Efficiency and equity comparison of cordon- and area-based road pricing schemes using a trip-chain equilibrium model

This paper compares performances of cordon- and area-road pricing regimes on their social welfare benefit and equity impact. The key difference between the two systems is that the cordon charges travellers per crossing whereas the area scheme charges the travellers for an entry permit (e.g. per day). For the area licensing scheme, travellers may decide to pay or not to pay the toll depending on the proportion between their travel costs for the whole trip-chains during a valid period of the area license and the toll level. A static trip-chain equilibrium based model is adopted in the paper to provide a better evaluation of the area-based tolls on trip-chain demands. The paper proposes a modified Gini coefficient taking in account assumptions of revenue re-distribution to measure the spatial equity impact. The model is tested with the case study of the Utsunomiya city in Japan. The results demonstrate a higher level of optimal tolls and social welfare benefits of the area-based schemes compared to those of the cordon-based schemes. Different sizes of the charging boundary have significant influences on the scheme benefits. The tests also show an interesting result on the non-effect of the boundary design (for both charging types) on their equity impacts. However, when comparing between charging regimes it is clear that the area schemes generate more inequitable results.