Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Road space rationing
View on Wikipedia
Road space rationing, also known as alternate-day travel, driving restriction, no-drive days and number coding (Spanish: restricción vehicular; Portuguese: rodízio veicular; French: circulation alternée), is a travel demand management strategy aimed to reduce the negative externalities generated by urban air pollution or peak urban travel demand in excess of available supply or road capacity, through artificially restricting demand (vehicle travel) by rationing the scarce common good road capacity, especially during the peak periods or during peak pollution events. This objective is achieved by restricting traffic access into an urban cordon area, city center (CBD), or district based upon the last digits of the vehicle registration plate on pre-established days and during certain periods, usually, the peak hours.
The practical implementation of this traffic restraint policy is common in Latin America, and in many cases, the road rationing has as a main goal the reduction of air pollution, such as the cases of México City, and Santiago, Chile. São Paulo, with a fleet of 6 million vehicles in 2007, is the largest metropolis in the world with such a travel restriction, implemented first in 1996 as measured to mitigate air pollution, and thereafter made permanent in 1997 to relieve traffic congestion. More recent implementations in Costa Rica and Honduras have had the objective of reducing oil consumption, due to the high impact this import has on the economy of small countries, and considering the steep increases in oil prices that began in 2003. Bogotá, Quito, and La Paz, Bolivia also have similar driving restriction schemes in place.
After a temporary implementation of road space rationing to reduce air pollution in Beijing during the 2008 Summer Olympics, local officials put in place several permanent rationing schemes to improve the city's air quality. As of June 2016[update], another 11 Chinese cities have similar restriction schemes in place. Also, temporary driving restrictions to reduce cars on the streets by half during severe pollution events have been implemented in Paris and surrounding suburbs in March 2014, March 2015, and December 2016; in Beijing twice in December 2015, and one more time in December 2016; and also in Rome and Milan for several days in December 2015. A similar alternate-day travel temporary scheme was implemented in New Delhi as a two-week trial in January 2016. A temporary ban on diesel cars was implemented in Oslo on municipal roads in January 2017.
Historical background
[edit]The earliest known implementation of road space rationing took place in Ancient Rome, as carriages and carts pulled by horses created serious congestion problems in several Roman cities. In 45 B.C. Julius Caesar declared the center of Rome off-limits between 6 a.m. and 4 p.m. to all vehicles except for carriages transporting priests, officials, visitors, and high-ranking citizens.[1]
Effectiveness
[edit]
Schemes rationing access based on number plate have mixed results. If used infrequently or temporarily the alternate-day travel policy can have some impact. However, if used as a long term measure, inequality issues might arise, as wealthier people can afford to own two cars with opposite-parity number plates, to circumvent any restrictions, with the second vehicle being often older and therefore more polluting.[2] Cities such as Tehran which have used such schemes are now looking to more sustainable methods of traffic and emissions control,[3] such as low emission zone or traffic limited zones as used in Europe.[4] Access regulations have often been found to be effective, in reducing congestion, traffic and pollution.[5]
The program's impact on moving behavior to more sustainable transport methods is also unclear. Evaluations on the effectiveness of road space rationing regulations focus mainly on whether there is a decrease in the usage of the less sustainable vehicles for which the schemes were implemented in the first place. They do not focus on whether there is a change in the pattern in which such vehicles are used. For example, evaluations examine how many people stop using a polluting car. They do not evaluate how many people start riding bicycles or carpool as a result of such schemes.[6]
Evaluating effectiveness
[edit]It is important to better understand the effectiveness of the regulatory policies intended to reduce traffic congestion to improve their implementation in the future. Some factors that hinder the effective program evaluation of policies like road space rationing are that transportation demand management strategies are often implemented as a part of other broader policies. It is difficult to separate the effects of such methods from the other methods they are associated with. Most measures are taken at the beginning and during the implementation of a strategy. Not enough evaluation is conducted after strategy implementation. In developing countries, data insufficiency hinders the formation of generalizable conclusions on the effectiveness of a strategy.[6] It is hard to outline a cause and effect relationship between the regulation that is implemented and the change in behavior it creates or general effect it has. Many factors could cause a change in the behavior of individuals affected by the regulation at hand. It could be the direct result of that regulation or the result of other existing regulations, and societal effects.[6] Given that such programs are not usually implemented in isolation, singular conclusions on the effectiveness of regulations impacting traffic congestion are difficult to form.
Three methods can be employed to measure the effectiveness of regulatory policies. The first measure, administration evaluation, examines how road space rationing is delivered and enforced to the target audience. The second measure, behavioral evaluation, focuses on the extent to which the regulation changes the behavior of the target audience. The third measure, outcome performance, analyzes the outcomes of the regulation. To collect information on these measures, direct observation, stated preferences surveys, and revealed preference surveys can be conducted. These methods can be conducted in isolation or simultaneously to procure rich data. The problems associated with these methods are observer bias in direct observation, the spread of misinformation when respondents are untruthful, and excess time consumption.[6]
Applications of road space rationing
[edit]Permanent alternate-day travel schemes
[edit]Road space rationing based on license numbers has been implemented in cities such as Athens (1982),[7] Santiago, Chile (1986 and extended 2001), México City (1989), Metro Manila (1995), São Paulo (1997), Bogotá, Colombia (1998), La Paz, Bolivia (2003),[8] San José, Costa Rica, (2005)[9][10] countrywide in Honduras (2008),[11] and Quito, Ecuador (2010).[12] All these cities restrain a percentage of vehicles every weekday during rush hours or for the entire day. When the restriction is based in two digits a theoretical 20% reduction of traffic is expected. Cities with serious air quality problems, such as México City and Santiago use more digits to achieve greater reductions in air pollution, and even the prohibition can be for more than one day a week. In Bogotá, Colombia from 2009 the plate restriction was extended from peak periods to the whole day (from 06:00 to 20:00 hours) in the whole city.[citation needed]
Bertrand Delanoë, the mayor of Paris, proposed to impose a complete ban on motor vehicles in the city's inner districts, with exemptions only for residents, businesses, and the disabled, as a three-part plan to implement during a seven-year period.[13] This proposal was made in 2005, in the context of Paris' bid to host the 2012 Summer Olympics[14] which ended up being won by London.
During the discussions regarding the proposal to introduce congestion pricing in New York, the commission created in 2007 by the New York State Legislature to evaluate other traffic relief options, considered road space rationing based on license plates as an alternative to congestion pricing.[15] The proposal stalled in April 2008 as the legislature decided not to vote the proposed plan.[16]
Athens
[edit]Rising traffic in Athens during the 1990s led to the development of the Dactylius (Greek: Δακτύλιος, romanized: Daktýlios, lit. 'ring') around central Athens. The Dactylius does not require drivers to pay in order to enter the areas subjected to the Dactylius' restrictions. Instead, the scheme depends on the parity of the date and of the vehicle's registration plate, the vehicle type as well as the time of the week/month. There are three Dactylius areas: The Inner, the Outer and the Green, each one with its own policies.[citation needed]
Bogotá
[edit]Then mayor Enrique Peñalosa, introduced in Bogotá, Colombia in 1998 a driving restriction program, "Pico y placa" (literally in Spanish: "peak and license plate") to reduce traffic congestion during rush hours.[17] The system restricts traffic access into a pre-established urban area for vehicles with license plate numbers ending in certain digits on pre-established days and during certain hours based on the last digit of the licence plate numbers. Initially the system restricted traffic between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and between 5:30 and 7:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, for two days for each registered vehicle.[17][18]
Then mayor Antanas Mockus extended the restriction for one hour in 2001. A complementary program called "El Pico y Placa Ambiental" (literally in Spanish: "environmental peak and license plate") was implemented by then mayor Luis Eduardo Garzón in 2006, expanding the restriction to public transportation vehicles, including both bus and taxi services.[18] Four numbers were restricted every day for private use vehicles, and two for public transportation vehicles. Since 2002 Bogotá's scheme switched the combinations of days and numbers every year, making it harder to circumvent the restriction by buying another car.[19]
Starting in February 2009, then mayor Samuel Moreno Rojas extended the restriction from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m., Monday through Friday. This extension was issued as a temporary measure until public works related with the Transmilenio BRT were completed.[20] In July 2012, then mayor Gustavo Petro reduced the hours of the restriction from 14 to 7 hours per day, to restrict access only between 6:00 and 8:30 a.m. and between 3:00 and 7:30 p.m. In addition, five neighborhoods were released from the restriction, Usme, Rafael Uribe Uribe, Tunjuelito, San Cristóbal and Ciudad Bolívar. Also, under the modified scheme five ending numbers are restricted every day between Monday and Friday, license plated ending on odd-numbers are restricted on odd-days of the month, and even-numbers on even-days.[18][21]
Since December 2014, exempted vehicles include passenger cars with three or more passengers including the driver; properly registered vehicles for use by people with disabilities; all-electric vehicles; emergency vehicles, such police cars, ambulances, and fire trucks; properly identified public utilities vehicles, traffic control and towing vehicles; school buses; motorcycles; cash-in-transit armored vehicles; funeral vehicles; and press, judiciary, diplomatic, presidential motorcade, and security escort vehicles.[22]
Similar schemes with the same name have been implemented in several Colombian cities, including Armenia, Barranquilla, Bucaramanga, Cali, Cartagena, Manizales, Medellín, and Pereira.[citation needed]
Jakarta
[edit]Road space rationing in Jakarta is known as Ganjil Genap (meaning "even and odd" in Indonesian). This policy imitates what has been done in Beijing during the Olympics. Police enforce rationing at the entrances of designated avenues and expressways. A car with an even license plate (for example, "B 1000 LA", the obsolete plate of Idris Sardi car) is allowed to pass on "even days", but will be fined when they enter that road on "odd days". Drivers might get even/odd days information from social media or radio stations. The Ganjil Genap policy was first implemented on Sudirman Avenue on 27 July 2016,[23] taking the place of the previous "3-in-1 policy" (high vehicle occupancy), terminated by former Jakarta Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (or Ahok) on 16 May 2016.[24]
In 2018, Ganjil Genap was expanded to expressways bound to suburban areas (Jabodetabek), being enforced at Bekasi, Cibubur (at the border of Jakarta and Depok) and Tangerang toll booths. Only overcrowded toll booths apply this ban. Existing Ganjil Genap in Jakarta was extended from 6 am starts from 23 April 2018.
"3-in-1" was in force for 12+1⁄2 years (23 December 2003 – 16 May 2016), prohibiting vehicles with less than 3 passengers from certain roads. Basuki opted for this policy's removal citing car jockeys that plagued the policy's success, as well as how jockeying often led to exploitation of children.[25] Police authorities also admitted that enforcement of 3-in-1 was harder than checking license plates, especially given the prevalence of car jockeying.
Mexico City
[edit]Mexico City started in November 1989 its driving restriction program, "Hoy no Circula" (literally in Spanish: "today [your car] does not circulate", known as "No-drive days"), which consisted of prohibiting the circulation of 20% of vehicles from Monday to Friday depending on the last digit of their license plates. Record levels of ozone and other airborne pollutants led the city government to implement the scheme.[19][26] The program was planned to apply only during the winter, when air pollution is at its worst. Winter follows the rainy season when thermal inversion, an atmospheric condition which traps smog and pollution close to the ground, increases air pollution noticeably. However, the program was made permanent at the end of the 1990 winter season.[citation needed]

The program is intended to improve the air quality of Mexico City. The restriction is based on the last digit of the license plate. Two numbers are restricted to travel every day from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. The restrictions apply to the entire Mexico City metropolitan area, therefore, a similar coordinated program operates within the State of México, including the 18 neighboring municipalities which surrounds Mexico City on three sides: Atizapán de Zaragoza, Coacalco de Berriozabal, Cuautitlán, Cuautitlán Izcalli, Chalco, Chimalhuacan, Chicoloapan, Ecatepec de Morelos, Huixquilucan, Ixtapaluca, La Paz, Naucalpan de Juárez, Nezahualcóyotl, Nicolás Romero, Tecámac, Tlalnepantla de Baz, Tultitlán and Valle de Chalco Solidaridad.[26][27]
Hoy No Circula is coupled with an exhaust monitoring program, known as "Verificación" in Spanish (verification), whereby a car's pollutant emissions are analyzed every six months. A colored sticker based on a vehicle's license plate number is affixed to each vehicle following an emissions test, indicating whether a vehicle is exempt from the program or not. Hybrid electric vehicles and electric vehicles are exempted. There are other restrictions that are applicable to non-local vehicles and foreigners.[28][29] In June 2015, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation ruled in favor a constitutional challenge, and ordered that passenger cars with model year older than 2007 shall be restricted based on their actual tailpipe emissions, and not on how old the car is.[30]
Taxis, buses, police cars, ambulances, fire trucks, commercial vehicles operating with liquid propane gas, and commercial vehicles transporting perishable goods are exempt. In 2008 the scheme in Mexico City was extended to limit driving into the city one Saturday every month, but only applies to cars that are more than 10-years old (sticker 2). Foreign-plated vehicles without emissions stickers are restricted all day every Saturday.[31] Similar alternate-day travel restriction programs have been implemented in Pachuca, Puebla and Toluca.[30]
The driving restriction program was initially successful in reducing pollution levels, as carbon monoxide (CO) fell by 11%. Compliance with the program is near universal. However, as the restriction was made permanent residents began buying second cars to get around the ban, usually used and old polluting cars. A 2008 study from the University of Michigan found that there is no evidence that the restrictions have improved air quality. Evidence from additional sources indicates that the restrictions led to an increase in the total number of vehicles in circulation and the long-term impact of the scheme on CO levels has been a 13% rise.[19][26]
San José
[edit]An alternate-day travel scheme was introduced in San José, Costa Rica, in August 2005. The goal of the restriction program was to reduced oil consumption with the purpose of mitigating the negative effects of high international oil prices in the Costa Rican economy. The program was implemented when the price of an oil barrel was at US$65 up from US$20 in early 2003. Fuel and oil imports represented in 2007 a 5.6% of the country's GDP, up from 2% ten years earlier.[32]

Initially the driving restriction was applied to enter the capital's central business district and the scheme is based on the last number of the license plate, restricting two numbers per day, Monday through Friday.[9] The travel restrictions were issued initially only during the rush hours, from 7:00 to 8:30 a.m. and 4:00-5:30 p.m.[10]
In June 2008 the restricted cordon area was expanded until San José's Boulevard Circunvalación peripheral ring.[33] The expansion aim was to attain further reductions in oil consumption, as oil prices continued to rise and reached US$130 per barrel in June 2008. Government official estimated that at this price, oil imports will reach US$2.85 billion, representing about a third of the country's export earnings and about 9% of the country's GDP estimated for 2008.[34][35] As the implemented scheme only reduced fuel consumption by 5%, the government decided to expand the restriction hours beginning in July 2008. The road space rationing was expanded to 13 hours for passenger cars and light-duty commercial vehicles, from 6 a.m. through 7 p.m. Heavy-duty commercial vehicles were included in the restriction program but only during rush hours.[36][37]
The alternate-day driving program was suspended in June 2009 as a result of a Constitutional Court ruling in favor a constitutional challenge. The court ruled that the policy infringed the constitutional freedom of movement right, and also that the economic sanctions for this violation were not supported by the existing legal framework.[38] The temporary end of the program resulted in heavy traffic jams all over the city, as traffic volumes within the restricted cordon area increased by 20% to 25%.[39][40] The driving restriction scheme was restored one month later by an Executive Decree based on amendments included in the Traffic Law passed by Congress in 2008. Nevertheless, this time the program was justified on San José's worsening traffic congestion levels instead of the economic impact of high oil prices.[41][42]
Since October 2012 hybrid electric vehicles and all-electric cars are exempted from the driving restriction as part of Costa Rica's government policy to promote the use of clean energy in the country.[43] As a result of multiple legal challenges, traffic engineering authorities decided to conduct periodic effectiveness evaluations of the program.[42] Traffic authorities announced in October 2014 that the results of six studies found that the alternate-day travel restriction reduced the number of vehicles entering downtown San José every working day between 14% and 16%.[44]
Santiago
[edit]This section needs additional citations for verification. (January 2016) |
Driving restrictions were introduced in Santiago in 1986, as a measure to mitigate Chile's capital high levels of air pollution. The scheme was based on the last number of the license plate. Two numbers are banned from entering the city between Monday and Friday. In 1992, Santiago reformed its program to adopt vintage-specific restrictions. These restrictions placed higher limits on old, more polluting cars and lower limits on new, less polluting cars. The 1992 reform led to a significant impact on the emissions created by local pollutants in Santiago. A price effect that favored less polluting car models was also seen. Households in localities facing restrictions owned more 1992 or older built vehicles without catalytic converter than households in localities that did not face restrictions. This reform highlights the effect of vintage-specific restrictions on fleet-composition. It does not provide information on how such a policy can be designed and how welfare is impacted by its implementation. It does not provide information on how such a policy can be designed and how welfare is impacted by its implementation.[45]
Initially the restriction applied only to passenger vehicles without a catalytic converter with the aim to reduced particulate matter emissions. As of March 2018, the restriction applies to all cars built before 2012.[46] During critical air pollution events, classified as alert, pre-emergency or emergency, the number of cars restricted to travel are increased by adding additional last number plates. Beginning with pre-emergency state, the restriction might include vehicles with catalytic converter. As the number of registered vehicles with the emission control device surpassed those without it, authorities decided in 2008 to increase the number of vehicles restricted to enter every day to the city, by increasing the restriction to the four last digits instead of the initial two. This scheme produces a theoretical reduction of 40% of vehicles entering the city on a work day.
São Paulo
[edit]
São Paulo is the largest metropolis in the world with a permanent alternate-day travel restriction (Portuguese: rodízio veicular). The scheme was first implemented in 1995 as a trial on a voluntary basis, and then as a mandatory restriction implemented in August 1996 to mitigate air pollution, and thereafter made permanent in June 1997 to relieve traffic congestion.[47][48] The driving restriction applies to passenger cars and commercial vehicles, and it is based on the last digit of the license plate. Two numbers are restricted to travel every day from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. from Monday through Friday.[49]
Vehicles exempted from the restriction include buses and other urban transportation vehicles, school buses, ambulances and other medical services vehicles, mail and fire cars and trucks, police and military vehicles, cash-in-transit armored vehicles, vehicles delivering perishable food products, properly registered vehicles for use by people with disabilities, and other public utility vehicles.[50] In May 2014 the City Council approved a law to exempt from the restriction plug-in electric vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles and fuel-cell vehicles with a license plate registered in the city.[51][52] The benefits for electric-drive vehicles went into effect in September 2015.[53]
Temporary restrictions
[edit]Beijing
[edit]
Temporary driving restrictions were imposed in Beijing from December 8 to 10, 2015, as part of the smog mitigation measures provided for in Beijing's red alert for hazardous smog, the first such alert issued ever. The smog alert system was put in place in 2013, and a red alert should go into effect if there is a prediction that the air quality index will stay over 200 for more than 72 hours. On the evening of December 7 the index was 253 according to Beijing's authorities. Under a red alert half of the city's cars are ordered off the streets through a temporary alternate-day travel scheme based on the cars' license plate numbers. Only cars with even-numbered license plates were allowed on the roads during the first day of the restriction.[54][55] Electric cars are not subject to the driving restriction, as a government incentive to promote the use of cleaner vehicles.[56]
According to the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the combined effect of all the restrictions imposed reduced pollutant emissions in Beijing by 30% during day one of the city's first red alert for smog. Environmentalist from Beijing University of Technology estimated that without the measures, the density of PM2.5 would have risen by 10% in that period.[57] A second red alert for pollution was issued on December 18, 2015. Temporary driving restrictions were imposed for four days, beginning at 7 a.m. on December 19 and ending on the 23rd at midnight.[58]
On 16 December 2016, Beijing authorities declared a five-day pollution “red alert” due to a heavy pollution event. Among other measures, about half the cars were restricted through a temporary alternate-day travel scheme, and older and “dirty” high-emissions vehicles were forbidden to circulate. Public transport services in the city were increased, with about 3,600 buses on duty. The Ministry of Environmental Protection reported that 21 other cities across north and central China had also declared pollution red alerts, including Tianjin, Shijiazhuang, Taiyuan, and Zhengzhou.[59][60] The red alert was lifted on 22 December 2016 as the winds cleared pollution away the night before.[61]
Italy
[edit]In December 2015, several Italian cities implemented temporary driving restrictions due to severe air pollution levels. The restrictions were issued in Rome, Milan and other cities in the Lombardy region, including Pavia, Buccinasco, Cesano Boscone, Cernusco sul Naviglio, Bresso, Cinisello Balsamo, Cormano, Corsico, Cusano Milanino, Paderno Dugnano and Sesto San Giovanni.[62][63] Italy had the most pollution-related deaths in Europe in 2012. Over 84,000 people in the country died prematurely owing to bad air quality, according to the European Environment Agency (EEA).[62]
Milan
[edit]
Milan was named as Europe's most polluted city in 2008 and remains among the worst on the continent. City officials have limited traffic on several occasions since 2007 to curb bad air quality.[62] Due to record high air pollution levels, Milanese authorities ban cars, motorcycles and scooters for six hours a day, between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. for three days during the last week of December 2015. Local authorities introduced a special "anti-smog" all-day public transport ticket for €1.50 (~US$1.65).[62][63][64] Neighboring towns and municipalities in the Lombardy region, including Pavia, Cinisello Balsamo, Paderno Dugnano, and Sesto San Giovanni, also implemented the temporary driving restriction.[63] Electric vehicles and carsharing cars are exempted from the ban.[63][65]
Rome
[edit]An alternate-day travel scheme was implemented in Rome to curb severe air pollution in the city, which has high concentrations of particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide. The scheme was in force for several days during the last two weeks of December 2015. The driving restriction is based on the last digits of license plate numbers and was implemented for a total of nine hours, from 7:30 to 12:30 and 16:30 until 20:30. To promote ridership by public transportation, €1.50 (~US$1.65) single-ride transit tickets became passes valid all day. Environmentally friendly vehicles, such as hybrids and natural gas vehicles are exempt from the restriction. The most polluting vehicles, such as gasoline-powered cars compliant with Euro 0 and 1 standards, and diesel cars up to Euro 2, can not enter the city independently of the number plate. Rome authorities resorted to limit traffic in the city on several occasions during the fall of 2015 due to high air pollution.[62][63][64]
Oslo
[edit]In January 2017 a combination of cold, still winter weather and poor air quality prompted Oslo city authorities to ban diesel-powered cars from municipal roads to combat rising air pollution for at least two days. The ban did not apply on the national motorways. This was the first time ever Oslo implemented a ban of this type after the city council agreed on the use of such a measure in February 2016. The diesel ban went into effect from 6 a.m. until 10 p.m on 17 January 2017, and motorists violating the ban were fined 1,500 kroner (~ US$180).[66][67] The temporary ban scheduled for 18 January was lifted after officials said the weather forecast indicated that higher altitude winds would clear the air.[68]
The restriction did not apply to heavy vehicles with Euro VI technology, gasoline-powered cars, electric cars and plug-in hybrid vehicles, emergency vehicles, goods transport, diplomatic vehicles, handicap transport, public service vehicles, and cars carrying a patient to a doctor appointment.[69] The restriction angered some motorists, who were encouraged by Norwegian authorities in 2006 to opt for diesel vehicles, which at the time were considered a better environmental choice than gasoline-powered cars.[66][67]
Paris
[edit]
On March 17, 2014, a partial driving restriction was imposed in Paris and its inner suburbs based on license plate numbers. The measure was issued by the city government in order to mitigate a peak in air pollution, caused by particulate matter (PM 10) attributable to vehicle emissions. Cars with even-numbered license plates and commercial vehicles over 3.5 tons were banned from entering the city from 5:30 a.m. until midnight. Electric and hybrid cars, natural gas-powered vehicles and carpools with three or more passengers were exempted. Only once before this type of restriction had been implemented in the city for one day in 1997. The week before the traffic restriction was imposed, the government also reduced speed limits around Paris by 20 km (12 mi) per hour, provided all public transportation for free, and the short-term subscriptions of the Vélib bikesharing program, and the first hour of the Autolib' carsharing service were free. The measure was not extended to the following day due to the improvement of air quality.[70][71] [72][73]

Another peak in air pollution affected Paris and Northern France in mid March 2015. The Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, requested the central government to implement a driving restriction to mitigate the problem. The pollution index in Paris at 93 micrograms per cubic meter (mcg/m3) on Friday 20, 2015, due to increase amounts of pollutant PM10. The accepted limit for PM10 is set at 50 mcg/m3, and the safe limit or alert threshold is set at 80 mcg/m3.[74][75] As the pollution episode continued on Saturday 21 according to Airparif measurements, the central government imposed a driving restriction on Monday 23 affecting cars with even-numbered license plates and commercial vehicles over 3.5 tons. Taxis, ambulances, carpools with three or more passengers, electric cars and other environmentally friendly vehicles were exempted. As in the 2014 episode, complementary measures were implemented including reduced speed limits in the city, free public transportation, free residential parking, and free short-term use for subscribers of bike and carsharing services. The restriction was implemented in Paris and 22 towns located in the administrative region of Île-de-France.[76]
In early December 2016, Paris and its surrounding region suffered for a week the longest and most intense winter pollution episode in 10 years.[77] A driving restriction went into effect in Paris and 22 surrounding towns for four days, from Tuesday 6 to Friday 9, due to the persistence of pollution of fine particles and nitrogen dioxide. The restriction was extended for the first time in the cities of Villeurbanne and Lyon on Friday December 9. This was the fourth time in twenty years that alternating traffic is implemented in the capital, but the first time it is maintained for several days in a row.[78][79][80]
In May 2016, the city of Paris launched a scheme called "Paris Respire" (literally "Paris breathes") as part of which certain areas of the city are closed to vehicular traffic on Sundays and public holidays.[81][82]
New Delhi
[edit]According to the World Health Organization, in 2014, New Delhi had the most polluted air of about 1,600 cities the organization tracked around the world. According to India's Central Pollution Control Board, the city's air pollution had been in the severe category on nearly three-quarter of the days in November 2015. The Delhi High Court asked the government to take action to curb air pollution on 30 November 2015.[83]

In an attempt to mitigate severe air pollution in New Delhi, which gets worst during the winter, a temporary alternate-day travel scheme for cars using the odd- and even-numbered license plates system was announced by Delhi government in December 2015. In addition, trucks were allowed to enter India's capital only after 11 p.m., two hours later than the existing restriction.[83] Almost 9 million vehicles are registered in Delhi.[84] The driving restriction scheme went into effect as a trial for an initial period of 15 days, from 1 to 15 January 2016. The restriction was in force from 8 a.m. till 8 p.m., and traffic was not restricted on Sundays. The scheme was expected to take more than a million private cars off the road every day.[85][86]
Public transportation service was increased during the restriction period.[83] A total of 27 exemptions to the restriction were allowed by the government, including all motorcycles, benefiting more than 5 million motorcyclists, all female drivers traveling alone, to ensure women's security, and several categories of official vehicles, including those of high-ranking officials. During the first day of the restriction there was acceptance by the general population.[84][86]
A petition was filed in the Delhi High Court against the government in order to stop the implementation of the restriction driving scheme. On 9 December 2015, the Court decided to put on hold the analysis of the petition until more details of the scheme are defined by the government, and considering that no official notification has been issued by a public agency. A hearing was scheduled for December 23 for further analysis.[87] The most contested exemption is the one for female drivers, and a legal petition was filed. A court had to decide whether it is discriminatory to allow women to drive around Delhi while some of males will be forced to leave their vehicles at home.[86]
On 16 December 2015, the Supreme Court of India mandated several restrictions to curb pollution. Among the measures, the court banned the sale of new cars that have diesel engines and sport utility vehicles with an engine greater than 2000 cc until 31 March 2016. The court also ordered all taxis in the Delhi region to switch to compressed natural gas by 1 March 2016. Transportation vehicles than are more than 10 years old were banned from entering the capital.[88]
Summer Olympics
[edit]Beijing 2008
[edit]On July 20, 2008, Beijing implemented a temporary road space rationing scheme based on plate numbers in order to significantly improve air quality in the city during the 2008 Summer Olympics.[89][90] Enforcement was carried out through an automated traffic surveillance network. The rationing was in effect for two months, between July 20 and September 20, as the Olympics were followed by the Paralympics from September 6 until 17.[91] The restrictions on car use was implemented on alternate days depending on the plates ending in odd or even numbers. This measure was expected to take 45% of the 3.3 million car fleet off the streets. In addition, 300,000 heavy polluting vehicles were banned from July 1,[92] and the measure also prohibited access to most vehicles coming from outside Beijing. Authorities decided to compensate car owners for the inconvenience, by exempting them from payment of vehicle taxes for three months.[93]

A pilot test was conducted in August 2007 for four days, restricting driving for a third of Beijing's fleet, some 1.3 million vehicles.[94] A 40% daily reduction of vehicle emissions was reported.[95] A previous test carried out in November 2006 during the Sino-African Summit show reductions of 40% in NOx auto emissions.[96]
Post-Olympics permanent rule
[edit]The driving restriction during the Olympics was so successful in cleaning the air and relieving traffic congestion, that a modified version of the scheme was made permanent afterward in October 2008, now banning 20% of the vehicles on a given weekday instead of half the vehicles as implemented during the Olympics.[97][98] Also a ban on heavy trucks from entering the city during the day was implemented, and the oldest most polluting automobiles, called "yellow-label" cars, after the sticker fixed to their windshields, are banned from entering the city center. In July 2009 a nationwide car scrappage program was implemented offering rebates for trade in old heavy polluting cars and trucks for new ones.[97] As of June 2016[update], in addition to Beijing, another 11 Chinese cities have similar restriction schemes in place.[99]
London 2012
[edit]The 2012 Summer Olympics organization, with support from the Mayor of London office,[100] announced in 2007 that they were planning auto exclusion zones around all venues, including London, Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle upon Tyne, Glasgow and Cardiff.[101] London authorities hoped this measure would work as an experiment to change the public's travel behavior, allowing thereafter a shift from automobile to mass transit or bicycling. This severe policy has been publicized as the "First Car-free Olympics". During the peak events, the Olympics expected a crowd of 800,000 people. Those attending had to travel by public transport, mainly through the Underground, or by bicycle or on foot.[102]
This strategy was deemed effective and successful by Transport for London. Over 60 million passengers used the tube, which was 30% more than usual usage. Road Traffic was reduced by 15% and only 30% of designated game lanes were in operation each day of the Olympics. Regular transport users altered their travel methods and times to avoid hotspots during the games. The success of the strategy was largely due to the cooperation of the residents of London and visitors attending the games.[103]
Similar management and rationing policies
[edit]Congestion pricing
[edit]Transport economists consider road space rationing a variation of road pricing, and an alternative to congestion pricing, but road space rationing is considered more equitable by some, as the restrictions force all drivers to reduce auto travel, while congestion pricing restrains less those who can afford paying the congestion charge. Nevertheless, high-income users can often avoid the restrictions by owning a second car.[104] Moreover, congestion pricing (unlike rationing) acts "to allocate a scarce resource to its most valuable use, as evinced by users' willingness to pay for the resource". While some "opponents of congestion pricing fear that tolled roads will be used only by people with high income. But preliminary evidence suggests that the new toll lanes in California are used by people of all income groups. The ability to get somewhere fast and reliably is valued in a variety of circumstances. Not everyone will need or want to incur a toll on a daily basis, but on occasions when getting somewhere quickly is necessary, the option of paying to save time is valuable to people at all income levels."[105]
Mobility rights or congestion credits
[edit]A more recent idea for automobile travel restrictions, proposed by some transport economists[106] to avoid inequality and revenue allocation issues, is to implement a rationing of peak period travel but through revenue-neutral credit-based congestion pricing. This concept is similar to the existing system of emissions trading of carbon credits, proposed by the Kyoto Protocol to curb greenhouse emissions. Metropolitan area or city residents, or the taxpayers, will have the option to use the local government-issued mobility rights or congestion credits for themselves, or to trade or sell them to anyone willing to continue traveling by automobile beyond the personal quota. This trading system will allow direct benefits to be accrued by those users shifting to public transportation or by those reducing their peak-hour travel rather than the government.[2][107]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Black, William R. (2010). Sustainable Transportation: Problems and Solutions. The Guilford Press. pp. 14. ISBN 978-1-60623-485-3.
- ^ a b José M. Viegas (October 2001). "Making urban road pricing acceptable and effective: searching for quality and equity in urban mobility". Transport Policy. 8 (4): 289–294. doi:10.1016/S0967-070X(01)00024-5. pp. 289-294.
- ^ "Tehran's low-emission zone rule gets green light". en.tehran.ir. Retrieved 2016-10-15.
- ^ "urban access regulations". urbanaccessregulations.eu. Retrieved 2016-10-15.
- ^ "Overview of website". urbanaccessregulations.eu. Retrieved 2016-10-15.
- ^ a b c d Frosch, Colin. Evaluation of Shared Space to Reduce Traffic Congestion: A case study on West Virginia University's Downtown Campus (Thesis). West Virginia University Libraries.
- ^ "LEDA Measure: License plate based traffic restrictions, Athens, Greece". LEDA database. Archived from the original on 2008-02-27. Retrieved 2008-04-09.
- ^ "Los choferes públicos acataron la restricción" (in Spanish). La Prensa. 2003-01-07. Archived from the original on 2006-12-13. Retrieved 2008-04-09.
- ^ a b Ángela Ávalos (2005-08-03). "Hoy empieza restricción para autos en centro de San José" [Today begins traffic restriction for cars in downtown San José]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2016-05-15. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ a b Mercedes Agüero (2006-04-12). "Evaluarán restricción vehicular en capital" [Driving restriction in the capital city will be evaluated]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-09-19. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ "Unos 39.000 vehículos dejan de circular en Honduras para ahorrar petróleo" (in Spanish). La Nación. 2007-04-07. Archived from the original on 2008-04-11. Retrieved 2008-04-09.
- ^ "Desde marzo se aplica el pico y placa en la capital" (in Spanish). Diario Hoy. 2010-01-10. Archived from the original on 2010-05-08. Retrieved 2010-04-10.
- ^ Henley, Jon (2005-03-15). "Paris drive to cut traffic in centre by 75%". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
- ^ Bremner, Charles (2005-03-15). "Paris bans cars to make way for central pedestrian zone". London: Times Online. Archived from the original on June 7, 2007. Retrieved 2008-04-26.
- ^ William Neuman (2008-01-25). "Traffic Panel Members Expecto to Endorse Fees on Cars". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-04-07.
- ^ Nicholas Confessore (2008-04-08). "$8 Traffic Fee for Manhattan Gets Nowhere". The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ a b "Decreto 626 de 1998 Alcalde Mayor" [Major's Decree 626 of 1998] (in Spanish). Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá D.C. 1998-07-15. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ a b c Staff (2012-06-12). "Pico y Placa marca Petro" ["Pico y Placa" Petro brand]. El Espectador (in Spanish). Retrieved 2016-01-02. See section: "La historia del Pico y Placa"
- ^ a b c Karl Mathiesen (2014-03-20). "Why licence plate bans don't cut smog". The Guardian. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ Staff (2009-01-24). "Pico y placa será todo el día para particulares en Bogotá, a partir del 6 de febrero" ["Pico y Placa" will be extended to all day for passenger vehicles in Bogotá, beginning February 6]. El Tiempo (Colombia) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2012-03-08. Retrieved 2016-01-01.
- ^ Secretaría Distrital de Movilidad (2015-10-29). "Restricción para vehículos de servicio particular - SDM" [Restriction for private vehicles] (in Spanish). Alcaldía de Bogotá. Retrieved 2016-01-02.[permanent dead link]
- ^ "Decreto 575 de 2013 Alcalde Mayor" [Major's Decree 575 of 2013] (in Spanish). Alcaldía de Bogotá. 2014-12-18. Retrieved 2016-01-03.
- ^ Pratama, Akhdi Martin (2016-07-27). "Hari Pertama Uji Coba Ganjil Genap, Arus Lalu Lintas di Sudirman Ramai Lancar". Kompas.com. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
- ^ Lestari, Reni (2016-05-16). "16 Mei, Penghapusan 3-in-1 Mulai Diberlakukan". OkeZone.com. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
- ^ Lubabah, Raynaldo Giffari (2016-03-29). "Sejarah Pemberlakuan 3-in-1 di Jakarta". Merdeka.com. Retrieved 2018-04-22.
- ^ a b c Lucas W. Davis (2008). "The Effect of Driving Restrictions on Air Quality in Mexico City" (PDF). Journal of Political Economy, 2008, vol. 116, no. 1. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ Orlando Maldonado (2016-01-02). "Estado descarta aplicar programa Hoy no circula". Milenio. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ AngloInfo (2015-12-04). "Driving Restrictions in Mexico City and the State of Mexico: Hoy No Circula and Vehicle Verification". Angloinfo. Retrieved 2016-06-15.
- ^ Secretaría del Medio Ambiente de la Ciudad de México (SEDEMA) (2016). "Calendario del programa Hoy No Circula 2016". SEDEMA. Archived from the original on 2016-01-02. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ a b Staff (2015-07-03). "Los autos viejos también podrán tener calcomanía 0 en el centro del país" [Old cars can also have sticker 0 in the center of the country]. CNN México (in Spanish). Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ Ángel Bolaños Sánchez (2008-03-12). "Ebrard y Peña Nieto presentan este día el No circula sabatino". La Jornada. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ Mercedes Aguero (2007-11-29). "Factura petrolera costará más de $1.400 millones" [Oil bill will cost more than US$1.4 billion]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-10-11. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ Vanessa Loaiza (2008-06-26). "440 conductores multados por violar restricciones en capital" [440 drivers fined for violating restrictions in the capital]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-06-30. Retrieved 2008-06-26.
- ^ Esteban Oviedo (2008-06-13). "MOPT ampliará restricción vehicular" [Ministry of Public Works and Transportation will expand the driving restriction]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-06-17. Retrieved 2008-06-13.
- ^ Esteban Oviedo (2008-06-13). "Gobierno aplica subsidio para frenar alza en diésel" [Government subsidies applied to curb rising diesel prices]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-06-15. Retrieved 2008-06-13.
- ^ Vanessa Loaiza y Alonso Mata (2008-07-09). "Mañana se iniciará restricción vehicular de 24 horas en capital" [Tomorrow will start 24-hour driving restriction in the capital]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-07-12. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
- ^ Vanessa Loaiza (2008-07-10). "MOPT reduce horario de restricción vehicular en la capital" [Ministry of Public Works and Transportation reduces hours of driving restriction in the capital]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2008-07-13. Retrieved 2008-07-10.
- ^ Álvaro Murillo (2009-06-13). "San José se abre a cualquier carro sin importar su placa" [San José is open to any car regardless of its plate number]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2009-06-16. Retrieved 2009-06-13.
- ^ Alonso Mata (2009-06-15). "Largas presas colapsan ingresos a San José" [Long traffic queues collapse entrances to San Jose]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2009-06-18. Retrieved 2009-07-05.
- ^ Alonso Mata (2009-07-05). "Restricción vehicular volverá en dos semanas" [Driving restriction will be back in two weeks]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2009-07-08. Retrieved 2009-07-05.
- ^ Álvaro Murillo (2009-07-16). "Restricción vehicular volverá a aplicarse desde el martes" [Driving restriction will be in force starting next Tuesday]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2009-07-19. Retrieved 2009-07-17.
- ^ a b Alonso Mata (2009-07-21). "30.000 carros sin poder ingresar hoy a la capital" [30,000 cars unable to enter the capital city today]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2009-07-24. Retrieved 2009-07-21.
- ^ Camila Salazar (2013-07-06). "Carros híbridos y eléctricos se abren paso en Costa Rica" [Hybrid and electric cars make their way in Costa Rica]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Retrieved 2013-07-06.
- ^ Patricia Recio (2014-10-03). "Restricción vehicular disminuye presas entre un 14% y un 16%" [Driving restriction reduces traffic jams between 14% and 16%]. La Nación (San José) (in Spanish). Retrieved 2014-10-04.
- ^ Onursal, Bekir; Gautam, Surhid P. (1997-09-30). "Vehicular air pollution". World Bank Technical Papers. doi:10.1596/0-8213-4016-6. ISBN 978-0-8213-4016-5. ISSN 0253-7494.
- ^ Moreno Gomez, Clara; García Pastor, Antonio (2016-06-07). "Diseño de redes de transporte urbano en ciudades de tamaño medio: El caso práctico de Terrassa". Libro de Actas CIT2016. XII Congreso de Ingeniería del Transporte. Valencia: Universitat Politècnica València. doi:10.4995/cit2016.2016.2147. ISBN 978-84-608-9960-0.
- ^ "Decreto 41858/97 - Decreto nº 41.858, de 12 de junho de 1997" [Decree 41,858/97] (in Portuguese). Jusbrasil. 2015. Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ Fabiana Maranhão (2014-01-09). "Rodízio de veículos em SP é improviso, afirma especialista em trânsito" [Driving restriction in SP is improvised says traffic expert]. Universo Online (in Portuguese). Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ Companhia de Engenharia de Tráfego (CET) (2015). "Rodízio Municipal: Como funciona" [Municipal Alternate-day travel: How it works] (in Portuguese). CET. Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ "Rodízio em São Paulo - Quem está liberado do rodízio?" [Alternate-day travel in Sao Paulo - Who is exempted from the restriction]. Guia Direitos (in Portuguese). GuiaDireitos.org. Archived from the original on 2016-01-23. Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ Leonardo Felix (2014-09-10). "Elétrico, BMW i3 chega com preço de 9 populares e isenção do rodízio em SP" [Electric BMW i3 arrives with a price worth 9 popular cars and exempted from Sao Paulo's driving restriction]. Universo Online (UOL) (in Portuguese). Retrieved 2014-09-21.
- ^ "Elétricos e híbridos: São Paulo aprova lei de incentivo" [All-electric and hybrids: São Paulo approves incentives law]. Automotive Business (in Portuguese). 2014-05-28. Retrieved 2014-09-21.
- ^ "Isenção de rodízio vai beneficiar 387 carros elétricos e híbridos em SP" [Driving restriction exemption will benefit 387 electric and hybrid cars]. Estadão de São Paulo (in Portuguese). Universo Online (UOL). 2015-09-14. Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ Te-Ping Chen (2015-12-07). "Beijing Issues First-Ever Red Alert for Hazardous Smog". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 2015-12-08.
- ^ Edward Wong (2015-12-07). "Beijing Issues Red Alert Over Air Pollution for the First Time". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-12-08.
- ^ Benjamin Dooley (2015-12-08). "Beijing slashes traffic in pollution red alert". Agence France-Presse. Yahoo! News. Retrieved 2015-12-08.
- ^ "Red alert cuts Beijing emissions by 30%". Xinhua News Agency. China Daily. 2015-12-12. Retrieved 2015-12-19.
- ^ Edward Wong (2015-12-17). "Beijing Issues a Second 'Red Alert' on Pollution". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-12-19.
- ^ Phillips, Tom (2016-12-17). "Beijing smog: pollution red alert declared in China capital and 21 other cities". The Guardian. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ "China Focus: A city sighs as Beijing's heavy smog continues". Xinhua. Xinhua English News. 2016-12-20. Archived from the original on December 21, 2016. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ Blanchard, Ben (2016-12-22). "Blue skies return to Beijing as wind clears dangerous pollution". Reuters. Archived from the original on December 23, 2016. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ a b c d e "Italy smog: Milan and Rome ban cars as pollution rises". BBC News. 2015-12-28. Retrieved 2015-12-30.
- ^ a b c d e Daniele Mascolo (2015-12-28). "Guida al blocco del traffico a Milano e Roma" [Guide to restrict traffic in Milan and Rome]. Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata (ANSA) (in Italian). Ilpost.it. Retrieved 2015-12-30.
- ^ a b Gaia Pianigiani (2015-12-24). "Italy, Dirty Air at Record Levels, Is Putting Limits on Traffic". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ Staff (2015-12-28). "Come funzionano le limitazioni del traffico a Milano e a Roma" [How Traffic Restriction Works in Milan and Rome]. Internazionale.it (in Italian). Retrieved 2015-12-31.
- ^ a b Agence France-Presse (2017-01-16). "Oslo temporarily bans diesel cars to combat pollution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2017-01-25.
- ^ a b Berglund, Nina (2017-01-16). "Diesel ban extended, no fines issued yet". News in English Norway. Retrieved 2017-01-25.
- ^ NTB/AFP (2017-01-18). "Oslo lifts temporary ban on diesel vehicles". The Local. Retrieved 2017-01-25.
- ^ Stensrud, Espen (2017-01-16). "Dieselbilforbud det stinker av" [Diesel ban stinks]. Dinside.no (in Norwegian). Retrieved 2017-01-25.
- ^ Scott Sayare (2014-03-17). "Fighting Pollution, Paris Imposes Partial Driving Ban". The New York Times. Retrieved 2014-03-18.
- ^ Agence France-Presse (2014-03-17). "Pollution : circulation alternée lundi matin à Paris et dans la petite couronne" [Pollution: traffic restriction on Monday morning in Paris and the inner suburbs]. Le Figaro (in French). Retrieved 2014-03-18.
- ^ Michaël Torregrossa (2014-03-17). "Circulation alternée – Les camions électriques bannis de la capitale" [Traffic restriction - Electric trucks banned from the capital] (in French). Association pour l'Avenir du Véhicule Electrique Méditerranéen (AVEM). Retrieved 2014-03-18.
- ^ Mayor of Paris (2014-03-17). "Fin de la circulation alternée et des mesures antipollution" [End of alternating traffic and pollution control measures] (in French). Mairie de Paris News. Retrieved 2014-03-18.
- ^ "France to restrict vehicles use on Monday unless air pollution eases: minister". Xinhua News Agency. GlobalPost. 2015-03-20. Archived from the original on 2015-03-21. Retrieved 2015-03-22.
- ^ Simon Blin (2015-01-21). "Anne Hidalgo annonce la circulation alternée lundi à Paris" [Anne Hidalgo announced alternate traffic restriction on Monday in Paris]. Le Figaro (in French). Retrieved 2015-03-22.
- ^ Staff (2015-03-22). "Pollution à Paris : qui est concerné par la circulation alternée lundi ?" [Pollution in Paris: Who is affected by alternating traffic on Monday?]. Le Monde (in French). Retrieved 2015-03-22.
- ^ "Paris connaît le plus long et intense pic de pollution hivernal depuis dix ans" [Paris is experiencing the longest and most intense winter pollution spike in ten years]. Le Monde (in French). 2016-12-07. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ "Pollution : circulation alternée reconduite jeudi à Paris, instaurée vendredi à Lyon et Villeurbanne" [Pollution: alternating circulation renewed Thursday in Paris, established Friday in Lyon and Villeurbanne]. Le Monde (in French). 2016-12-08. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ Agence France-Presse (2016-12-08). "Pollution: circulation alternée reconduite vendredi à Paris et en proche banlieue" [Pollution: alternate circulation renewed Friday in Paris and near suburbs]. Le Huffington Post (in French). Archived from the original on 2016-12-09. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ "Pollution à Paris : pas de circulation alternée, ni ce lundi, ni mardi" [Pollution in Paris: no alternating traffic, neither this Monday nor Tuesday]. Le Parisien (in French). 2016-12-11. Retrieved 2016-12-25.
- ^ "Paris Respire" (in French). Retrieved 2016-12-12.
- ^ Anzilotti, Eillie (2016-04-29). "Starting May 8, Sundays on the Champs Elysées Will Be a Car-Free Experience". CityLab. Retrieved 2016-12-12.
- ^ a b c Nida Najar (2015-12-04). "Delhi to Limit Use of Cars in an Effort to Control Pollution". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-12-05.
- ^ a b Charles Riley (2016-01-01). "Delhi residents give up cars to stop toxic air pollution". CNNMoney. Retrieved 2016-01-02.
- ^ "Have taken note of odd-even formula of plying of vehicles: Delhi Police". Press Trust of India (PTI). Daily News and Analysis (DNA India). 2015-12-08. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
- ^ a b c Maseeh Rahman (2015-12-31). "Delhi driving restrictions in force from New Year's Day in bid to clear pollution". The Guardian. Retrieved 2016-01-01.
- ^ "Delhi govt's vehicle plan: HC refuses to pass interim order on PIL". Press Trust of India (PTI). The Indian Express. 2015-12-09. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
- ^ Nida Najar (2015-12-16). "India, choking on pollution, Restricts Vehicle Use in Delhi". The New York Times. Retrieved 2015-12-19.
- ^ "Car restrictions begin in Beijing". BBC News. 2008-07-20. Retrieved 2008-07-25.
- ^ Andrew Jacobs (2008-04-14). "Traffic Beijing Stops Construction for Olympics". New York Times. Retrieved 2008-04-14.
- ^ Lanl an W ang; Ji nta o Xu; Xinye Zheng & Ping Qin (September 2013). "Will a Driving Restriction Policy Reduce Car Trips? - A Case Study of Beijing, China" (PDF). Environment for Development and Resources for the Future. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-04-01. Retrieved 2013-10-07. Discussion Papers Series, EfD DP 13-11, pp. 7-8.
- ^ Anita Chang (2008-07-21). "Beijing has first workday under car restrictions". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-07-25.[dead link]
- ^ "Beijing to launch Olympic 'odd-even' car ban". ABC news. Reuters. 2008-06-23. Archived from the original on June 25, 2008. Retrieved 2008-06-23.
- ^ Edward Cody (2007-08-11). "Beijing To Test Plan to Cut Cars: Measure Intended For '08 Olympics". Washington Post. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ "Pequim vai adotar rodízio de veículos durante os Jogos" (in Portuguese). Agencia Xinhua. 2008-03-28. Retrieved 2008-04-08.[permanent dead link]
- ^ Yuxuan Wang; Michael B. McElroy; et al. (2007). "Traffic restrictions associated with the Sino-African summit: Reductions of NOx detected from space". Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34. Retrieved 2008-04-08.
- ^ a b Michael Wines (2009-10-16). "Beijing's Air Is Cleaner, but Far From Clean". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-10-17.
- ^ "Post-Olympics Beijing car restrictions to take effect next month". China View news. 2008-09-28. Archived from the original on October 1, 2008. Retrieved 2009-10-17.
- ^ "The great crawl". The Economist. 2016-06-18. Retrieved 2016-06-22. From the print edition.
- ^ "The 2012 Olympic Games and the environment". Mayor of London official website. Archived from the original on 2008-01-17. Retrieved 2008-04-10.
- ^ "Car-Free Travel: London Olympic Organizers Hope to Reform Britain". Spiegel ONLINE. 2007-10-23. Retrieved 2008-04-10.
- ^ "London 2012 Olympics the first to be "car-free"". AutoBlogGreen. 2007-10-31. Retrieved 2008-04-10.
- ^ "Tube carried 60m during Olympics". BBC News. 2012-08-13. Retrieved 2020-03-18.
- ^ Victoria Transport Policy Institute. "Vehicle Restrictions. Limiting Automobile Travel At Certain Times and Places". TDM Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2008-04-09.
{{cite web}}:|author=has generic name (help) See Equity Impacts section - ^ Holtz-Eakin, Douglas (2003-05-06). "Congestion Pricing for Highways (Testimony before the Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress)". Congressional Budget Office. Archived from the original on 2008-02-14. Retrieved 2008-02-26.
- ^ Verhoef E, Nijkamp P, Rietveld P (1997). "Tradeable permits: their potential in the regulation of road transport externalities". Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design. 24 (4): 527–548. Bibcode:1997EnPlB..24..527V. doi:10.1068/b240527. hdl:1871/16225. S2CID 153913288.
- ^ Kara M. Kockelman & Sukumar Kalmanje (2005). "Credit-based congestion pricing: a policy proposal and the public's response". Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 39 (7–9): 671–690. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2005.02.014.
External links
[edit]- Online TDM Encyclopedia - Vehicle restrictions
- The effect of transport policies on car use: Evidence from Latin American cities, Journal of Public Economics, November 2013
- Will a Driving Restriction Policy Reduce Car Trips? - A Case Study of Beijing, China, Environment for Development, September 2013.
Road space rationing
View on GrokipediaConceptual Foundations
Definition and Core Mechanisms
Road space rationing constitutes a non-price-based demand management intervention in urban transportation systems, wherein authorities restrict vehicle entry into designated areas or roadways during peak periods by enforcing prohibitions tied to identifiable vehicle attributes, principally the license plate number. This policy seeks to curb excessive road demand that surpasses infrastructure capacity, thereby mitigating resultant congestion and pollutant emissions from motor vehicles.[1][3] At its foundation, the mechanism partitions the vehicle fleet into subsets via the terminal digit of the registration plate—commonly alternating between even (0, 2, 4, 6, 8) and odd (1, 3, 5, 7, 9) categories—and authorizes circulation for one subset per restricted interval, such as weekdays or specific hours (e.g., 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM).[12][3] This binary or rotational exclusion typically halves allowable vehicles on implementation days, assuming uniform distribution across digits, though real-world adherence hinges on exemptions for categories like emergency services, commercial fleets, electric vehicles, or high-occupancy setups.[1][12] Implementation relies on verifiable enforcement protocols, including manual patrols at checkpoints for plate verification or, increasingly, automated optical recognition systems integrated with traffic cameras to detect and penalize violations via fines calibrated to offense severity (e.g., fixed penalties ranging from $50 to $500 in various jurisdictions).[13] Compliance monitoring often incorporates public signage, mobile apps for restriction calendars, and data analytics from traffic sensors to adjust schemes dynamically, such as tightening during pollution spikes.[1] While core to the policy's equity claim—imposing uniform burdens irrespective of income—the mechanism's causal efficacy presumes inelastic substitution to alternatives like transit, without inducing fleet expansion through multiple registrations.[12]Theoretical Justifications and Assumptions
Road space rationing is justified theoretically as a demand management tool to counteract the negative externalities of motorized traffic, including time losses from congestion and localized air pollution from emissions. By capping vehicle access through non-price mechanisms like license-plate restrictions, it seeks to keep traffic flows below road capacity thresholds, enhancing average speeds and reducing queuing delays during peak periods. This aligns with transportation engineering principles recognizing roads as finite resources subject to diminishing returns in speed as volume approaches capacity, as modeled in fundamental diagrams of traffic flow.[1] Economically, the policy positions road space as a rationed good, allocating usage slots administratively to internalize congestion costs without market pricing, often viewed as a second-best option where Pigouvian tolls—equating user fees to marginal external damages—are deemed politically unviable due to public opposition to perceived added taxes. Advocates emphasize its revenue neutrality and superficial equity, as restrictions apply uniformly to registered vehicles regardless of user income or trip purpose, potentially fostering modal shifts to public transport under complementary "pull" measures like infrastructure investments.[14][15] The framework rests on several core assumptions, including inelastic aggregate travel demand, where barring vehicles on specific days proportionally curtails total vehicle-kilometers traveled without inducing equivalent rebounds via rescheduled trips or secondary purchases. It presumes heterogeneous travelers will rationally substitute to slower but unrestricted alternatives like transit, based on comparative generalized costs (time plus out-of-pocket expenses), and that enforcement deters widespread non-compliance or exemptions erosion. Further, it assumes uniform behavioral responses across users and negligible spillovers, such as diverted flows exacerbating congestion elsewhere, while overlooking long-term adaptations like fleet expansion that could offset initial gains. These premises, often modeled under single-period homogeneous-user equilibria, underpin expectations of net welfare improvements but falter if evasion or induced ownership prevails, as second-car acquisitions can elevate baseline emissions.[15][6][1]Historical Development
Early 20th-Century Origins
The proliferation of automobiles in the early 20th century exacerbated urban congestion in major European and American cities, prompting initial regulatory responses that foreshadowed later rationing schemes. By the 1910s, cities like Paris and London experienced severe traffic bottlenecks as vehicle numbers surged; for example, Paris's streets, previously dominated by horse-drawn carriages, saw motorized traffic contribute to hazardous conditions and delays, with surveys documenting flow patterns that highlighted bottlenecks at key intersections.[16] These issues arose from the transition to mass-produced cars, with U.S. production rising from 45,000 vehicles in 1907 to millions by the 1920s, overwhelming infrastructure designed for lower volumes. Early management focused on basic controls such as speed limits and one-way streets rather than direct rationing, but the underlying pressure of limited road capacity relative to demand established the conceptual need for demand-side interventions. World War I marked the first widespread application of vehicle use restrictions akin to road space rationing, driven by fuel scarcity and military priorities. In Britain and France, petrol supplies were diverted to essential and wartime uses, effectively curtailing private motoring; civilian gasoline consumption plummeted, reducing non-essential vehicle traffic on public roads by prioritizing military logistics.[17] In Paris, access controls were imposed during the 1914 German advance, limiting vehicle entry to just 14 of 55 city gates to manage flows and conserve resources, a measure that rationed urban road space amid invasion threats. These wartime expedients demonstrated the feasibility of restricting civilian access to roads for broader societal goals, though they were temporary and fuel-focused rather than plate-based, influencing post-war traffic policies without formal permanence. Post-war recovery in the 1920s saw congestion reemerge without equivalent rationing, as cities invested in signals and paving instead; for instance, traffic flow mapping in the U.S. revealed directional imbalances that informed early planning but did little to cap vehicle numbers directly.[16] Empirical data from the era, including rising accident rates from unregulated speeds and volumes, underscored the limits of supply-side fixes alone, setting precedents for demand management in resource-constrained environments.[18] While not equivalent to modern schemes, these early constraints highlighted causal links between vehicle density and capacity overload, privileging empirical observation over expansionist assumptions.Expansion in Late 20th and Early 21st Centuries
Road space rationing proliferated in Latin American cities during the 1980s and 1990s amid acute air pollution episodes driven by rapid urbanization and vehicle growth. In Santiago, Chile, the scheme commenced in 1986, restricting vehicles lacking catalytic converters from circulating during autumn and winter pollution alerts to curb smog accumulation in the Andean valley basin.[19] This marked an early adaptation of license-plate-based bans tailored to emission standards rather than uniform quotas.[20] Mexico City's "Hoy No Circula" program launched in late 1989, prohibiting private vehicles from operating one weekday per week according to the last digit of their license plate, initially applying only to cars while exempting public transport and high-occupancy vehicles.[21] The policy aimed to reduce daily vehicle volume by about 20% in the metropolitan area, which spanned over 20 million residents and suffered from basin-trapped pollutants.[22] By 2008, it expanded to include Saturday restrictions during high-pollution seasons, despite empirical studies questioning net air quality gains due to compensatory driving behaviors.[23] In São Paulo, Brazil, the "rodízio vehicular" began as a voluntary trial in winter 1995 before becoming mandatory in 1997, barring vehicles ending in specific plate digits from central zones during peak hours (7-10 a.m. and 5-8 p.m.) on weekdays.[24] This odd-even system targeted congestion and ozone precursors in a metropolis exceeding 10 million inhabitants, initially reducing peak-hour traffic by 15-20% though prompting secondary vehicle purchases over time.[25] The approach extended into the early 21st century, notably in Asia. Beijing instituted temporary plate-number rationing on July 20, 2008, ahead of the Summer Olympics, alternating odd- and even-numbered plates to halve daily vehicle traffic and achieve a reported 40% drop in emissions during the event period.[26] While primarily crisis-driven, such implementations influenced permanent schemes in cities like Bogotá, Colombia (from 1998) and Hanoi, Vietnam (experimental in 1999), reflecting a global shift toward demand-side traffic management amid rising megacity challenges.[27]Operational Variants
License-Plate-Based Restrictions
License-plate-based restrictions, also known as number-plate rationing, prohibit vehicles from operating on designated roads or within urban zones on specific days or time slots determined by the last one or two digits of their license plate. This approach segments the vehicle fleet into rotating groups, theoretically reducing peak-hour traffic by 20% if evenly distributed across a five-day cycle restricting two digits per day, or by about 40% in a daily odd-even scheme.[28] Enforcement typically involves visual inspections by police, automated cameras, or checkpoints, with penalties including fines starting from $50 to $200 depending on jurisdiction.[29] Exemptions often apply to emergency vehicles, public transport, motorcycles, electric or hybrid cars, and high-occupancy vehicles to mitigate disruptions.[19] The earliest large-scale implementation occurred in Mexico City with the Hoy No Circula program, launched on February 5, 1989, to combat severe smog episodes. Under this scheme, private vehicles are banned one weekday per week from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., with restrictions assigned by plate endings: 5-6 on Mondays, 7-8 Tuesdays, 9-0 Wednesdays, 1-2 Thursdays, and 3-4 Fridays.[22] A verification sticker based on emissions testing is required for participation, and violations incur fines up to 20 times the minimum daily wage, approximately $400 in 2023 terms. The program expanded to include Saturday restrictions in 2016 for plates ending in 5-6 or 7-8, but these were suspended in 2020 amid evaluations showing limited air quality gains.[23] In São Paulo, Brazil, the Rodízio system began on November 10, 1997, targeting congestion in the metropolitan core. It bars vehicles with plates ending in 1-2 on Mondays, 3-4 Tuesdays, 5-6 Wednesdays, 7-8 Thursdays, and 9-0 Fridays, limited to peak hours of 7:00-10:00 a.m. and 5:00-8:00 p.m. within a 90 km² restricted zone. Fines for non-compliance reached 100 times the minimum wage unit, about $300, with electronic surveillance aiding enforcement. The policy initially reduced trips by 25% but prompted adaptations like secondary vehicle purchases.[24] Santiago, Chile, applies seasonal restrictions under Plan Sierra Pequeña since 1996, intensifying during winter from May 1 to August 31 to curb PM2.5 pollution. Vehicles are categorized by emissions via a green, yellow, or no-sticker system; category-2 (older, higher-polluting) cars face daily bans based on last plate digit, prohibiting even or odd days alternately.[30] Non-compliant vehicles face impoundment and fines up to 1 UTM (about $65). The program covers the urban commune, with exemptions for zero-emission vehicles registered post-2012.[19] Similar schemes operate in Bogotá, Colombia (Pico y Placa since 1998, restricting one day per week by last digit during 6:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m.), and Athens, Greece (daily rotation by plate category since 1989, though suspended periodically). These programs generally rotate restrictions weekly or daily, with variations for holidays or crises, such as Beijing's 2008 Olympics ban alternating odd-even plates to cut vehicles by 45%.[29][31]Odd-Even and Day-of-Week Schemes
Odd-even schemes restrict vehicle use based on the parity of the last digit of a license plate relative to the calendar day, allowing odd-numbered plates on odd dates and even-numbered plates on even dates, typically implemented as temporary measures during high-pollution episodes to reduce immediate traffic volumes by approximately 40-50%.[6] These schemes alternate daily restrictions, aiming for equitable rotation while halving eligible vehicles each day, though exemptions for public transport, electric vehicles, and emergency services often apply.[32] In Delhi, India, odd-even restrictions were trialed multiple times starting April 1, 2016, for 15 days, followed by repeats in November 2016, 2017, and 2019, correlating with short-term reductions in particulate matter (PM2.5) by up to 13% and traffic counts by 20-30% during enforcement periods, but post-trial rebounds exceeded baseline levels due to compensatory driving.[33] Empirical analyses indicate these effects stem from reduced on-road vehicles during restricted phases, yet causal factors like weather and concurrent policies confound attributions, with no sustained air quality gains observed beyond enforcement windows.[34] Day-of-week schemes assign fixed weekly bans to vehicles based on license plate digits, prohibiting circulation one or two specific weekdays per vehicle, such as Mexico City's "Hoy No Circula" program launched February 5, 1989, which restricts plates ending in 5-6 on Mondays, 7-8 Tuesdays, 9-0 Wednesdays, 1-2 Thursdays, and 3-4 Fridays.[21] São Paulo's Rodízio Veicular, introduced January 1997, bans vehicles on two weekdays per week (e.g., plates 1-2 and 3-4 on Mondays and Fridays), achieving initial 20-30% weekday traffic drops but prompting household fleet expansions.[35] Beijing applied day-of-week restrictions from July 2008 during the Olympics, evolving into permanent plate-based quotas, where evaluations showed temporary emission cuts of 10-20% but long-term increases in vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) from second-car purchases, offsetting gains.[6] Peer-reviewed studies on Mexico City reveal the policy increased total circulating vehicles by 15-20% through behavioral adaptations, including dirtier substitute cars used more frequently, resulting in net air quality deterioration for pollutants like carbon monoxide by up to 10%.[21][23] Both variants demonstrate short-term traffic volume reductions of 15-40%, verifiable via monitoring stations and GPS data, but causal evidence from regression discontinuity designs highlights rebound effects: households circumvent bans via additional vehicles or trip timing shifts, leading to higher overall emissions and congestion on permitted days.[36][37] Saturday extensions in Mexico City, tested 2016-2017, failed to lower PM2.5 or ozone, underscoring that fixed bans inadequately address elastic demand without complementary incentives.[23] These schemes prioritize simplicity over precision, yet empirical data consistently reveal unintended incentives for fleet growth, particularly among higher-income groups acquiring unrestricted alternatives.[35]Temporary and Crisis-Driven Applications
Temporary road space rationing schemes have been deployed in response to acute air pollution episodes, major international events, and environmental crises to rapidly curtail vehicle emissions and traffic volume. These measures typically involve short-term bans or alternations based on license plate digits, enforced only until the crisis abates or predefined thresholds are met, contrasting with permanent programs by their episodic activation. Authorities activate such restrictions when pollutant levels, such as PM2.5 or NO2, surpass regulatory limits, aiming for immediate reductions in on-road vehicles by 20-50% depending on the scheme's stringency.[35] In Mexico City, the Hoy No Circula program originated as a crisis response to the 1989 smog emergency, when photochemical ozone and particulate levels reached hazardous peaks, prompting a weekday ban on private vehicles based on the last digit of their license plate, restricting each car to four circulation days per week from December 1, 1989. Initially framed as a provisional intervention to avert public health disasters amid the city's basin topography trapping emissions, the scheme exempted public transport and initially focused solely on private autos before expanding. Though intended to lapse after pollution stabilization, it evolved into a staple policy due to persistent congestion challenges.[21][38] Beijing implemented a temporary odd-even rationing policy starting July 20, 2008, ahead of the Olympic Games, prohibiting vehicles with odd-numbered plates on even days and vice versa to slash traffic by approximately 45% and mitigate smog for athletes and spectators. This measure, coupled with factory shutdowns and construction halts, was enforced strictly during the July-September Games period, with exemptions for Olympic vehicles and emergency services, and was discontinued post-event though elements persisted in later pollution controls. Air quality data from the period showed notable declines in pollutants like CO and NO2 during restriction days.[39][40] India's National Capital Region, particularly Delhi, has recurrently applied odd-even restrictions during winter smog crises, such as the November 13-17, 2017, phase triggered by stubble burning and stagnant air trapping emissions, barring private cars on alternate days per plate parity while exempting two-wheelers, electric vehicles, and carpools. Similar temporary enforcements occurred November 4-15, 2019, amid AQI levels exceeding 400, reducing eligible private vehicle trips by half on restricted days to target vehicular contributions to PM2.5 spikes. These schemes, declared under emergency powers, conclude after monitoring shows pollution easing or fixed durations elapse.[41][42] In Paris, temporary zoning under the Crit'Air system activates during pollution alerts, imposing circulation bans on higher-emission vehicles (Crit'Air 3 and above) within the Grande Paris perimeter when hourly NO2 or PM10 thresholds are breached, as seen in multiple episodes since 2017. These episodic measures, often lasting days to a week, complement permanent low-emission zones by escalating restrictions dynamically, with odd-even alternations historically used in severe cases like the 1996-1997 winter peaks, prioritizing diesel bans to address fine particle surges from traffic. Enforcement relies on camera surveillance and fines, with activation tied to real-time air monitoring data from regional authorities.[43][44]Empirical Evidence on Traffic and Congestion
Short-Term Reductions in Vehicle Use
Road space rationing schemes often yield initial reductions in observed vehicle volumes during restricted periods, with empirical data from early implementations showing drops of 10-20% in peak-hour traffic counts relative to baseline levels. In São Paulo, Brazil, the rodízio program, introduced on January 28, 1998, as a temporary crisis measure to address severe congestion and pollution, resulted in a 17.7% decrease in vehicle traffic between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays.[45] This reduction aligned closely with the scheme's design, which restricted 20% of vehicles based on license plate digits, indicating high initial compliance and minimal immediate evasion. Similar patterns emerged in other license-plate-based systems, where gross vehicle exclusions translated to measurable short-term declines in circulating cars before behavioral adaptations set in. In Bogotá, Colombia, the pico y placa restriction, launched in 1998 to curb peak-period congestion, produced initial increases in vehicle speeds of 3.3% to 4.2%, implying corresponding reductions in traffic volumes assuming stable road capacities.[46] These effects stemmed from odd-even day prohibitions during rush hours (6-9 a.m. and 5-8 p.m.), which suppressed about half of private vehicle trips on restricted days, though overall vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) fell less proportionally due to partial mode shifts to public transit or non-restricted vehicles. Peer-reviewed analyses confirm that such short-term volume drops enhance flow rates temporarily, alleviating acute bottlenecks without requiring infrastructure changes.[46] Beijing's temporary odd-even scheme, enforced from July 20, 2008, ahead of the Olympic Games, demonstrated more pronounced short-term impacts amid strict enforcement and complementary measures like truck curbs. Traffic volume data from 529 monitoring stations indicated significant declines, with average speeds rising and daily flows dropping by up to 20-30% in affected zones during the initial phase.[47] However, these reductions were amplified by event-specific controls, and isolated license-plate effects in non-crisis settings typically yield smaller net VKT cuts, often 5-10%, as drivers suppress trips or carpool briefly.[48] Across cases, short-term efficacy hinges on surprise implementation and robust verification, with under-enforcement eroding gains rapidly. Reviews of multiple schemes underscore that while vehicle use dips initially, total emissions or congestion relief may not scale linearly due to compensatory driving by exempt or secondary vehicles.[7]Long-Term Behavioral Adaptations and Rebounds
In implementations of license-plate-based road space rationing, such as Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program introduced in 1989, long-term behavioral adaptations have included households purchasing additional vehicles with differing license plates to evade restrictions, thereby increasing overall vehicle ownership and fleet size rather than reducing it. Empirical analyses indicate that this circumvention offsets initial traffic reductions, with total vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) potentially rebounding due to the expanded number of cars available for use on unrestricted days.[35][49] However, subsequent research has questioned the direct causality between the policy and accelerated vehicle purchases, attributing some growth to broader economic factors while acknowledging persistent mode-shifting incentives.[36] Similar adaptations occur in other schemes, including Santiago de Chile's restrictions starting in 1991, where drivers responded over time by acquiring second vehicles, opting for motorcycles or less-regulated alternatives, or adjusting travel schedules to non-restricted hours, leading to diminished long-term efficacy in curbing congestion. Studies estimate that permanent restrictions alone yield negligible impacts on private vehicle use, with rebounds manifesting as only modest shifts to public transit unless complemented by infrastructure improvements.[46][50] In Bogotá's Pico y Placa program, moderate restrictions prompted comparable responses, including increased purchases of exempt or alternative vehicles, which contributed to a rebound in total emissions and traffic volumes after initial declines.[51] Rebound effects are further evidenced in Beijing's driving restrictions implemented from 2008, where long-term data show drivers compensating by intensifying use of permitted vehicles, relocating residences closer to workplaces to minimize restricted-day impacts, or substituting with higher-emission options like older cars on allowed days, resulting in no sustained reduction in urban VKT. Across multiple cities, a review of 20 empirical studies on license-plate rationing reveals that while short-term vehicle reductions average 10-20%, long-term persistence is rare, with one-quarter of cases showing rebounds or null effects due to these adaptations.[52][6] Enforcement challenges exacerbate rebounds, as lax monitoring allows widespread evasion, underscoring that without addressing underlying demand drivers like population growth or inelastic travel needs, rationing induces compensatory behaviors that restore or exceed baseline traffic levels.[46]Environmental and Health Impacts
Air Quality Measurements from Implementations
In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, implemented since 1989 and expanded to include Saturdays in 2016, multiple studies using hourly air quality data from monitoring stations found no statistically significant improvements across key pollutants such as CO, NO₂, O₃, SO₂, and PM₁₀.[53] [54] Regression analyses comparing restricted and non-restricted days, while controlling for meteorological factors and trends, indicated that the scheme either had null effects or, in some specifications, slightly increased pollution levels due to shifts toward higher-emitting vehicles.[53] Beijing's license-plate-based driving restrictions, enforced since 2008 and intensified during the 2008 Olympics and subsequent periods, yielded mixed air quality outcomes in empirical evaluations. One analysis of daily data from 11 monitoring stations reported short-term reductions in PM₁₀ concentrations by approximately 12% on restricted days, alongside decreased traffic congestion, attributing this to lower vehicle kilometers traveled.[55] However, broader assessments, including difference-in-differences models across multiple pollutants like PM₂.₅, NO₂, SO₂, and CO, found insignificant or negligible long-term effects on air quality indices, with rebounds from evasion tactics such as purchasing second vehicles offsetting initial gains.[56] [57] Delhi's odd-even vehicle rationing trials, conducted in phases from 2016 onward, showed modest but inconsistent reductions in particulate matter. Measurements during the first phase indicated average PM₂.₅ decreases of about 5.7% and PM₁.₀ by 4.7% across monitored corridors, based on real-time sensor data adjusted for weather and baseline trends. Yet, subsequent evaluations at traffic intersections revealed no sustained particulate matter declines, with high pollution levels persisting due to persistent emissions from non-restricted sources like industry and construction, and overnight accumulation unaffected by daytime restrictions.[58] [59] A review of global license-plate rationing schemes, synthesizing over a dozen empirical studies, concluded that roughly half report no pollution reductions or even increases, often linked to behavioral adaptations like increased use of motorcycles or older cars, underscoring the limitations of such measures without complementary enforcement against evasion.[6] São Paulo's rodízio system, operational since 1997, lacks robust peer-reviewed evidence of measurable air quality gains; general monitoring shows PM₂.₅ levels averaging 15.3 μg/m³ annually, but attributions to the scheme remain unverified amid multifactor pollution sources.[60]| Implementation | Key Pollutant Measured | Observed Change | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mexico City (Hoy No Circula) | PM₁₀, NO₂, O₃ | No significant change | [53] |
| Beijing Restrictions | PM₁₀ | ~12% short-term reduction | [55] |
| Delhi Odd-Even | PM₂.₅ | ~5.7% average reduction (limited phases) | |
| General Schemes | Various | Mixed/no effect in ~50% of studies | [6] |
Critiques of Attributed Emission Reductions
Critics contend that emission reductions attributed to road space rationing are frequently exaggerated, as they fail to account for behavioral adaptations that offset initial declines in vehicle kilometers traveled, such as heightened usage on permitted days and the purchase of secondary, often older and higher-emitting vehicles. A review of 40 empirical studies on license-plate-based restrictions found that only half reported pollution decreases, while 25% showed no effect or counterproductive increases, attributing this to evasion tactics and rebound driving that dilute net emission cuts.[6][7] In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, launched in November 1989 to restrict one-fifth of vehicles daily based on license plates, econometric analysis using hourly air quality data from 1990 revealed no statistically significant improvements across key pollutants including carbon monoxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulates, despite a 7-11% reduction in total vehicle kilometers. The policy inadvertently raised average emissions per kilometer by approximately 11% through fleet aging and substitution toward dirtier second cars, resulting in negligible or null net emission benefits. An expansion to Saturday restrictions in April 2016 similarly yielded no discernible air quality gains across eight major pollutants, with estimated impacts near zero based on monitoring station data.[21][22][23] Similar patterns emerged in Bogotá's Pico y Placa scheme, implemented in 1998, where moderate restrictions reduced car use modestly but drastic versions increased congestion and emissions via rebounds, with air quality monitors showing limited sustained pollutant declines. In Beijing, odd-even restrictions during the 2008 Olympics temporarily cut nitrogen dioxide by up to 57% on restricted days, but long-term evaluations indicated rebounds eroded gains, and non-permanent policies in other Chinese cities produced no pollution reductions. These cases underscore how simplistic attribution of proportional emission drops ignores elastic supply responses and substitution effects, often leading policymakers to overestimate environmental efficacy.[31][61]Socioeconomic and Equity Dimensions
Economic Costs to Individuals and Businesses
Road space rationing imposes direct financial burdens on individuals through the need to acquire alternative transportation or additional vehicles to comply with or evade restrictions. In Beijing, contingent valuation studies estimate the annual cost to affected drivers at RMB 356 to 709 (approximately US$54 to $107), equivalent to 0.5 to 1 percent of median annual income, reflecting willingness-to-pay to remove the policy.102366.pdf) This includes expenses for public transit, ridesharing, or purchasing second cars with non-restricted plates, a common response documented across implementations. In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, introduced in 1989, the policy spurred a net increase in vehicle ownership, as households bought older, higher-emission second cars to maintain mobility, elevating personal costs for vehicle acquisition, registration, and maintenance without reducing overall driving.[53] Such adaptations often regressively impact lower-income drivers, who face proportionally higher burdens relative to vehicle-dependent routines.[62] Indirect costs to individuals manifest in lost productivity and time, as restricted access limits job commuting or errands, effectively reducing effective labor supply. Beijing's restrictions, enforced since 2008, decreased labor supply by 2.5 to 3.8 percent among affected workers, implying forgone wages and economic output tied to curtailed work hours or remote alternatives. Literature reviews confirm that evasion via second vehicles—cited in over 140 studies—offsets intended reductions in vehicle use, perpetuating congestion-related time losses that exacerbate these productivity hits.[6] Businesses face elevated operational costs from logistics disruptions, particularly in delivery, taxi, and service sectors reliant on timely vehicle access. While many schemes exempt commercial vehicles, non-exempt firms must expand fleets or hire extra drivers to cover restricted days, inflating capital and labor expenses; for example, Mexico City's program prompted taxi operators to increase vehicle numbers, raising per-trip costs passed to consumers.[53] Broader economic ripple effects include reduced commerce efficiency, as supplier delays and employee absenteeism from mobility constraints hinder supply chains. In Beijing, the policy's labor supply contraction signals firm-level productivity losses, with affected businesses experiencing 2-4 percent dips in operational tempo due to worker immobility. These inefficiencies contrast with market-based alternatives like congestion pricing, which empirical models show impose lower deadweight losses by allowing flexible usage.[63]Distributional Effects and Class Disparities
Road space rationing policies, by restricting vehicle access based on license plate numbers, often impose regressive burdens on lower-income households, who possess fewer resources to evade restrictions through measures like acquiring additional vehicles or relying on paid alternatives such as taxis or ride-sharing services.[64] In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, implemented in 1989, lower-income drivers faced heightened mobility constraints, as they were more likely to own non-exempt older vehicles and lacked the financial means to purchase second cars with differing plates, leading to reduced essential trips for work and services.[46][38] Empirical analysis of the program revealed heterogeneous effects across income strata, with affluent residents in central areas continuing to drive exempt or multiple vehicles, exacerbating spatial inequities in access to urban opportunities.[65] Wealthier individuals frequently respond to rationing by increasing vehicle ownership—such as buying a second car to alternate usage days—which offsets intended reductions in traffic and emissions while widening class disparities, as evidenced in Mexico City where second-car registrations rose significantly post-implementation among higher-income groups.[66] São Paulo's Rodízio scheme, introduced in 1997, similarly prompted evasion through second-vehicle purchases, a strategy feasible primarily for upper-class households, while lower-income commuters experienced amplified reliance on overcrowded public transit without corresponding improvements in service quality.[67] These adaptations underscore a causal dynamic where policies inadvertently favor those with capital to substitute restricted assets, potentially entrenching socioeconomic segregation by limiting low-income access to transit-adjacent housing and employment hubs.[5] Critiques from economic evaluations highlight that such schemes fail to mitigate class-based disparities in pollution exposure, as high-income drivers shift to unrestricted or premium vehicles, leaving poorer peripheral residents to bear ambient air quality burdens without mobility gains.[68] In Beijing's license plate lottery system, introduced in 2011 as a quota variant of rationing, low-income applicants faced near-zero success rates in obtaining plates due to competitive disadvantages against wealthier entrants using proxies or multiple attempts, further stratifying vehicle ownership along class lines.[69] Overall, peer-reviewed assessments conclude that without compensatory measures like income-targeted exemptions or transit subsidies, road space rationing reinforces rather than alleviates urban inequities.[64][68]Major Case Studies
Permanent Schemes in Latin America
Permanent road space rationing schemes emerged in Latin American megacities during the late 1980s and 1990s primarily to mitigate acute air pollution and traffic congestion amid rapid urbanization and motorization. These programs restrict private vehicle access to urban roads based on license plate digits, typically exempting public transport, motorcycles, and newer or low-emission vehicles. Implementation varies by city, with restrictions applied either daily during peak hours or one day per week, aiming for a 20% reduction in circulating vehicles. Empirical evaluations, often using econometric methods, reveal short-term traffic drops but frequent long-term rebounds through behavioral adaptations like increased car ownership or circumvention tactics.[70][31] Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, launched on November 1, 1989, bans most private vehicles from operating one weekday per week (e.g., plates ending in 5 or 6 on Mondays) from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m., excluding holidays and certain vehicle categories. Designed to curb photochemical smog in a basin prone to thermal inversions, it initially reduced weekday vehicle kilometers traveled by about 13% but showed no statistically significant improvement in key air pollutants like ozone and carbon monoxide from 1990 to 2001. A natural experiment exploiting the program's exemption for newer vehicles indicated perverse effects, including a 15-30% increase in emissions from remaining vehicles due to their older age and higher pollution profiles. Compliance remains high at over 90%, yet subsequent expansions, such as Saturday bans from 2016, failed to yield measurable air quality gains.[21][23][71] In Bogotá, the Pico y Placa (peak and plate) restriction began on February 1, 1998, prohibiting vehicles with specific plate endings from roads during rush hours (6-9 a.m. and 4-7 p.m. weekdays), rotating daily to cover two digits per day for a theoretical 40% fleet reduction. Intended to ease congestion on a road network strained by 1.5 million vehicles, the policy correlated with a 14% rise in car registrations post-implementation, as households bought second vehicles to evade bans. Randomized evaluations of intensified versions (e.g., three-day bans) found modest air pollution declines (2-4% in PM10) but net congestion increases from longer detours and mode shifts to buses, which added to emissions without capacity expansions. A 2020 paid opt-out reform shifted toward market mechanisms but preserved the core rationing for non-payers, highlighting ongoing evasion via multiple plates.[72][31][73] São Paulo's Rodízio Veicular, enacted via municipal decree on July 28, 1997, and effective from 1998, limits vehicles to specific weekdays during peak periods (7-10 a.m. and 5-8 p.m.), with plates ending in odd digits (1,3,5,7,9) barred on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and evens on Tuesdays and Thursdays, achieving a 20% daily reduction in the restricted zone covering 90% of the city. Motivated by gridlock costing 8% of GDP in lost productivity, it initially cut peak-hour traffic by 25-30% and emissions proportionally, but adaptations including taxi proliferation and peripheral sprawl eroded gains within years. By 2010, studies estimated negligible long-term air quality benefits amid rising fleet emissions, prompting exemptions for electric vehicles and freight to balance equity concerns for lower-income drivers. The program persists with periodic tightenings, such as pandemic-era expansions in 2021.[74][70] Santiago de Chile's vehicular restriction, formalized in the 1990s as part of the Plan de Prevención y Descontaminación Atmosférica, operates year-round with intensified bans (one weekday per week, 7:30 a.m.-9:30 p.m.) from May to August for non-catalytic or older vehicles based on plate parity. Aimed at reducing winter PM2.5 spikes in the Andean valley, it achieves 20% vehicle reductions during alerts but faces criticism for rebound effects, including up to 10% higher emissions from idling and older cars substituting banned ones. Evaluations indicate temporary ozone drops but persistent fine particle issues, underscoring the scheme's limitations without complementary public transit investments.[75][76]Event-Specific Uses in Asia
Beijing implemented a temporary road space rationing scheme starting July 20, 2008, ahead of the Summer Olympics, restricting vehicles from operating on alternate days based on the last digit of their license plates to curb traffic congestion and air pollution.[48] This measure halved the city's vehicle volume, banning approximately 1.81 million vehicles or 54% of those registered in Beijing.[47] The restrictions applied to most private cars within the Fifth Ring Road, with exemptions for Olympic vehicles, buses, and certain high-occupancy or clean-fuel options, and were extended through the Paralympic Games ending September 17, 2008.[48] Empirical analysis using satellite data showed reductions in urban heat intensity by up to 0.3°C and decreased surface temperatures, attributing these effects partly to lower traffic emissions.[48] Air quality improvements were observed, including lowered levels of carbon monoxide and ozone, though construction halts and factory shutdowns contributed alongside the rationing.[77] Traffic speeds increased modestly, but the scheme's short-term nature limited long-term behavioral shifts, with post-event data indicating partial rebound in vehicle use.[6] Similar event-tied restrictions occurred in Beijing for the September 3, 2015, military parade marking the 70th anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II, where vehicle numbers were halved from August 20 to September 3 via plate-based bans, aiming to ensure clear skies for the event.[78] In other Asian contexts, event-specific rationing has been less documented or systematic. For instance, Hanoi announced temporary truck and passenger vehicle bans on select streets in August 2025 to prepare for national commemoration events, but these were localized and not broad plate-based schemes.[79] Delhi's odd-even vehicle restrictions, while implemented multiple times since 2016, targeted chronic winter pollution crises rather than discrete international events like the 2010 Commonwealth Games, with no verified plate-rationing tied directly to those occasions.[80] Overall, Beijing's Olympic and anniversary implementations stand as prominent examples of leveraging rationing for high-profile visibility, prioritizing immediate emission cuts over sustained policy integration.European and Temporary Western Examples
In Athens, Greece, the "daktylios" (ring) scheme, implemented in 1982, restricts private vehicles from entering the city center on alternate weekdays based on the last digit of the license plate, with odd-numbered plates allowed on specific days and even-numbered on others, aiming to halve peak-hour traffic and mitigate air pollution from the high vehicle density in the densely populated urban area.[81] The system operates from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on weekdays, excluding holidays, and includes exemptions for taxis, buses, motorcycles, and electric vehicles, though enforcement relies on police checks and fines starting at €100 for violations. Despite initial reductions in central traffic volumes by up to 50%, long-term adaptations such as increased vehicle ownership to secure alternate-day access have limited sustained congestion relief, as evidenced by persistent high car dependency ratios in Greece compared to other European nations.[81] In France, Paris has applied temporary license-plate-based rationing during acute pollution episodes, such as the March 2014 measure that banned half of vehicles (alternating even and odd plates) from Greater Paris roads for one day to curb particulate matter levels exceeding EU limits by over 50%.[82] The restriction, enforced via fines up to €135 and speed cameras, was lifted after 24 hours as winds dispersed pollutants, but similar short-term odd-even bans have recurred during winter inversions, often paired with free public transit to encourage compliance.[43] These episodic implementations, unlike permanent schemes, prioritize immediate emission drops—achieving up to 30% reductions in nitrogen oxides on ban days—but face criticism for rebound effects, including higher per-vehicle emissions from idling or route deviations.[83] Italy has deployed temporary road space rationing in northern cities amid smog crises; in December 2015, Milan banned private cars, motorcycles, and scooters from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. for three consecutive days, targeting PM10 levels that had exceeded safe thresholds for over a week due to stagnant anticyclones and heating emissions.[84] Concurrently, Rome restricted vehicles with odd-numbered plates for a full day, enforced through barriers and patrols, to reduce circulating traffic by about 30% in affected zones.[84] Such measures, repeated in subsequent winters (e.g., 2015-2016 season with multiple multi-day bans), rely on regional alerts tied to air quality indices but have shown mixed results, with immediate traffic drops offset by evasion via carpooling exemptions or peripheral route shifts, as monitored by local traffic cameras.[4]Criticisms and Unintended Consequences
Widespread Evasion Tactics
One prevalent evasion tactic in road space rationing schemes involves households acquiring additional vehicles with license plates featuring different terminal digits, thereby ensuring unrestricted daily access to roadways. This strategy, often termed the "second-car effect," directly counters the policy's intent to reduce vehicle kilometers traveled by expanding the overall fleet of automobiles. In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, implemented in 1989 to restrict vehicles one weekday per week based on plate numbers, residents responded by purchasing extra cars to maintain mobility, leading to a notable increase in total vehicle registrations. Empirical analyses confirm that such behavioral adaptations can negate up to 20-40% of projected emission reductions, as newer or additional vehicles often replace older ones without proportional declines in usage.[85] Similar patterns emerged in Bogotá's Pico y Placa system, introduced in 1998, where multiple vehicle ownership per household became a common workaround to the alternating-day restrictions tied to plate digits. Local reports highlight how families register secondary cars—frequently older or less efficient models—to rotate compliance, exacerbating parking demands and overall congestion rather than alleviating it.[86] In São Paulo's Rodízio program, launched in 1997 with similar plate-based weekday bans, surveys indicated that wealthier households evaded limits by maintaining two or more vehicles, contributing to a 15-20% rise in car ownership rates post-implementation despite stagnant population growth.[85] Illegal methods, such as falsifying or swapping license plates, further undermine enforcement, particularly in jurisdictions with manual inspections rather than automated camera systems. In Bogotá, authorities documented cases of plate tampering to bypass Pico y Placa, resulting in fines but persistent circumvention due to limited detection resources.[87] These tactics disproportionately affect lower-enforcement areas and can increase risks like uninsured driving or vehicle mismatches, as evidenced by heightened accident reports tied to non-compliant vehicles in restricted zones. Where official exemptions exist—such as paid "solidarity" permits in Bogotá allowing circumvention for a fee—these have been exploited beyond intent, with uptake rates exceeding 10% among eligible drivers and generating revenue but failing to curb total trips.[88] Overall, such evasions highlight enforcement challenges, with studies estimating that unmonitored schemes lose 30-50% of their traffic-reduction potential to adaptive behaviors.[36]Policy Backfire and Inverse Effects
Road space rationing schemes have frequently produced inverse effects, where intended reductions in traffic volume and emissions fail to materialize or even reverse due to adaptive behaviors such as increased vehicle ownership and substitution with higher-emitting vehicles. In Mexico City's Hoy No Circula program, introduced in 1989 and expanded to Saturdays in 2008, empirical analysis revealed a 14-27% rise in total vehicle ownership, driven by households acquiring second cars exempt from the same restrictions on alternate days.[21] These additional vehicles were disproportionately older and more polluting, resulting in no net improvement in air quality across eight major pollutants and potential increases in carbon monoxide and fine particulate matter concentrations.[23] [89] Similar backfire occurred through heightened usage of non-restricted vehicles and extended driving on permitted days, amplifying total vehicle kilometers traveled without alleviating congestion. A study utilizing vehicle registration and fuel consumption data estimated that the policy increased overall driving by encouraging evasion tactics, including the deployment of dirtier cars on unrestricted days, thereby offsetting any marginal reductions from banned vehicles.[66] In Bogotá's Pico y Placa system, implemented in 1998, moderate rationing variants led to rebound effects where drivers compensated by increasing trips on allowed days, yielding negligible or counterproductive impacts on emissions; stricter enforcement was required to achieve even partial mitigation, but second-vehicle purchases persisted as a response.[31] Broader reviews of license-plate restrictions across multiple cities, including Santiago and Delhi, confirm the prevalence of the "second-car effect," where households respond to rationing by expanding their fleet, often selecting less efficient models that undermine emission goals.[6] These outcomes stem from the policy's failure to address underlying demand for mobility, instead incentivizing circumvention that elevates total emissions and reinforces dependency on private vehicles, as evidenced by sustained or worsened pollution levels post-implementation.[90]Comparisons to Alternative Approaches
Market-Based Congestion Pricing
Market-based congestion pricing employs variable tolls on road use, calibrated to time, location, and traffic levels, to internalize the external costs of congestion such as time delays and emissions, thereby signaling drivers to adjust behavior through economic incentives rather than prohibitions.[91] This approach contrasts with road space rationing, which imposes non-price quotas like license plate restrictions, often leading to arbitrary allocations that ignore users' willingness to pay and fail to generate revenue for infrastructure improvements.[63] Economic theory posits that pricing achieves Pareto-efficient outcomes by equating marginal social cost to benefit, reducing vehicle volumes where demand exceeds capacity without the deadweight losses inherent in quota systems.[92] Empirical implementations demonstrate superior congestion mitigation compared to rationing schemes. In London, the cordon charge introduced on February 17, 2003, initially cut central zone traffic by approximately 30% and increased average speeds by 37%, with revenues exceeding £2.6 billion by 2020 directed toward public transit enhancements.[93] Stockholm's trial in 2006, made permanent in 2007, reduced peak-hour crossings by 20-25% and emissions by similar margins, outperforming temporary rationing by sustaining behavioral shifts through dynamic pricing adjustments.[94] Singapore's Electronic Road Pricing (ERP), operational since 1998 with real-time gantries, has maintained traffic speeds at 45-50 km/h on expressways by varying fees up to SGD 6 per entry, avoiding the evasion and fleet expansion seen in quota-based systems elsewhere.[95] These cases illustrate pricing's elasticity: demand reductions of 10-30% typically occur at tolls reflecting congestion costs, with minimal rebound effects due to revenue recycling into alternatives like buses.[96] Pricing's advantages over rationing stem from its incentive structure and fiscal outcomes. Quotas distort resource allocation by granting access based on non-price criteria, fostering inefficiencies such as secondary markets or circumvention via additional vehicles, whereas pricing allocates scarce space to highest-value trips, enhancing overall welfare.[97] For instance, studies show pricing yields equivalent or greater volume reductions than rationing while producing net revenues—e.g., Stockholm's system generated SEK 1 billion annually initially—enabling subsidies for low-income exemptions or transit, mitigating regressivity absent in revenue-neutral rationing.[63] However, implementation requires robust enforcement technology like ANPR cameras, as seen in London's evolution to emissions-based tiers in 2021, and faces political hurdles from perceived inequity, though evidence indicates broader efficiency gains outweigh these when revenues fund inclusive mobility options.[98]| Aspect | Road Space Rationing | Congestion Pricing |
|---|---|---|
| Allocation Mechanism | Administrative quotas (e.g., plate numbers) | Price signals based on marginal cost |
| Efficiency | Arbitrary; ignores trip value | Allocates to highest-value uses |
| Revenue Generation | None; potential enforcement costs | Funds alternatives (e.g., £2B+ in London) |
| Behavioral Response | High evasion, mode switching | Sustained shifts via incentives |
| Empirical Volume Reduction | Variable, often temporary (10-20%) | Consistent 10-30% with speed gains |