When are urban growth boundaries not second-best policies to congestion tolls?
When are urban growth boundaries not second-best policies to congestion tolls?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jue.2006.09.004
复制
发表时间：
2007-03-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Rhee, Hyok-Joo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Anas, Alex;Rhee, Hyok-Joo
Pines和Sadka通过假设所有工作都外生地位于一个城市中心（单中心城市），证明了当交通拥堵没有定价时，不太严格的城市增长边界是拥堵通行费的次优政策[D. Pines，E. Sadka，Zoning，First-best，Second-best and Third-best criteria for allocating land to roads，Journal of Urban Economics 17（1985）167-183]. Kanemoto [Y Kanemoto.成本效益分析和次优土地利用交通，城市经济学杂志4（1977）483-503]和Arnott [R。Arnott，Unpriced transport congestion，Journal of Economic Theory 21（1979）294-316. Brueckner将这一狭窄的理论结果外推到真实的城市[J. Brueckner，Urban sprawl：Diagnosis and remedies，International Regional Science Review 23（2000）160-179]。我们发现，如果没有城市和郊区之间的交叉通勤，交通的最佳效率收费可以减少拥堵和总出行成本的转移工人，居民从城市到郊区，导致城市扩张。因此，任何严格的规划城市边界都不是次优政策，因为它们会诱使人们搬迁到更拥挤的地区。在交叉通勤的情况下，任何严格的边界都可能是低效的，即使收费会缩小城市，因为边界做得很少，但收费在减少低效的城市通勤方面做得很多。我们还表明，当城市半径是有限的自然边界，然后增长边界的任何严格是低效的。(c)2006年爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
Pines and Sadka proved that a not-too-stringent urban growth boundary is a second-best policy to congestion tolls when traffic congestion is unpriced, by assuming that all jobs are exogenously located at one urban center (monocentric city) [D. Pines, E. Sadka, Zoning, first-best, second-best and third-best criteria for allocating land to roads, Journal of Urban Economics 17 (1985) 167-183]. The result is also implied by Kanemoto [Y Kanemoto. Cost-benefit analysis and the second-best land use for transportation, Journal of Urban Economics 4 (1977) 483-503] and Arnott [R. Arnott, Unpriced transport congestion, Journal of Economic Theory 21 (1979) 294-316]. Brueckner extrapolated this narrow theoretical result to real cities [J. Brueckner, Urban sprawl: Diagnosis and remedies, International Regional Science Review 23 (2000) 160-179]. We show that if there is no cross-commuting between city and suburb, first-best efficient tolls on traffic can reduce congestion and total travel cost by shifting worker-residents from the city to the suburbs, causing urban expansion. Then, planned urban boundaries of any stringency are not a second-best policy because they induce people to relocate to more congested areas. With cross-commuting, boundaries of any stringency can be inefficient even when tolls shrink cities, as boundaries do little but tolls do a lot to reduce inefficient suburb-to-city commuting. We also show that when the urban radius is limited by a natural boundary, then growth boundaries of any stringency are inefficient. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.