Citation

Walton D, Thomas JA, Cenek PD. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 2004; 38(7): 483-494.

Affiliation

Opus Central Laboratories

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.tra.2004.03.004

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A contingent valuation study involving a quasi-experimental design was undertaken to measure motorists self and perceived others' willingness to pay (WTP) for improvements to the paved road surface. The three benefits considered were: (1) improved fuel efficiency, (2) reduced interior noise and (3) reduced stopping distance in wet conditions. To assess the perceived relative importance of the improvements, 1200 motorists received one of eighteen versions of a questionnaire outlining a road surface scenario with different levels of the benefits within a 3 X 2 X 3 factorial design. It was found that motorists were willing to pay for improved fuel efficiency and reduced interior vehicle noise. However, motorists showed no significant WTP for a reduction in vehicle stopping distance. No systematic bias is detected in perceptions of self-other WTP for road surface improvements and perceived other WTP presents the same pattern of results. These findings are contrasted with the finding for a preference for Government to spend additional petrol taxation on safety benefits. The explanation for the absence of a positive WTP for reduced stopping distance is discussed along with the importance of recognising that motorists' preference for improved safety benefits need not translate into a positive WTP.