How to deal with the constant traffic jams in Sofia?

This article is an excerpt from the new EKIP report " Urban Planning Policy in Sofia: Recommendations for Reform "

Traffic congestion in Sofia is one of the major problems in the capital. Heavy traffic is a difficult issue to solve in many places around the world, and everywhere it leads to the same negative effects that citizens, businesses, local authorities, state authorities and supranational organizations are trying to combat. These include air pollution, noise pollution, vibrations, harmful emissions, loss of time for employees of companies or businesses in traffic jams, wear and tear on road surfaces and other infrastructure, as well as an increase in accidents with or without victims, etc. Some of these indicators are easily measured by economists - such as the time lost in travel per worker, while others, such as the quality of life in cities with more or less car traffic, are more subjective.

Currently, the entrance to the center of Sofia, as well as the busiest roads, is completely free, which leads to congestion. The economic principle that if a resource is free, it is used too much by users, applies with full force all over the world.

How NOT to fight car traffic

The Greek capital Athens has one of the most unmarketable traffic control measures in existence, restricting only half the number of cars on half the days. In the 1980s, an inner ring was established, which prohibited half of the cars from entering – cars with even numbers were allowed to enter on even days, and cars with odd numbers on odd days (e.g. if the last digit of the license plate is 4, 6, 8, then you can enter the city on the 10th, 12th, 14th, etc. of the month) [1].

However, since the introduction of the tax, there has been a 75% increase in private car ownership [2]. According to various media reports, many people have decided to buy a second car in order to avoid changing their daily schedule. Similar measures have been introduced in Beijing (China), Lyon (France) and Mexico City [3]. The results are identical – traffic continues to be heavy, and in some places the situation even worsens. It turns out that the measure is more of a subsidy for car manufacturers and dealers.

Congestion charge unclogs London traffic

A relatively more market-based approach is being introduced by other cities with the so-called Congestion tax. In all the examples examined, it is managed by the local municipal administration. A Congestion tax is a method that allows complete freedom of entry into the center of the respective city – but against payment of the corresponding fee. However, the implementation differs in different cities. In all the examples examined, an area is outlined for which there is a plan to restrict traffic. In some cities, a fixed fee has been introduced, in others it changes depending on the traffic.

The Congestion Charge in London (United Kingdom) is fixed. It was introduced in 2003, gradually increasing in price to its current value of 11.50 pounds (about 15 euros) and is constantly active from 7:00 to 18:00. The introduction of the charge has had a positive effect on traffic congestion - a 20% drop in car traffic was recorded upon introduction, as well as subsequent drops with each subsequent increase in price. A number of measures have been identified that give everyone the opportunity to reach the city center in other ways - bicycle transport is facilitated, investment is made in better public transport, and entry is free for motorcycles that do not cause congestion.

The result is that in addition to a decline in road transport, the specific desired effects are also noticeable, and not just a reduction in cars for the sake of it – traffic jams are less, journeys are faster, and the approval of the initiative among people in a longer period – after a decline in approval immediately after its introduction – is constantly increasing. There are also criticisms of the scheme, according to which it restricts people with lower incomes who do not have the financial means to pay the fee, but there is no “right” to use the roads, especially when there is a well-developed public transport network.

In Stockholm, it also leads to a decrease in harmful emissions

There has also been a positive effect after the introduction of the fee in Stockholm (Sweden). The local government introduced the fee after a trial period in 2006 – it worked for several months, after which a local referendum was held for its approval. People who supported the idea won by 53% and in 2007 the fee was introduced permanently. The scheme takes into account the hours when the roads are busiest and at these times the price for entering the city center is higher. During the busiest hours (between 7:30 and 8:30 in the morning, as well as between 4:00 and 5:30 p.m.) it is 20 kronor (about 2 euros). The fee is half as low between 6:30 and 7:00 a.m. and between 6:00 and 6:30 p.m. – 10 crowns or 1 euro, and after 6:30 PM and until 6:30 AM, entrance to the city center is free [4].

According to the analysis of the organization Tools of Change, the introduction of the system is financed by the government and costs approximately 300 million euros, with annual costs of about 15 million euros, and revenues of about 150 million euros. Immediately after the introduction of the fee, a decrease in traffic was recorded, which led to a significant reduction in congestion (measured as the time to travel a fixed distance in the center) - the decrease was between 30 and 50% in busy areas. A decrease in harmful emissions was also recorded - both PM and CO2, between 10 and 14%. Accordingly, an increase was recorded among bicycle users, as well as those using public transport as an alternative. Support for the initiative was about 50% during the referendum, but after its introduction it reached 70% approval.

Various analyses report that the main negative aspect of the introduction of this essentially market mechanism (you use a service – you pay for the service) is related to public approval. All other measurable results are positive – everywhere there is an improvement in the problems identified at the beginning of this chapter, related to pollution, time lost in traffic jams, a decrease in road accidents with and without victims, etc., as well as subjective ones, such as quality of life.

Singapore's flexible system cuts traffic by almost 50%

Fees are also flexible in other cities where congestion charges have been introduced. Thus, in the busiest hours in Oslo, the fare is higher than in less busy times. The system in Singapore is most strongly related to congestion. It is extremely complex, related to different hours, but also to different streets, compared to all other cities examined, in which the toll areas are only one specific area of the city - no matter which street you enter. After the introduction of the system, a 44% decrease in cars was recorded, as well as a corresponding increase in the use of public transport or shared travel. Prices are flexible at any time and depend on traffic and congestion forecasts, with the system improving over a certain period of time.

The system cost about $200 million to implement. Annual costs are about $25 million, and revenues are about $150 million per year. The profits are invested in improving the system, as well as in alternative forms of transport [5]. The system was developed entirely by private companies, initially by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, then by a consortium including companies from Philips and Miyoshi, which installed and managed the system, and the last improvement was developed by IBM. The results related to the improvement of traffic are comparable to those in the other cities examined, and the financial indicators in Singapore are the best.

The more "market-oriented" the approach, the better the results.

We recognize that the mechanism is market-based, since owning a car and having access to the city center is a luxury. The resource for space to pass through the city center's arterial roads is limited, and anyone who uses it and occupies a space must pay for it. Solutions that are more directly related to the principle of "you use a space - you pay for the space used" are better than solutions that are more distant from the problem, either related to limiting traffic through an absolute ban on certain days (Athens, Mexico City, etc.), as well as more general ones related to nationwide car taxes, "city vignettes" and other options offered for the country.

The examples examined show that the more market-based the approach (flexible prices, depending on the workload; use of private subcontractors for management and installation), the higher the positive results – a decrease in traffic, improved transport, a decrease in emissions. This will open up opportunities for investment in other sectors, as well as a decrease in taxes for all car owners, so that people who do not use the limited resource – the boulevards in the city center, will not pay for the negatives and maintenance costs, and thus the costs will be distributed in a more fair manner.

This would also be an appropriate method for dealing with the traffic problem and the resulting problems in Sofia. The existing modern systems for registering, controlling and charging for busy arteries can be automated and provide differentiated data. Market control, by charging for the used resource from the narrow and busy Sofia streets in the city center, would be the best and fairest way for those who use the relevant service and burden traffic to pay. At the same time, these measures must be synchronized with several others - in order to avoid double payment, local taxes for passenger cars should be reduced (i.e. a person who drives less in the center, pollutes less and burdens traffic less will pay less than the one who burdens and pollutes the city center more), and in order to provide people with a quality alternative, the income from this system should be invested in improving public transport - investing in better quality and more frequent public transport lines.

[1] Athens Ring; Living in Greece; 2010

[2] Bakogiannis, E.; "Athens in Crisis, Sustainable Mobility and Climate Change"; National Technical University of Athens

[3] Alassaf, Mohammed; "Congestion Charge and its Alternatives"; California State Polytechnic University; 2015

[4]"Stockholm's Congestion Pricing"; Tools of Change Highlight Series; Oct. 2014

Croci, Edoardo; Douvan, Aldo; "Urban Road Pricing: A Comparative Study on the Experiences of London, Stockholm and Milan"; IEFE at Bocconi University; Working Paper n. 85; 2016

[5]"Road Pricing in London, Stockholm and Singapore: A Way Forward for New York City"; Tri-State Transportation Campaign; 2018

Did you like it? Take a minute to support the EKIP on Patreon!