挤收费面临相当大的不确定性,对国外失败的案例进行剖析,无疑对我国试行拥挤收费具有重要的参考价值。2005年英国爱丁堡对道路拥挤收费草案进行全民公决,公决失败致使爱丁堡放弃了研究近12年的拥挤收费方案。本文分析了爱丁堡拥挤收费方案出台的背景、实施措施,重点分析了公众抵制拥挤收费的原因。研究表明,爱丁堡在拥挤收费区域划分、豁免人群界定、收费时机选择、推进策略上存在很大争议,从而导致全民公决失败。本文指出,当前我国各大城市需要慎重考虑拥挤收费的推行时机、推进策略,积极争取潜在受益者的大力支持,并努力协调临近行政区域联合使用拥挤收费措施,以减少政策风险。Abstract： The implementation of congestion pricing has faced with considerable uncertainty. A critical analysis of the failure case has undoubtedly added an important reference value to our country＇s pilot of congestion pricing. In 2005 a referendum on congestion charging draft was conducted in Edinburgh. The failure of referendum caused the local authority to give up the congestion pricing program which had been discussed for nearly 12 years. This paper analyzes the background of Edinburgh congestion pricing scheme and the detailed implementation measures, with a focus on reasons why public boycott for congestion pricing. Results show that there is a big controversy in the congestion pricing zoning, the definition of exemption, charging timing and promotion strategies, resulting in the failure of referendum. The paper points out that the major cities in China need to carefully consider the right time and promotion strategies of implementing congestion pricing, actively seek the strong support from the potential beneficiaries and make good efforts to coordinate with adjacent administrative regions in implementing congestion pricing scheme, in order to reduce the risk of policy.

关 键 词：道路拥挤收费 爱丁堡 全民公决 抵制 

分 类 号：TU984.191[建筑科学—城市规划与设计]