Driving change, beyond the technical

We’re nearing the end of March Madness in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland, and I wonder - is there any other city in the world that allocates an entire month to their traffic woes?

As we continue to grapple with our well-documented traffic problem, Auckland Council last year announced their plan to roll out a ‘time of use’ charge. A big deal for the sprawling city, it’s pitched as a key step towards a more sustainable and efficient transport system. Something that feels painfully far away for most Aucklanders.

Success abroad

Used in many cities around the world, congestion charging has proven its worth in addressing both traffic congestion and air quality, while delivering revenue for improvements to transport infrastructure.

Singapore implemented its ‘electronic road pricing’ system in 1998. Over 25 years it’s demonstrated to manage congestion, encourage off-peak travel and maintain traffic flow. In London in 2003, the city saw a 30% reduction in traffic in their charging zone, and a shift towards the use of public transportation.

Milan, Oslo, and Beijing are also on the list of cities with a charge in place.

Reading about the success stories, it’s curious that a congestion charge has sat on the shelf in Auckland, while its people sit in traffic complaining. Indeed, despite having international successes to point to, just a handful of cities around the world have implemented the policy, with many others trying and failing.

Failed attempts

Cities including New York, San Francisco and Vancouver have attempted to implement congestion charges, but their efforts faced major challenges and ultimately didn’t materialise.

Failed attempts in Manchester and Edinburgh in the late 2000s underscore some of these hurdles. In both cases, opposition from residents, businesses, and political leaders derailed the proposals. Concerns about the potential adverse effects on businesses, doubts about the fairness of the schemes, and the perceived lack of viable transport alternatives were significant factors contributing to public resistance.

So, how would it work here?

Early noise about its success in Auckland has been around it relying on factors like the right price, technology and logistics. These are obviously crucial components. But, even with a compelling business case and project plan, the road to implementation of any new behaviour changing policy is fraught with challenges beyond the technical.

Supposing the platform burns hotter now than it did 10 years ago - when Auckland Council first proposed the policy - how can we collectively ensure we get it right this time?

In our view, it hinges not only on its economic merits, but on effective public engagement and communication. And, we have an international example comparable in size to Auckland to learn from.

See: Stockholm

Congestion charging was introduced in Stockholm, Sweden, in 2007. Almost immediately afterwards, traffic in the charging zone reduced by 20% and congestion by 30% to 50%. But, despite having a strong business case, success was hardly guaranteed.

A year prior to implementation, just 3% of all media articles on the topic were positive in sentiment, and two thirds of the public weren’t in favour. The scheme was at risk of getting off the ground.

Instead of forging ahead with implementation, a carefully planned, comprehensive seven-month trial was conducted. Data was collected and analysed to evaluate key aspects like traffic flow, air quality, public transportation usage and economic impacts. Vehicles entering or exiting the city centre during peak hours were subjected to a fee, while public opinion was actively sought to gauge the impact and acceptability of the charge on the city’s people.

And, public perception swung markedly after the trial. The congestion charge was then implemented in full, and the following day’s front page of the city’s newspaper showed contrasting images of a heavily congested roadway prior to the policy, and a freely flowing one afterward. The headline read “One in every four cars disappeared”.

You can learn more about Stokholm’s congestion charge and its roll out from the Infrastructure Commission here.

Driving change in Auckland

Anyone reading this will be familiar with how public outrage can lead to time consuming and expensive project delays, and cancellations altogether. In a country where infrastructure is privy to politics, perhaps none more so than roads, public opinion may be the difference between improving Aucklanders’ biggest gripe, and the status quo of traffic congestion with no alleviation in sight.

A congestion charge would be a big change. A diverse range of people will be affected, and have legitimate concerns to boot. We must test the concept, seek the feedback, and use it to design the solution. Time must be taken to not only listen and speak to people, businesses, advocacy groups and more, but lay bare the problem - the why - and how a congestion charge can form part of the solution.

Timing is also critical. Enough lead time must be given for a public awareness and education campaign. People need time to understand the charge, its implications, and available alternatives. A phased implementation can then help smooth the transition and address concerns gradually.

The voices of Aucklanders must shape the (congested) road ahead.