PENANG (Dec 18, 2006): An inadequate public transportation system and worsening traffic congestion in cities have heightened the urgency to look for ways out of the jam.

The mission: find options to improve traffic dispersal systems or reduce the number of vehicles plying city roads.

The option: road pricing - charging road-users so as to arm-twist them to use public transport or plan their trips to lessen congestion during peak hours.

For countries in the European Union and Central Europe, where traffic jams in urban areas are a massive problem due to car ownership rising ten times faster than the population over the past 15 years, policymakers are steering towards road-user charging.

Singapore, London, Oslo and Stockholm (see graphics) are among cities using road pricing.

But is it the solution for Malaysia? Experts admit that road pricing is not "the" solution, but neither is building more roads and expressways, which offer only temporary relief.

theSun asked two transport experts whether road pricing would actually help ease the situation.

Expert No. 1: Associate Prof Dr Ahmad Farhan Mohd Sadullah of Universiti Sains Malaysia who has done numerous

studies and research on sustainable transport systems and also on Malaysian highways says: "Road pricing is a charge that is levied for road users regardless of whether they contribute to congestion or not."

The charge can be based either on the basis of entry, or time spent in the area. Usually, they are associated with certain strategies like by introducing a period (usually the peak hour) when the charge applies.

"Then there is the congestion

charging, which is associated with the degree of contribution to the congestion situation. A complex charging system is usually associated with congestion

charging (as in London).

"There is also the cordon charging which is toll like where toll houses (are erected) at entry of city centres to deter people from coming in," he said.

However, Farhan said control was

critical at entry and exit points as it could bring about serious congestion if not planned well.

"Sometimes toll booths are used and these are bottlenecks, which are the causes of congestion. If this happens, the entire road pricing scheme is useless.

"Technology has helped and with

sensor and detection and transmission

technology, we are able to keep track of cars coming and exiting the area at the cordon, and with other payment and transaction technologies available, we can make congestion/road charging

similar to other utility bills."

But many questions remain - "How do you charge? What are the strategies

associated with charging? How do you enforce? How do you differentiate between optional and compulsory users?

How do you give priority to public transport systems such as taxis and buses? What is the right fee? Will this fee deter or will not have any affect on users? The question of equity?"

If road pricing is in force, there must be an alternative with a good public transport system in place. "Otherwise, people do not have their option to go in, and they will continue using the car despite the charge."

Farhan feels studies needed to be done to gauge public reactions to congestion charging when alternatives were available or when they were not available.

A crucial point is political will. "Many cities are reluctant to introduce such systems, as anything that affects car users are usually the most critical action one can take, and at time may be a political suicide.

"We also need to change the culture of the people so they are more supportive for sustainable transport systems. This will make things easier to implement such schemes."

Expert No 2: Paul Barter, who researches urban transport policy, has carried out research over the past 12 years including comparing Malaysian citiesÕ urban transport with other cities in the region.

He believes there is hope yet for Malaysian cities although traffic jams seemed to be getting worse by the day.

"The bad news is that the obvious, popular solutions are not enough. Some of the obvious solutions actually make thing worse.

"The key example is just expanding the roads and building more expressways. It can seem like a good idea, but it only ever gives temporary relief in the long run traffic actually gets worse.

"Focus on people and goods instead of vehicles and traffic jams. Concentrate on how can we move people and goods in the most efficient ways.

"When you think like that, you tend to think a lot more about public transport, which is much more space efficient. When you are used to driving everywhere, even good public transport seems inconvenient," said Barter, who teaches at the LKY School of Public Policy in the National University of Singapore.

Improving public transport alone was not enough. Efforts should be put in to get the best out of those big investments by making sure they link up seamlessly, he said.

He suggests deliberately making parking a little less convenient and more expensive. It will help people think twice before jumping in their car.

He proposes that costs involved in owning a car, including insurance and road tax, be converted into "pay as you drive". The catch, he said was a better and affordable technology to keep track of distance driven and send bills accordingly.

On its own, public transport was not enough and neither are pay-as-you-drive or road pricing reforms to ease traffic jams. "To make not owning a car attractive, we would need to make it much easier for people to use a combination of various kinds of transport. We need better public transport, better taxi service, safer cycling, safer walking," he said.

"Singapore has realised that making cars expensive to buy might have been a mistake, because then those who do have cars in Singapore drive them a lot.

"They are shifting more costs to usage costs, like parking and electronic road pricing," he added.

Barter is also against fuel subsidy, which he said gave people an incentive to waste.

"The Malaysian government has said it will use the money to improve public transport. This sounds good and is probably well intentioned but the benefits do not necessarily help the poor folk who are really suffering in real ways from the change.

"I think fuel should be taxed and not subsidised," he said.