Search results

This chapter provides an overview of parking policy. The chapter takes as its start point that parking is first and foremost a land-use issue. It looks at the conflicts and synergies between parking policy for the purposes of traffic management and parking policy to support various key land-uses and policy objectives.

This chapter discusses the main practice-oriented viewpoints on what is meant by parking policy and what it aims to achieve. It then provides a state-of-art review of the evidence base on residential, retail and workplace parking as the three key parking destinations before drawing together these findings.

The reviews reveal that there has been an overemphasis on the importance of the impact of parking pricing to trip frequency, destination and walk times in the literature. Much greater emphasis should be given to establishing the extent to which parking restraint supports the economy, the environment and social equity. Only then will we be able to develop a consistent policy framing within which good parking management policy can play out and make a long-term difference to travel patterns and the quality of life in our cities.

If parking policy is to work well as part of an overall package of demand restraint, it needs to be applied in conjunction with land-use planning. In transport terms, this means connecting parking policy to non-car accessibility. If the overarching land-use and transport accessibility policies are right, then there is a greater possibility for other parking management policies to be effectively applied and integrated in broader transport strategies.

This chapter suggests that without a clear understanding of the broader objectives that parking policy supports it will not be possible to design effective parking management approaches.

Since the 1950s, and the steadily growing mobility of people and production (economic activity) as a result of the shift to road traffic, especially in North America, suburban areas have grown rapidly as residential areas and places of (post-industrial) economic activity (Hoffmann-Axthelm, 1998). People moved from ‘the country’ and, especially, the established central cities to the more spacious and cheap to develop peripheral locations. In Europe, differences have emerged on the basis of established planning law and thus availability of land for development, and of historic legacies in the relationship between ‘city’ and ‘country’. Thus, for instance, while in Germany cities were distinctly separate from their surrounding areas in legal terms and land ownership, in Italy, cities have been viewed as ‘owning’ or controlling the surrounding areas to the extent that these are subservient to the cities’ developmental needs (Heitkamp, 1998).

Airport economics literature has recently included the supply of concession services among the factors that might affect airport pricing. In particular, there is only little empirical analysis on whether: (i) the supply of airport concession services can stimulate the demand for travel (two-side complementarity) and (ii) the demand for airport concession services is independent of traveling activities (welfare neutrality). In this chapter, we survey papers that have addressed two-side complementarity and welfare neutrality in airport concessions. Our goal is to discuss the different assumptions that have shaped the models and to collect evidences, facts and empirical findings that may support analytical hypotheses. We argue that the notions of two-side complementarity and welfare neutrality might be interrelated – especially when airports invest in concessions in the area accessible to non-passengers. Welfare gains should be assessed on a case by case basis, depending on the type of airport in terms of ownership, size (and the relative mass of connecting passengers compared to origin–destination passengers), and the source of concession revenues. Our arguments might be particularly relevant to policy makers who need to understand (i) whether the supply of concessions reduces or increases the benefits of airport (aviation) price regulation and (ii) whether the effective control of market power may require the regulation of the prices of both the businesses.

This article discusses how the COVID-19 pandemic affects the demand and preferences of tourists in Russia. Tourists are the important part of the tourism industry, the most affected by COVID-19, because they are not only limited in moving and free choice of vacation destinations but also experience the economic consequences of the pandemic. However, the industry has already adapted to the current realities of the pandemic period, and tourists largely accept closed borders, mandatory vaccination requirements and PCR tests as an integral part of a modern tourist trip.

In Russia, the tourism industry has received a significant development boost despite the expected crisis consequences. The efforts of the authorities to stimulate domestic tourism and the lack of alternatives for vacations contributed to the fact that in 2020–2021 the domestic tourist flow increased by several times.

Article is aimed at studying the changes in tourist motivation and preferences of Russian tourists made by ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. However, will Russians still want to travel across their country after the pandemic is over? And what is currently influencing their choice of vacation forms and destinations? The survey revealed changes in the tourists' choice of vacation destinations, preferences in forms of activity and duration of travel, decrease of interest in package tours and rise of individual trips as well as the stable degree of satisfaction with vacations in Russia.

To answer this question, we examined the results of public opinion survey, carried out by All-Russian Centre for the Public Opinion Study and Association of Russian Tour operators. To confirm these results, we conducted own tourist opinion survey and analysed reviews on popular travel platforms in Russia. Today the tourism industry is in uncertainty and it is impossible to predict its development and tourist motivation in long-term perspective. This makes the study promising for continuation in the long term.

This chapter covers the range of issues which need to be considered when planning a new railway route or system. These issues are grouped under the three main aspects of sustainability: social, environmental and economic, while noting that there are inevitably some overlaps between them. This chapter therefore provides information which can help ensure that a holistic and comprehensive consideration of sustainability is embedded in the planning process. It also discusses how the various impacts associated with the construction and operation of a new railway route or system can be compared and assessed in order to determine whether or not a proposed rail scheme should go ahead.

Purpose – In this chapter, issues involved in trying to reduce car use in urban areas are examined, drawing on experience in Britain, and the possible lessons for China are considered.

Methodology – The advantages and disadvantages of the car are considered to explain the growth in car use in Britain. The political difficulties of reducing urban car use are discussed. A variety of methods of reducing car use by changing travel behaviour are described, including charging for the use of the road, fuel pricing, control of car parking and alternative methods of accessing the car such as car clubs and car sharing. The evidence on the effectiveness of measures to reduce car use is examined. The potential for reducing car use in China is then considered.

Findings – Most of the initiatives for reducing car use in Britain have focused on reducing congestion rather than actually reducing car use. The largest initiative to do this has been the London Congestion Charging scheme; this was successful, unlike proposals for some other cities, for a variety of reasons. However, while there have been many initiatives in Britain, there is little systematic evidence of their effectiveness.

Practical implications – The chapter discusses some of the political difficulties involved in trying to reduce car use and then illustrates these, particularly for congestion charging using the example of London.

Value of the chapter – The main value of this chapter is to illustrate the range of possible approaches to reducing car use, drawing upon evidence from various cities showing some of the ways of overcoming the barriers to implementation.