Bill,
I think the issue is somewhat more complex than has been presented so
far on the list.  We have a number of issues here.
1.one is the  doctrine that "user pays".  This suggests that those who
use the roads should pay the cost.
2.two is the doctrine of public goods.  Infrastructure transportation
facilities are public goods the marginal cost of which (for the
individual user) approaches zero.  It is only at the point of congestion
that  individuals contribute to the cost though the marginal cost
remains very low or, more properly, is unapportionable to any individual.
3.  the user pay principle is already incorporated into gas taxes.  If
there is a problem here, it is that the gas taxes are not high enough.
That is a political problem but not, technically, an economic problem.
Also, we know that commercial trucks which do the most damage to roads
(and contribute the most to rising greenhouse gases) do not pay
gas/diesel taxes commensurate to their user pay costs.  This implies
that part of the 'subsidy' of 'free roads' is to the consumer in that
the full cost of  road transport is not being applied to consumer (or
producer) prices.  Indeed, one of the hidden costs of 'free trade' has
been a massive increase in road usage by commercial  vehicles and a
commensurate increase in global warming gasses.  One article I read
recently points to the fact that increased commercial traffic has
accounted for the entire increase in global warming gases offsetting the
decline in those produced by regular cars and even SUVs.
4. Given the political opposition to rising gas taxes to pay for roads,
I have come to support road tolls but only for (public) expressways
where local people and traffic have access to publicly funded
alternative secondary highways.  I.e. let the high speed, commercial
traffic pay tolls (and significant tolls sufficient to pay both the
capital cost and the maintenance cost) and give the rest the option of
the expressways or more liesurely, and free, older slower highways/roadways.

This is the situation that is developing in Europe.  My experience is in
Slovenia where, because of their entry into Europe, Slovenians saw their
highways being clogged and terrible accidents from increasing
trans-European transport.  They began a massive super-highway program,
financed in part from borrowing from the EU, in part from tolls and
imposts on gas taxes and insurance premiums.  The tolls are significant
and are aimed at 'free-rider' commercial and tourist traffic through
Slovenia though they are also paid by locals who choose to use the
freeways.  Many do because time is held more precious than money :-P

I have written an article for a local "mature readers" newspaper arguing
that we should adopt the Slovenian approach to rebuild the Trans-Canada
Hi (death) way east of Revelstoke by building a divided superhighway
complete with tunnels and viaducts and subject to significant tolls.
(If anyone is interested I can send them the article, sans pictures of
the incredible tunnels and massive viaducts)  My argument is that most
people will be willing to pay the tolls to buy the extra safety and the
time and that these tolls will pay for the cost in the long run.  Of
course, none of this will work if the roads are built to make private
profits.  The one thing that economic history tells us is that private
transportation infrastructure has never worked efficiently.  But that is
a lesson that we don't seem to have learned very well.

On another note, Bill, the problem with how you framed your original
question is that you do not distinguish between the problem of  who and
why people use the road -- the worker going to his place of work or the
young mother taking her children to the grandmother for a visit. Because
of that, it is impossible to allocate costs and benefits.  That is why
such infrastructure costs are best allocated by taxes rather than by
use.  Not necessarily an easy task but not impossible.  Why not just a
business tax on road access, for instance?

Anyhow, for what it is worth,

Paul
Paul Phillips,
Senior Scholar, Department of Economics,
University of Manitoba

Reply via email to