The Stockholm Trial:Congestion charging and improved public

transport aimed at reducing traffic jams and creating a better environment

Gunnar Söderholm, director head of environment-and health department

• 15 Sep 2002 General election• 2 June 2003 Proposal from city

parliament• 16 June 2004 New law• 1 July 2004 Procurment to NRA• 9 July 2004 IBM gets contract• 30 march 2005 Final court decision

• Improved public transport 22 Aug 2005

• Congestion charging3 Jan-31 July 2006

• Referendum 17 Sept2006

• Restarted 1 Aug 2007

Primary objectives of congestioncharging

• Reduced congestion

• Increased accessibility

• Better environment

18 control pointsa charge is made when entering/exiting the centre of Stockholm

Congestion-charging zone

Congestion charges and timesPEAK PERIODS7.30-8.30 a.m., 4-5.30 p.m SEK 20 € 2

SEMI PEAK PERIODS7.-7.30 a.m., 8.30-9 a.m.3.30-4 p.m., 5.30-6 p.m. SEK 15 € 1,5

MEDIUM-VOLUME PERIODS6.30-7 a.m., 9 a.m.-3.30 p.m.6-6.30 p.m. SEK 10 € 1

MAXIMUM CHARGE: SEK 60/day € 6

Evenings, Saturdays, Sundays, holidays: NO CHARGE

Charging principles• Charge for every passage over

charging-zone cordon• Charge for traffic both entering and

departing the charging zone• One tax decision per day• Car owner is responsible for paying

the tax• No demand or other notice to car

owners that they must pay the tax –or how much

• If payment is not made within 14 days (5 days until 30 May 2006) a penalty of SEK 70 (€ 7) is charged. Proposal for monthly payment by invoice from 1 July 2008

• If payment is not made within 4 weeks a penalty of SEK 200 (€ 20) is charged. Maximum € 200/month.

• Direct debit from bank account 77 %

These traffic categories are exempt about 30 % of passages

• Emergency vehicles• Vehicles with disability permits

• Foreign vehicles• Transport services forthe disabled

• Taxis• Motorcycles • Buses over 14 tons• Vehicles using alternative fuel (5 years)

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10%

Liding

öpas

sage

r*

Taxi

"Miljö

bilar"

Buss,

> 14 t

onPark

ering

stills

tånd

Utländ

ska f

ordon

Diplom

atbil

Utryck

nings

fordo

nFärd

tjäns

t

JanuariFebruariMarsAprilMajJuniJuli

No discount for residents inside the cordon

Passages entering/departing the congestion-charging zone 06:00 – 19:00

-

100 000

200 000

300 000

400 000

500 000

600 000

jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

2005 2006 2007 2008

= month with congestion tax

Dygnsfördelning, inkommande + utgående passager

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

00:0

000

:45

01:3

002

:15

03:0

003

:45

04:3

005

:15

06:0

006

:45

07:3

008

:15

09:0

009

:45

10:3

011

:15

12:0

012

:45

13:3

014

:15

15:0

015

:45

16:3

017

:15

18:0

018

:45

19:3

020

:15

21:0

021

:45

22:3

023

:15

Flöd

e/tim

me Tot-april-2005

Tot-oktober-2005

Tot-april-2006

Tot-oktober-2006

Tot-oktober-2007

Traffic in to and out from the inner city

Dygnsfördelning-passager ut från innerstaden

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

00:0

000

:45

01:3

002

:15

03:0

003

:45

04:3

005

:15

06:0

006

:45

07:3

008

:15

09:0

009

:45

10:3

011

:15

12:0

012

:45

13:3

014

:15

15:0

015

:45

16:3

017

:15

18:0

018

:45

19:3

020

:15

21:0

021

:45

22:3

023

:15

Flöd

e/tim

me Ut-april-2005

Ut-oktober-2005

Ut-april-2006

Ut-oktober-2006

Ut-oktober-2007

Dygnsfördelning-passager in mot innerstaden

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

00:0

000

:45

01:3

002

:15

03:0

003

:45

04:3

005

:15

06:0

006

:45

07:3

008

:15

09:0

009

:45

10:3

011

:15

12:0

012

:45

13:3

014

:15

15:0

015

:45

16:3

017

:15

18:0

018

:45

19:3

020

:15

21:0

021

:45

22:3

023

:15

Flöd

e/tim

me In-april-2005

In-oktober-2005

In-april-2006

In-oktober-2006

In-oktober-2007

In

Out

2007: Travel time improvements once again – but partlyoffset by roadworks

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

innerstad inreinfartIN inreinfartUT

200520062007

Congestion index (PM) September-October

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

innerstad inreinfartIN inreinfartUT

200520062007

AM peak PM peak

Travelling time morning rush hour

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

FMR okt 05

FMR, K1-06

FMR K1-07

FMR K1-08

Travelling time afternoon rush hour

Goals essentially reached• 10 - 15 % less traffic to/from

inner city– Was 20-25%

• Increased accessibility– Queue times down 30-50% in/near

the inner city – Essingeleden about the same

• Decreased emissions – 10-14% less in inner city; 2-3% in

total county

• Inhabitants should perceive an improved urban environment– Unclear – difficult to define and

measure

Trains, tubes and trams in Stockholm

Public transport 2005 - 2007SL-resandet totalt

1 200

1 400

1 600

1 800

2 000

2 200

2 400

2 600

2 800

jan feb mar apr maj jun jul aug sep okt nov dec

Påst

igan

de p

er v

arda

gsdy

gn, 1

000-

tal

År 2005År 2006År 2007År 2008

Public transit statistics 2007 a day

531 000123 000Local train

40750242 000Commutertrains

192425 000975 000Buses

1051 9501 094 000Metro

NumberDeparturesBoarding

How many are ffected of the congestion tax?

• Many pays now and then –few pays often– During two weeks pays 50 % of

the car owners in greaterStockholm sometime…

– …but less than 5 % pays morethan 100 SEK/2 weeks

• A small groupe pays a big part– 5 % pays more than 1/3 of the

taxes from private owned cars

Industry & commerce• Well-functioning road

transport important– Time gains valuable, but

administration cumbersome

• Marginal influence on land use, real estate prices and regional economy compared to otherfactors

• No identifiable effects on retail at aggregate level

• Influence on householdspurchasing power negligible

Is the Stockholm trial a good idea

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Septem

ber 0

5Okto

ber 0

5Nove

mber 0

5Dece

mber 0

6Ja

nuari 0

6Feb

ruari 0

6Mars

06Apri

l 06

Maj 06

Juni

06Good ideaBad idea

The result of the referendum

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

City of Stockholm County of Stockholm Together

YesNo

Growing support for the scheme

From 75 % against

To 67 % for

Did you change opinion during the trial?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

No change More positive More negative

Public opinion nov – dec 2007

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Positive Neither Negative

Why did you get more positive?Varför blev du mer positiv

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Rinkeby

-Kist

a

Spång

a-Tens

ta

Hässe

lby-V

älling

by

Bromma

Kungs

holm

enNorrmalmÖste

rmalmSöd

ermalm

Enske

de- Å

rsta-V

antörSka

rpnäc

k

Farsta

Älvsjö

Hägers

ten- L

iljeho

lmenSkä

rholm

enHela st

aden

...miljön blev bättre än väntat...framkomligheten blev bättre än väntat...resekostnaderna blev bättre än väntat...kollektivtrafiken blev bättre än väntat...annat

...vet ej/minns inte

Whay did you get more negativ?Varför blev du mer negativ?

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Rinke

by-K

ista

Spång

a-Ten

sta

Hässe

lby-V

älling

byBrom

maKun

gsho

lmenNorr

malmÖsterm

almSöderm

alm

Enske

de- Å

rsta-V

antörSka

rpnäc

kFars

taÄlvs

jö

Hägers

ten- L

iljeho

lmenSkä

rholm

enHela st

aden

...miljön blev sämre än väntat...framkomligheten blev sämre än väntat...resekostnaderna blev sämre än väntat...kollektivtrafiken blev sämre än väntat...annat

...vet ej/minns inte

Opinion by city district

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Rinkeby-K

istaSpånga-Tensta

Hässelby-Vällingby

BrommaKungsholmenNorrmalmÖstermalmSödermalm

Enskede- Årsta

-VantörSkarpnäckFarstaÄlvs

jö

Hägersten-LiljeholmenSkärholmenHela staden

Mycket positivGanska positivGanska negativMycket negativ

Do you think that the congestion tax gives

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Less cogentionin/out from the

inner city

Less congestionin the inner city

Better air in theinner city

Less noice Better road safety Better publictransit

The demonstrated sucess of roadpricing.

Other major cities around the world, including London and Stockholmmost recently have reducedcongestion and improved throughputalmost immediately through the im-plementation of congestion pricingstrategies

Vote Yes!

Why was the trial a success?

• It worked technically verywell

• People have known what to do

• The traffic effects haveexceeded the expectations

• People have seen the benefits by themselves

• Continously mesuring didn’tgive room for rumours

• People have been preparedto change their minds

Information on the web:

www.Stockholmsforsoket.sewww.vv.se