{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

380 transprev243

380 transprev243 - Transport Reviews Vol 24 No 3 275292 May...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
0144-1647 Print/1464-5327 Online/04/030275-18 © 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd DOI: 10.1080/0144164042000181725 Transport Reviews, Vol. 24, No. 3, 275–292, May 2004 Correspondence Address: Phil Goodwin, ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK. Email: [email protected] Elasticities of Road Traffic and Fuel Consumption with Respect to Price and Income: A Review PHIL GOODWIN, JOYCE DARGAY and MARK HANLY ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University College London, London, UK (Received 24 March 2003; revised 2 June 2003; accepted 26 September 2003) A BSTRACT This paper gives the main results of a literature review of new empirical studies, published since 1990, updating work on the effects of price and income on fuel consumption, traffic levels, and where available other indicators including fuel efficiency and car ownership. The results are broadly consistent with several earlier reviews, though not always with current practice. The work was carried out as one of two parallel ‘blind’ literature reviews, the other being summarized in a companion paper by Graham and Glaister: the results are broadly, though not in every respect, consistent. Introduction This is a companion paper to Graham and Glaister (2004). Both papers were commissioned by the UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (now called the Department for Transport), with the same project brief, but to be carried out separately and independently as a means of ensuring the robustness of the conclusions. The published versions were amended following sight of each other’s draft reports, but these amendments were minor. The two projects identified an overlapping but not identical source literature, used different selection criteria when drawing from that literature, gave different weights to meta-analysis and to earlier literature reviews as source material. They had different emphases especially in relation to new evidence on freight (to which Graham and Glaister give greater attention) and to new evidence on traffic volumes and forecasting implications (to which the present paper gives greater attention). The core results are strongly consistent, but there are some interesting and illuminating differences. Definitions The present paper will not repeat the standard and well-rehearsed definitions and caveats relating to the estimation and use of demand elasticities, except in relation
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
276 P. Goodwin et al. to the distinction made between short- and long-term effects. Dynamic methods of estimation are those—always using time series data—in which allowance is made for a progressive build-up of effects over an explicitly identified time scale. This is now standard in the fuel consumption literature and increasingly common in the traffic literature. Static (or equilibrium) methods are those—either using cross-section or time series data—in which there is no explicit allowance for any time scale of response, which their users hope relate to an end state, of indeterminate date, when all responses have been completed.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 18

380 transprev243 - Transport Reviews Vol 24 No 3 275292 May...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online