畢業(yè)論文-交通擁堵和城市交通系統(tǒng)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展【外文翻譯(中英文)】

1、譯文 交通擁堵和城市交通系統(tǒng)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展摘要：城市化和機(jī)動化的快速增長，通常有助于城市交通系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展，是經(jīng)濟(jì)性，環(huán)境性和社會可持續(xù)性的體現(xiàn)，但其結(jié)果是交通量無情增加，導(dǎo)致交通擁擠。道路擁擠定價已經(jīng)提出了很多次，作為一個經(jīng)濟(jì)措施緩解城市交通擁擠，但還沒有見過在實踐中廣泛使用，因為道路收費(fèi)的一些潛在的影響仍然不明。本文首先回顧可持續(xù)運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)的概念，它應(yīng)該滿足集體經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義的目標(biāo)。然后，根據(jù)可持續(xù)交通系統(tǒng)的特點(diǎn)，使擁擠收費(fèi)能夠促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義。研究結(jié)果表明，交通擁堵收費(fèi)是一個切實有效的方式，可以促進(jìn)城市交通系統(tǒng)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展。一、介紹城市交通是一個在世界各地的大城市迫

2、切關(guān)注的話題。隨著中國的城市化和機(jī)動化的快速發(fā)展，交通擁堵已成為一個越來越嚴(yán)重的問題，造成較大的時間延遲，增加能源消耗和空氣污染，減少了道路網(wǎng)絡(luò)的可靠性。在許多城市，交通擠塞情況被看作是經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的障礙。我們可以使用多種方法來解決交通擠塞，包括新的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建設(shè)，改善基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的維護(hù)和操作，并利用現(xiàn)有的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，通過需求管理策略，包括定價機(jī)制，更有效地減少運(yùn)輸密度。交通擁堵收費(fèi)在很久以前就已提出，作為一種有效的措施，來緩解的交通擠塞情況。交通擁堵收費(fèi)的原則與目標(biāo)是通過對選擇在高峰擁擠時段的設(shè)施的使用實施附加收費(fèi)，以紓緩擁堵情況。轉(zhuǎn)移非高峰期一些出行路線，遠(yuǎn)離擁擠的設(shè)施或高占用車輛，或完全阻止一些出行

3、，交通擁堵收費(fèi)計劃將在節(jié)省時間和降低經(jīng)營成本的基礎(chǔ)上，改善空氣中的質(zhì)量，減少能源消耗和改善過境生產(chǎn)力。此計劃在世界很多國家和地方都有成功的應(yīng)用。繼在20世紀(jì)70年代初和80年代中期挪威與新加坡實行收費(fèi)環(huán)，在2003年2月倫敦金融城推出了面積收費(fèi);直至現(xiàn)在，它都是已經(jīng)開始實施擁擠收費(fèi)的大都市圈中一個最知名的例子。然而，交通擁堵收費(fèi)由于理論和政治的原因未能在實踐中廣泛使用。道路收費(fèi)的一些潛在的影響尚不清楚，和城市發(fā)展的擁塞定價可持續(xù)性，需要進(jìn)一步研究。可持續(xù)發(fā)展通常作為運(yùn)輸政策的評估基本目標(biāo)。可持續(xù)交通的想法已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)在交通運(yùn)輸部門的可持續(xù)發(fā)展的概念中，可以定義如下，“可持續(xù)發(fā)展的交通基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和出行

4、政策是服務(wù)于經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，環(huán)境管理和社會公平的多重目標(biāo)，用這個目標(biāo)來優(yōu)化交通運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)的使用，并達(dá)到經(jīng)濟(jì)和相關(guān)的社會和環(huán)境目標(biāo)，以實現(xiàn)在不犧牲后代的能源的前提下，達(dá)到相同的目的。”可持續(xù)運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)的要求是當(dāng)前和未來幾代的可持續(xù)發(fā)展的要求，即經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義的主要支柱之間的動態(tài)平衡。在可持續(xù)發(fā)展的運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)背景下，擁擠收費(fèi)如何能夠促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義，是本文研究的課題。本文的其余部分的結(jié)構(gòu)如下。在第2節(jié)，對經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展對交通擠塞定價的影響進(jìn)行了闡述。第3節(jié)是對保護(hù)環(huán)境，社會正義和擁擠定價之間的關(guān)系進(jìn)行了分析。有些結(jié)論是在第5節(jié)二、經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展交通擁堵，造成旅行時間的增加，交通事故，能源消耗

5、和環(huán)境惡化，已經(jīng)造成了大量的經(jīng)濟(jì)損失。據(jù)報道，由交通擠塞所造成的經(jīng)濟(jì)損失在2003年的北京和上海占其國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的1 / 3，每年達(dá)4000萬元。在許多危害中，交通擁堵已被視為經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的障礙。任何可持續(xù)的交通管理政策應(yīng)符合提高交通運(yùn)輸對經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的目標(biāo)的影響，并且沒有造成不利的環(huán)境影響和經(jīng)濟(jì)的進(jìn)一步增長。那么擁塞的定價策略如何有效減少交通堵塞，減少污染物和溫室氣體排放，減少燃料使用，并減少當(dāng)前交通運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)的其他不利影響呢？交通擁堵收費(fèi)的基本經(jīng)濟(jì)原則，可以在圖1所示。從理論上說，個人用戶決定是否使用一個特定的道路的成本權(quán)衡他們將承擔(dān)對自己的利益。社會總效益可以由下圖1中的面積測量。 MPC的曲線表

6、示用戶成本只反映每個用戶負(fù)擔(dān)的成本為新用戶（即“邊緣”的用戶）。然而，邊際用戶的場合，如空氣污染，延遲給其他用戶，他不承擔(dān)額外的社會成本。每個邊緣用戶和他所造成的社會成本的負(fù)擔(dān)的總成本是每次出行的邊際社會成本。邊際社會成本是由圖1中的MSC曲線表示。圖1交通擁堵收費(fèi)的影響如果有ñ車輛在交通運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)中，意味著用戶的成本是由MPC表示，一個邊際的用戶將增加平均用戶成本MPC +MPC。因此，邊際社會成本可以表述為：MSC=（N + 1）（MPC +MPC） - nMPC = MPC +MPC+nMPC擁擠收費(fèi)是交通需求管理的重要手段，最初只是影響交通出行的決定。實踐證明擁擠收費(fèi)能有效地規(guī)

7、范交通出行時間和空間分布，促進(jìn)道路資源的有效利用，提高運(yùn)輸業(yè)務(wù)的效率。在新加坡的擁塞定價實施表明，交通量下降了17，在高峰時段，倫敦的經(jīng)驗也表明，定價方案是成功的。我們可以得出結(jié)論，減少交通擠塞，將促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展。收費(fèi)會影響旅客的預(yù)算，將導(dǎo)致不僅在模式上的轉(zhuǎn)換，而且是更廣泛的經(jīng)濟(jì)變化，將伴隨著地理再分配的過程。一些人擔(dān)心，交通擁堵收費(fèi)可能對中部地區(qū)的經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)生負(fù)面影響，特別是在零售方面。產(chǎn)生了相反的論調(diào)，不過，減少交通擠塞，應(yīng)該是服務(wù)于更廣泛的業(yè)務(wù)，以降低成本，使他們成為更具有競爭力的國家。零售活動的位置也是由個人首選的購物場所。眾所周知，個人傾向于購買的商店在他們的居住地附近，因此零售企

8、業(yè)不能輕易遷出核心區(qū)，因為許多人住在中心區(qū)。這種方便客戶的依賴，解釋了為什么零售生產(chǎn)跌幅小于核心區(qū)的其他主要行業(yè)的輸出。交通擁堵收費(fèi)減少在繁忙時間的擠塞情況，并增加在其他時段的交通擠塞情況。通過向公共交通和大量出租車輛轉(zhuǎn)向，交通擁堵收費(fèi)降低所有時段定價領(lǐng)域人次。除減少交通擠塞，如果考慮到改善空氣質(zhì)量和減少燃料消耗等方面，交通擁堵收費(fèi)形成的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益將是相當(dāng)可觀的。三、環(huán)保在中國，環(huán)境問題日益嚴(yán)重。據(jù)報道，中國是二氧化碳排放大國，有7個城市在世界嚴(yán)重污染的城市名單中。交通運(yùn)輸對環(huán)境的影響，涵蓋了不同的影響，包括空氣污染，噪音，氣候變化的范圍，例如。汽車是城市空氣和噪音污染的占主導(dǎo)地位的生產(chǎn)者，包括

9、一氧化碳，氮氧化物和大氣飄塵。這些污染物是關(guān)鍵因素，許多呼吸系統(tǒng)疾病，如哮喘，以及其他的影響人體健康的方面，如頭疼，眼疾等癥狀。據(jù)世界銀行估計，在發(fā)展中國家，有0.5億人每年死亡與于交通工具空氣污染物排放有關(guān)，這是與交通事故類似的死亡人數(shù)，。交通是不可替代的，因為它是生產(chǎn)鏈的一部分。出于這個原因，交通系統(tǒng)必須發(fā)展和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化，運(yùn)輸服務(wù)的有效性，是必須增加的，同時必須減少或防止環(huán)境污染。由于道路交通排放是一個復(fù)雜的系統(tǒng)，不能完全統(tǒng)一一個輸出。從車輛樣本分析不同的駕駛條件下的排放量這是自然的。加州空氣資源委員會指出車輛的擁堵走走停停顯著增加了排放量。作為一個例子，一個報告估計，10英里的路程，用普通的

10、1987年的汽車，以55英里的速度運(yùn)行HC排放廢氣的重量為1克，而HC在20英里的平均速度下的排放量是7克，典型的走走停停模式。四、社會正義可持續(xù)發(fā)展有三個廣泛的目標(biāo)：經(jīng)濟(jì)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義，這三個目標(biāo)都要解決可持續(xù)發(fā)展這個問題。經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展和環(huán)境保護(hù)的投入一直受到關(guān)注，但投入給社會正義的關(guān)注較少。社會正義（公平）包含的經(jīng)濟(jì)權(quán)益和環(huán)境權(quán)益。 經(jīng)濟(jì)公平的問題，造成交通擁堵收費(fèi)是難以完全解決的。有些人認(rèn)為道路收費(fèi)是倒退，因為它更多地讓承擔(dān)較差的汽車用戶，只需短距離行程的用戶，或者是生活水平欠佳的用戶，不管是什么原因，別無選擇，只能乘車。這些參數(shù)可以通過制定更加靈活的收費(fèi)制度，在一定程度上

11、抵消。它已被接受的任何形式的道路收費(fèi)將引入一些不公平現(xiàn)象。關(guān)鍵是要保持這些最低限度，并找到那些沒有受益于交通擁堵收費(fèi)的補(bǔ)償方式。在實踐中，收入最低的旅客，他們通常乘坐公共交通工具或徒步旅行，是最有可能受益的。 對于傳統(tǒng)的運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)，對汽油的稅率是相同的，不管運(yùn)輸業(yè)的用戶是否是在擁擠或非擁擠的時段行駛。擁擠收費(fèi)是選擇在交通高峰期間對擁擠設(shè)施的使用實施附加費(fèi)，預(yù)計這樣將減少這種不公平的 公平問題解決在運(yùn)輸已基本上涉及經(jīng)濟(jì)權(quán)益，包括公共交通和私人交通之間的關(guān)系，對周邊地區(qū)和弱勢人口群體的擁塞定價的影響。但是，在運(yùn)輸方面環(huán)境權(quán)益的問題已經(jīng)很少提及。運(yùn)輸產(chǎn)生的直接影響很多，如大氣排放和噪音，也間接影響通過

12、對污染設(shè)施的位置和影響的人的影響，。環(huán)境公平是指環(huán)境質(zhì)量的社會分配（特別是二氧化氮分布）。這是平等地獲得一個干凈的環(huán)境和對環(huán)境可能造成的危害，不論收入，階級或其他鑒別特征的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)地位受到平等保護(hù)。交通規(guī)劃者應(yīng)該指出，減少擁堵水平和行程速度對整個設(shè)施的增加將有利于公共交通的使用者。從環(huán)境公平的角度來看，交通擁堵收費(fèi)的成效是敏感的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)特征的空間分布，因此最佳的方案設(shè)計的每個應(yīng)用程序都會有所不同?？梢钥闯觯鐣亲铍y解決得，實踐表明，稅收在道路定價中起著至關(guān)重要的作用。如果稅收是回收投資，允許對公共交通工具的投資，或維持更高的服務(wù)水平，它有助于提供一個明確的選擇，這既加強(qiáng)了模式的選擇上的影

13、響，并減少那些誰負(fù)責(zé)征收的關(guān)注。如果是用于改善道路基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，它可以看出，交通改道在控制區(qū)的優(yōu)勢體現(xiàn)。如果它是用來支付環(huán)境的改善，這將有助于加大道路收費(fèi)。如何使用稅收，改善城市交通系統(tǒng)的效率，在可持續(xù)發(fā)展中發(fā)揮了關(guān)鍵作用。五、結(jié)論隨著持續(xù)增長的交通需求和道路基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的擴(kuò)展范圍減少，交通擁堵的現(xiàn)象是不會減少。作為一項重要的戰(zhàn)略，擁擠收費(fèi)是解決交通需求管理問題的重要途徑，但因為經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，環(huán)境保護(hù)和社會正義的不確定影響，仍收到了強(qiáng)烈的社會和政治的反對。本文回顧了交通擁堵收費(fèi)和可持續(xù)交通運(yùn)輸系統(tǒng)的三個目標(biāo)之間的關(guān)系，結(jié)果表明，交通擁堵收費(fèi)是一種很有前途的交通管理策略，它可以促進(jìn)城市經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，改善環(huán)境質(zhì)量

14、，減少不公平。電子不停車收費(fèi)系統(tǒng)（ETC）技術(shù)的最新進(jìn)展證明了交通擁堵收費(fèi)技術(shù)上是可行的。可以預(yù)見的，未來幾十年將看到越來越多的地方實施交通擁堵收費(fèi)策略或?qū)⒁獙嵤┙煌〒矶率召M(fèi)的策略。交通擁堵收費(fèi)的設(shè)計和評價，將需要一個可持續(xù)的發(fā)展，需要更深入的了解它帶來的直接和間接影響。鳴謝這項工作是支持（2007F3078）福建省青年人才項目。期待有益的意見和建議，以改善本文。附件：外文原文Congestion and Sustainable Development of UrbanTransportation systemAbstractThe rapid growth in urbanization a

15、nd motorization generally contributes to an urban transportation system that is economically, environmentally and socially unsustainable. The result has been a relentless increase in traffic congestion. Road congestion pricing has been proposed many times as an economic measure to fight congestion i

16、n urban traffic, but has not seen widespread use in practice because of Some potential impacts of road pricing remain unknown. he paper first reviews the concept of sustainable transportation system, which should meet the goals of economic development, environmental protection and social justice col

17、lectively. And then, based on the characteristics of sustainable transportation system, how congestion pricing can contribute to economic growth, environmental protection and social justice is examined. Examination result shows that congestion pricing is a powerful way to promote the sustainable dev

18、elopment of urban transportation system.1、 IntroductionUrban transportation is a pressing concern in mega cities around the world. Along with Chinas rapid development of urbanization and motorization, traffic jams has become a more and more serious problem, resulting in greater time delay, increase

19、of energy consumption and air pollution, decrease of reliability of road network. In many cities traffic congestion is seen as a hindrance to economic development. Numerous methods can be used to address congestion and reduce transport density, including building new infrastructure, improving mainte

20、nance and operation of infrastructure, and using the existing infrastructure more efficiently through demand management strategies, including pricing mechanisms. Congestion pricing has long been proposed as an effective measure to combat traffic congestion. The principle objective of congestion pric

21、ing is to alleviate congestion by implementing surcharge for the use selected congested facilities during peak time periods. By shifting some trips to off-peak periods, to routes away from congested facilities, or to higher-occupancy vehicles, or by discouraging some trips altogether, congestion pri

22、cing schemes would result in savings in time and operating costs, improvements in air quality, reductions in energy consumption and improvements in transit productivity. There are lots of successful applications in some countries and regions in the rest of the world. Following Singapore in the early

23、 1970s and Norwegian toll rings in the mid-1980s, the city of London introduced its area toll in February 2003; up till now, it is the most well-known example of a large metropolitan area that has implemented congestion pricing.However, congestion pricing has not seen widespread use in practice due

24、to theoretical and political reasons. Some potential impacts of road pricing remain unknown, and the sustainability of congestion pricing for urban development requires further study.Sustainability is normally taken as basic objectives in the assessment of transportation policy. The idea of sustaina

25、ble transportation emerges from the concept of sustainable development in the transport sector and can be defined as follows，“sustainable transportation infrastructure and travel policies that serve multiple goals of economic development, environment stewardship and social equity, have the objective

26、 to optimize the use of transportation systems to achieve economic and related social and environment goals, without sacrificing the ability of future generations to achieve the same goals”. Sustainable transportation systems require a dynamic balance between the main pillars of sustainable developm

27、ent, economic development, environmental protection and social justice for current and future generations.In the context of sustainable transport systems, how congestion pricing can contribute to economic growth, environmental protection and social justice is examined in this paper. The rest of the

28、paper is structured as follows. In section 2, the impacts of congestion pricing on economic development are described. Section 3 presents the contribution to environment protection, and the relationship between social justice and congestion pricing is analyzed. Some conclusions are given in section

29、5.2. Economic developmentTraffic congestion, resulting in the increase of travel time, traffic accident, energy consumption and environment deterioration, has produced numerous economic losses. It was reported that economic loss caused by traffic congestion amounted to 40 million Yuan per year in Be

30、ijing and 1/3 of GDP in Shanghai in 2003 In many cites, traffic congestion has seen as a hindrance to economic development. Any sustainable transportation management polices should meet the goals of improving the effects of transport on economic development, and without adversely impacting the envir

31、onment and the potential for further economic growth. How effective would congestion pricing strategy be in reducing congestion, lowering pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, cutting fuel use, and reducing other adverse impacts of current transportation system?The basic economic principles of co

32、ngestion pricing can be illustrated in Figure 1. Theoretically, individual users decide whether or not to use a particular road by weighing the costs they will to bear against the benefits to themselves. Total social benefits can be measure by the area under D in Figure 1. The user costs indicated o

33、n the MPC curve reflect only the costs borne by each user as new users (i.e. “marginal” users) are added. However, the marginal user occasions additional social costs, such as air pollution and delay to other users, which he does not bear. The total costs borne by each marginal user and the social c

34、osts occasioned by him are the marginal social costs of each trip. Marginal social costs are indicated by the MSC curve in figure 1.Figure 1 Effect of congestion pricingIf there are n vehicles in the transport system, and mean user cost is represented by MPC, one marginal user added will increase me

35、an user cost to MPC+ MPC.Thus the marginal social costs can be formulated as MSC = (n + 1)( MPC + MPC ) nMPC= MPC + MPC + nMPCCongestion pricing is an important means of transportation demand management, and initially only affects transportation decisions. Practices prove that congestion pricing can

36、 effectively regulate traffic travel time and space distribution, promote effective utilization of road resources, and enhance the efficiency of transportation operations. Congestion pricing implementation in Singapore has showed that traffic volumes decreased by 17% in peak time periods, and London

37、s experience also indicated that pricing schemes was successful. As we convert all the savings in travel time resulting from decreased congestion to monetary units, we can conclude that the reduction of congestion will promote sustainable economic development.Toll will affect travelers budget constr

38、aints and will result not only in mode switching but also in broader changes in the economy that will be accompanied by the geographic redistribution of trips. Some concerns that congestion pricing may have negative effects on the economy of the central area, particularly on retail. A counterargumen

39、t, however, states that the reduced congestion is supposed to lower the costs of the downtown businesses, making them more competitive. The location of retail activity, on the other hand, is also driven by individuals preferred shopping locations. As well known, individuals tend to shop near their p

40、lace of residence, so retail firms cannot easily move out of the core area, because so many people live in center area. This dependence on customer convenience explains why retail production decreases less than the output of other primary industries in the core area.Congestion pricing reduces conges

41、tion during the peak time and increases congestion during other periods. By shifting toward public transit and high occupancy vehicles, congestion pricing reduced the number of trips to the pricing areas across all time periods. Except reduced congestion, if improvement of air quality and decrease o

42、f fuel consumption are taken into account, the economic efficiency resulting from congestion pricing would be considerable.3. Environmental protectionIn China, environmental problem become increasingly serious. It was reported that china is the second emitter of CO2, and 7 cities are in the list of

43、seriously-polluted cities in the world.The environmental effects of transportation cover a wide range of different impacts, including for example air pollution, noise, and climate change. Motor vehicles are the dominant producers of urban air and noise pollution, including carbon monoxide, oxides of

44、 nitrogen, and airborne particulates. These pollutants are key factors in many respiratory ailments such as asthma as well as “a range of other human health effects, from headaches and eye irritation to cancer”.The World Bank estimates that 0.5 million people in developing countries die each year fr

45、om transport-related air emissions, with a similar death toll from traffic accidents.Transportation cannot be replaced because it is the part of the production chain. For this reason, transportation systems must be developed and standardized, the effectiveness of transportation service must be incre

46、ased, while the environmental pollution must be decreased or prevented.Emission from road traffic is a complex system with an output that cannot be completely measured. It is natural to analyze the emissions from a sample of vehicles under different driving conditions. The California Air Resources B

47、oard pointes out that congestion-stop and go traffic significantly increases emissions. As an example, one report estimates that a 10-mile trip, using an average 1987 automobile, results in running exhaust HC emission of 1grams at a speed of 55 mph but that HC emissions would be 7 grams at an averag

48、e speed of 20 mph, typical of stop-and-go conditions With respect to air quality impacts, congestion pricing can be expected to improve air quality in two ways. The first impact comes from the reduced level of congestion on the facility, compared with the level of congestion on the un-priced road. T

49、he second impact on emissions is due to the reduced number of vehicles on the road facilities. To the extent that higher prices succeed in reducing vehicle miles traveled, there will be fewer vehicles on the road.It is clear that reduced travel demand in peak periods reflects fewer and shorter trips

50、 being made and results in higher travel speeds during peak periods, with consequent reductions in vehicles emissions during peak periods. However, the bulk of daily travel occurring in off-peak periods may be negatively affected, as some peak travelers shift their time of travel to off-peak periods

51、 to avoid tolls. Overall beneficial impacts on air quality may thus be smaller than that suggested simply by peak period travel demand reductions. This reduction cannot be measured directly, but will have to be calculated from the information on traffic diversion, congestion reduction, and ride-shar

52、ing increase.In the long term, congestion pricing could lead to increases in use of alternative travel modes for all daily trips, thus reducing total daily emissions.4. Social justiceSustainable development has three widely agreed meta-goals: sustainable economic development, environmental protectio

53、n and social justice. All three goals must be addressed together if development is to be sustainable. Much attention has been paid to economic development and environmental protection, but less attention has been paid to social justice. Social justice (equity) contains economic equity and environmen

54、tal equity. Economic equity issues resulting from congestion pricing are difficult to address completely. Some people have argued that road pricing is regressive, in that it will bear more heavily on poorer car users, short distance journeys, and on those living adjacent to the cordons; more general

55、ly concern has been expressed at the impact on those who, for whatever reason, have no choice but to travel by car. These arguments can be countered to some extent by devising more flexible charging regimes. It has to be accepted that any form of road pricing will introduce some inequities. The key

56、is to keep these to minimum,and to find ways of compensating those who do not benefit from congestion pricing. In practice, the lowest income travelers, who typically travel by public transport or on foot, are most likely to benefit.For the conventional transportation system, the tax rates on gasoli

57、ne, which are the same regardless of whether transport users are traveling during congested or un-congested periods Congestion pricing is expected to reduce this unfair by implementing surcharge for the use selected congested facilities during peak traffic periods.Equity issues addressed in transpor

58、t have been largely concerned with economic equity, including the relationship between public and private transport, the impacts of congestion pricing on peripheral areas and underprivileged population groups.However, environmental-equity issues have been little within a transport context. Transport produces direct effects such as atmospheric emissions and noise, and also indirect effects, through its influence on the location of polluting facilities and affected people.Environmental equity refers to the social distributio