No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
This paper addresses the assessment of user benefits generated from increased road standard; improvements which road users may (partly) realize as reduced travel time. We show how travel time reductions may be understood as resulting from an interrelation between speed choice, driving comfort and values-of-time. We discuss how investments and other projects can be evaluated to avoid two ditches: double-counting and systematic underestimation of benefits Estimated values-of-time are known to comprise two inseparable components: the “resource” value of time, and a “quality adjustment”, reflecting the conditions under which time is spent. For the evaluation of an investment expected to reduce travel time, estimated (average) values-of-time are typically multiplied by average estimated time gains, to obtain an estimate of the consumer surplus generated for users that benefit fully from the improvement. This method is relevant for projects that reduce travel time at (approximately) constant driving comfort, for example by introducing a short-cut in a network of homogeneous standard. As this paper shows, however, the procedure is not appropriate for projects that induce time gains by “allowing” a higher travel speed. Based on current theories for driver behaviour, this paper sets up a model in which travel time and value-of-time is related through driving comfort and speed choice. We explore the consequences of this model for project evaluation and estimation of willingness-to-pay (by, for example, Stated Preference or Contingent Valuation methods). We show how careful consideration of the central relationships is needed to draw relevant conclusions about total benefits.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.