[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20190005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Autonomous, Connected, Electric Shared vehicles (ACES) and public finance: an explorative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Adler

    (VU University; AtAdlerAdvisory, The Netherlands)

  • Stefanie Peer

    (Vienna University of Economics and Business)

  • Tanja Sinozic

    (Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA), Austrian Academy of Sciences (OEAW))

Abstract
This paper discusses the implications of autonomous-connected-electric-shared vehicles (ACES) for public finance, which have so far been widely ignored. In OECD countries, 5-12% of federal and up to 30% of local tax revenue are currently from fuel and vehicle taxation. The diffusion of ACES will likely reduce these important sources of government revenues, while also affecting transport-related government expenditures. We argue that the realization of socioeconomic benefits of ACES depends on the implementation of tailored public finance policies. In particular, the introduction of road tolls in line with ‘user pays’ and ‘polluter pays’ principles will become more attractive. Moreover, innovation in taxation schemes to fit the changing technological circumstances may alter the (relative) importance of levels of governance in transport policy making, likely shifting power towards local (in particular urban) governmental levels. We finally argue that due to path-dependencies, and the risk of lock-in effects in sub-optimal public finance regimes, further research and near-term policy action regarding ACES is required.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Adler & Stefanie Peer & Tanja Sinozic, 2019. "Autonomous, Connected, Electric Shared vehicles (ACES) and public finance: an explorative analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-005/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20190005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/19005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 42905, Congressional Budget Office.
    2. Mohring, Herbert, 1972. "Optimization and Scale Economies in Urban Bus Transportation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(4), pages 591-604, September.
    3. Ian W. H. Parry & Kenneth A. Small, 2009. "Should Urban Transit Subsidies Be Reduced?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 700-724, June.
    4. Proost, S. & Van Dender, K. & Courcelle, C. & De Borger, B. & Peirson, J. & Sharp, D. & Vickerman, R. & Gibbons, E. & O'Mahony, M. & Heaney, Q. & Van den Bergh, J. & Verhoef, E., 2002. "How large is the gap between present and efficient transport prices in Europe?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 41-57, January.
    5. Reyer Gerlagh & Inge van den Bijgaart & Hans Nijland & Thomas Michielsen, 2015. "Fiscal Policy and CO2 Emissions of New Passenger Cars in the EU," Working Papers 2015.32, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    6. Adler, Martin W. & van Ommeren, Jos N., 2016. "Does public transit reduce car travel externalities? Quasi-natural experiments' evidence from transit strikes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 106-119.
    7. Greenblatt, Jeffery & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2015. "Automated Vehicles, On-Demand Mobility and Environmental Impacts," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt23r1h80t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    8. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "An Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 43539, Congressional Budget Office.
    9. Gilles Duranton & Matthew A. Turner, 2011. "The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US Cities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(6), pages 2616-2652, October.
    10. Dijk, Marc & Wells, Peter & Kemp, René, 2016. "Will the momentum of the electric car last? Testing an hypothesis on disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 77-88.
    11. Wadud, Zia & MacKenzie, Don & Leiby, Paul, 2016. "Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-18.
    12. Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2018. "Carpooling and the Economics of Self-Driving Cars," NBER Working Papers 24349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Gilles Duranton & Peter M. Morrow & Matthew A. Turner, 2014. "Roads and Trade: Evidence from the US," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 681-724.
    14. Brons, Martijn & Nijkamp, Peter & Pels, Eric & Rietveld, Piet, 2008. "A meta-analysis of the price elasticity of gasoline demand. A SUR approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2105-2122, September.
    15. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 42905, Congressional Budget Office.
    16. Maizlish, N. & Woodcock, J. & Co, S. & Ostro, B. & Fanai, A. & Fairley, D., 2013. "Health cobenefits and transportation-related reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the San Francisco Bay Area," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(4), pages 703-709.
    17. Yan Zhou & Michael Wang & Han Hao & Larry Johnson & Hewu Wang & Han Hao, 2015. "Plug-in electric vehicle market penetration and incentives: a global review," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 777-795, June.
    18. Joao Guerreiro & Sergio Rebelo & Pedro Teles, 2022. "Should Robots Be Taxed?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(1), pages 279-311.
    19. Georg Hirte & Stefan Tscharaktschiew, 2015. "Optimal Fuel Taxes and Heterogeneity of Cities," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 35(2), pages 173-209, October.
    20. Fullerton, Don & West, Sarah E., 2002. "Can Taxes on Cars and on Gasoline Mimic an Unavailable Tax on Emissions?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 135-157, January.
    21. Innes, Robert, 1996. "Regulating Automobile Pollution under Certainty, Competition, and Imperfect Information," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 219-239, September.
    22. Rajagopal, 2014. "Organizations and Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 3, pages 58-86, Palgrave Macmillan.
    23. Edward Calthrop & Stef Proost, 1998. "Road Transport Externalities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 335-348, April.
    24. Vickrey, William S, 1969. "Congestion Theory and Transport Investment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 251-260, May.
    25. Slemrod, Joel, 1990. "Optimal Taxation and Optimal Tax Systems," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 157-178, Winter.
    26. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 42905, Congressional Budget Office.
    27. Uwe Thuemmel, 2018. "Optimal Taxation of Robots," CESifo Working Paper Series 7317, CESifo.
    28. Langer, Ashley & Maheshri, Vikram & Winston, Clifford, 2017. "From gallons to miles: A disaggregate analysis of automobile travel and externality taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 34-46.
    29. De Borger, Bruno & Mayeres, Inge, 2007. "Optimal taxation of car ownership, car use and public transport: Insights derived from a discrete choice numerical optimization model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 1177-1204, July.
    30. Gerard H Dericks & Hans R A Koster, 2021. "The billion pound drop: the Blitz and agglomeration economies in London [The economics of density: evidence from the Berlin wall]," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(6), pages 869-897.
    31. Fullerton Don & West Sarah E, 2010. "Tax and Subsidy Combinations for the Control of Car Pollution," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-33, February.
    32. Avinash K. Dixit, 1998. "The Making of Economic Policy: A Transaction Cost Politics Perspective," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262540983, April.
    33. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "An Update to the Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 43539, Congressional Budget Office.
    34. Geir H. M. Bjertnaes, 2017. "The Efficient Combination of Taxes on Fuel and Vehicles," CESifo Working Paper Series 6789, CESifo.
    35. Michael L. Anderson, 2014. "Subways, Strikes, and Slowdowns: The Impacts of Public Transit on Traffic Congestion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2763-2796, September.
    36. Small, Kenneth A., 2005. "Unnoticed Lessons from London," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt4fv237ht, University of California Transportation Center.
    37. Itf, 2017. "Managing the Transition to Driverless Road Freight Transport," International Transport Forum Policy Papers 32, OECD Publishing.
    38. De Borger, Bruno & Proost, Stef, 2012. "A political economy model of road pricing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 79-92.
    39. De Borger, Bruno, 2001. "Discrete choice models and optimal two-part tariffs in the presence of externalities: optimal taxation of cars," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 471-504, July.
    40. Pernestål Brenden , Anna & Kristoffersson , Ida, 2018. "Effects of driverless vehicles: A review of simulations," Working papers in Transport Economics 2018:11, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    41. Fagnant, Daniel J. & Kockelman, Kara, 2015. "Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 167-181.
    42. Frey, Carl Benedikt & Osborne, Michael A., 2017. "The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-280.
    43. Tresch, Richard W., 2014. "Public Finance," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 3, number 9780124158344.
    44. Congressional Budget Office, 2012. "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2012 to 2022," Reports 42905, Congressional Budget Office.
    45. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    46. Geir H. M. Bjertnæs, 2017. "The efficient combination of taxes on fuel and vehicles," Discussion Papers 867, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    47. Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Distributional effects of taxing transport fuel," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 75-83.
    48. Itf, 2015. "Urban Mobility System Upgrade: How shared self-driving cars could change city traffic," International Transport Forum Policy Papers 6, OECD Publishing.
    49. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    50. Gerlagh, Reyer & van den Bijgaart, Inge & Nijland, Hans & Michielsen, Thomas, 2015. "Fiscal Policy and CO2 Emissions of New Passenger Cars in the EU," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 202239, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    51. Chen, T. Donna & Kockelman, Kara M. & Hanna, Josiah P., 2016. "Operations of a shared, autonomous, electric vehicle fleet: Implications of vehicle & charging infrastructure decisions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 243-254.
    52. Hensher, David A., 2018. "Tackling road congestion – What might it look like in the future under a collaborative and connected mobility model?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 1-8.
    53. Goldman, Todd & Wachs, Martin, 2003. "A Quiet Revolution in Transportation Finance: The Rise of Local Option Transportation Taxes," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2gp4m4xq, University of California Transportation Center.
    54. Edwin van de Haar, 2015. "CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis: Dutch (economic) policy-making," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 182-190, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sirikhan, Kulacha, 2022. "Potentials and Challenges of The Connected Autonomous Shared Electric Vehicle (CASE) from Urban Geography Perspective in Southeast Asia Mega-Urban Regions," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265670, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Doyeon Lee & Keunhwan Kim, 2021. "A Collaborative Trans-Regional R&D Strategy for the South Korea Green New Deal to Achieve Future Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-30, August.
    3. Yu Chen & Di Zhu, 2024. "Economic impact of ACES trends on the automotive value chain: a forecast exploratory study of the Chinese automotive industry in 2030," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Peer, Stefanie & Müller, Johannes & Naqvi, Asjad & Straub, Markus, 2024. "Introducing shared, electric, autonomous vehicles (SAEVs) in sub-urban zones: Simulating the case of Vienna," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 232-243.
    5. Chen, Ching-Fu & Lee, Chia-Han, 2023. "Investigating shared e-scooter users’ customer value co-creation behaviors and their antecedents: Perceived service quality and perceived value," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 147-154.
    6. Bretones, Alexandra & Marquet, Oriol, 2022. "Sociopsychological factors associated with the adoption and usage of electric micromobility. A literature review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 230-249.
    7. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Daniels, Chux & AbdulRafiu, Abbas, 2022. "Transitioning to electrified, automated and shared mobility in an African context: A comparative review of Johannesburg, Kigali, Lagos and Nairobi," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    8. Anastasia Roukouni & Gonçalo Homem de Almeida Correia, 2020. "Evaluation Methods for the Impacts of Shared Mobility: Classification and Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Papaix, Claire & Eranova, Mariya & Zhou, Li, 2023. "Shared mobility research: Looking through a paradox lens," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 156-167.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John G. Fernald, 2015. "Productivity and Potential Output before, during, and after the Great Recession," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-51.
    2. Scott R. Baker & Nicholas Bloom & Steven J. Davis, 2012. "Has Economic Policy Uncertainty Hampered the Recovery?," Book Chapters, in: Lee E. Ohanian & John B. Taylor & Ian J. Wright (ed.), Government Policies and the Delayed Economic Recovery, chapter 3, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
    3. Murphy, Robert G., 2014. "Explaining inflation in the aftermath of the Great Recession," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 228-244.
    4. William R. Cline, 2012. "Restoring Fiscal Equilibrium in the United States," Policy Briefs PB12-15, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    5. Robert A. Moffitt, 2012. "The U.S. Employment-Population Reversal in the 2000s: Facts and Explanations," NBER Working Papers 18520, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Laurence Seidman, 2013. "Overcoming the Fiscal Trilemma with Two Progressive Consumption Tax Supplements," Public Finance Review, , vol. 41(6), pages 824-851, November.
    7. Scott R. Baker & Nicholas Bloom & Steven J. Davis, 2012. "Has Economic Policy Uncertainty Hampered the Recovery?," Book Chapters, in: Lee E. Ohanian & John B. Taylor & Ian J. Wright (ed.), Government Policies and the Delayed Economic Recovery, chapter 3, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
    8. repec:fip:fedfsp:y:2012:i:oct15 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Jeffrey B. Liebman, 2013. "The Deterioration in the US Fiscal Outlook, 2001-2010," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(1), pages 1-18.
    10. Neveu, Andre R., 2013. "Fiscal policy and business cycle characteristics in a heterogeneous agent macro model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 224-240.
    11. Jeffrey S. Smith & James E. West, 2012. "Retirement Pay and Officer Retention," NBER Working Papers 18502, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Noll, Franklin, 2012. "Repudiation: The Crisis of United States Civil War Debt, 1865-1870," MPRA Paper 43540, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Laurence Seidman, 2013. "Medicare for All," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1), pages 88-115.
    14. John C. Williams, 2012. "The Federal Reserve’s mandate and best practice monetary policy," Speech 98, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
    15. Shinichi Nishiyama, 2013. "Fiscal Policy Effects in a Heterogeneous-Agent Overlapping-Generations Economy With an Aging Population: Working Paper 2013-07," Working Papers 44941, Congressional Budget Office.
    16. Ivan Kitov, 2012. "Why price inflation in developed countries is systematically underestimated," Papers 1206.0450, arXiv.org.
    17. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Martin Vieiro, 2012. "Right Idea, Wrong Direction: Obama’s Corporate Tax Reform Proposals," Policy Briefs PB12-13, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    18. Molly Dahl & Thomas DeLeire & Jonathan Schwabish & Timothy Smeeding, 2012. "The Earned Income Tax Credit and Expected Social Security Retirement Benefits Among Low-Income Women: Working Paper 2012-06," Working Papers 43033, Congressional Budget Office.
    19. Dimitri B. Papadimitriou & Greg Hannsgen & Gennaro Zezza, 2012. "Back to Business as Usual? Or a Fiscal Boost?," Economics Strategic Analysis Archive sa_apr_12, Levy Economics Institute.
    20. Alan J. Auerbach, 2012. "Societal Aging: Implications for Fiscal Policy," IMES Discussion Paper Series 12-E-12, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan.
    21. Wilson Au Yeung & Michael Kouparitsas & Nghi Luu & Dhruv Sharma, 2013. "Long term international GDP projections," Treasury Working Papers 2013-02, The Treasury, Australian Government, revised Sep 2013.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    autonomous connected electric shared vehicles; public finance; taxation; fiscal revenues; fiscal expenditures; disruptive technologies; path-dependency; technological transition; political economy; multilevel-governance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R40 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - General
    • R50 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - General
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • H54 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Infrastructures
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20190005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.