Milan’s pollution charge: sustainable transport and the politics of evidence

Giulio Mattioli, Mario Boffi, Matteo Colleoni

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The city of Milan, one of the most car-dependent and polluted in Europe, is also among the few to have introduced a road pricing measure. The story of how this happened is of great interest, for it shows how EU regulations, scientific evidence and political action at the local level have concurred to bring about change in the city’s transport policy. Unlike the well-known cases of London and Stockholm, it is concerns for the levels of pollution (rather than congestion) that have led to the introduction of the “Ecopass” scheme in 2008. Accordingly, in the following years the public debate has focused on the effectiveness of this pollution charge in reducing PM10 – a pollutant with adverse health impacts. Based on the analysis of media coverage and official reports, this paper argues that EU regulations had a crucial role in determining the newsworthiness of PM10 in Milan. Media and public concerns have then put increasing pressure on politicians to find a solution to the “emergency”. The dubious effectiveness of Ecopass in reducing PM10 levels then has had two kinds of consequences. First, the scheme was upgraded to a congestion charge in 2012, following the results of a bottom-up referendum in which a large majority of voters demanded both an upgrade and an extension of the Ecopass area: this stands in stark contrast with the experience of other cities, where voters have turned down charging schemes (e.g. Edinburgh, Manchester). Second, the new city administration has recently implemented a monitoring system for Black Carbon, a new PM metric that is more suitable to prove the effectiveness of traffic restrictions. Overall, the paper shows how all actors involved in the process (politicians, media and civil society groups) made strategic use of scientific evidence on pollution, in order to bring forward their own agendas
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages16
Publication statusPublished - 2012
Event2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development - Berlin, Germany
Duration: 5 Oct 20106 Oct 2010

Conference

Conference2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development
CountryGermany
CityBerlin
Period5/10/106/10/10

Fingerprint

Pollution
politics
politician
EU
media society
municipal administration
evidence
regulation
political action
referendum
Carbon black
pollutant
civil society
pricing
Railroad cars
coverage
Health
road
traffic
monitoring

Keywords

  • acceptability
  • road pricing
  • air pollution
  • sustainable transport
  • car use
  • referendum
  • congestion charge
  • transport policy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transportation

Cite this

Mattioli, G., Boffi, M., & Colleoni, M. (2012). Milan’s pollution charge: sustainable transport and the politics of evidence. Paper presented at 2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development, Berlin, Germany.

Milan’s pollution charge : sustainable transport and the politics of evidence. / Mattioli, Giulio; Boffi, Mario; Colleoni, Matteo.

2012. Paper presented at 2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development, Berlin, Germany.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

Mattioli, G, Boffi, M & Colleoni, M 2012, 'Milan’s pollution charge: sustainable transport and the politics of evidence' Paper presented at 2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development, Berlin, Germany, 5/10/10 - 6/10/10, .
Mattioli G, Boffi M, Colleoni M. Milan’s pollution charge: sustainable transport and the politics of evidence. 2012. Paper presented at 2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development, Berlin, Germany.
Mattioli, Giulio ; Boffi, Mario ; Colleoni, Matteo. / Milan’s pollution charge : sustainable transport and the politics of evidence. Paper presented at 2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development, Berlin, Germany.16 p.
@conference{cb91d63a0cab4ce9b5f496272adefad8,
title = "Milan’s pollution charge: sustainable transport and the politics of evidence",
abstract = "The city of Milan, one of the most car-dependent and polluted in Europe, is also among the few to have introduced a road pricing measure. The story of how this happened is of great interest, for it shows how EU regulations, scientific evidence and political action at the local level have concurred to bring about change in the city’s transport policy. Unlike the well-known cases of London and Stockholm, it is concerns for the levels of pollution (rather than congestion) that have led to the introduction of the “Ecopass” scheme in 2008. Accordingly, in the following years the public debate has focused on the effectiveness of this pollution charge in reducing PM10 – a pollutant with adverse health impacts. Based on the analysis of media coverage and official reports, this paper argues that EU regulations had a crucial role in determining the newsworthiness of PM10 in Milan. Media and public concerns have then put increasing pressure on politicians to find a solution to the “emergency”. The dubious effectiveness of Ecopass in reducing PM10 levels then has had two kinds of consequences. First, the scheme was upgraded to a congestion charge in 2012, following the results of a bottom-up referendum in which a large majority of voters demanded both an upgrade and an extension of the Ecopass area: this stands in stark contrast with the experience of other cities, where voters have turned down charging schemes (e.g. Edinburgh, Manchester). Second, the new city administration has recently implemented a monitoring system for Black Carbon, a new PM metric that is more suitable to prove the effectiveness of traffic restrictions. Overall, the paper shows how all actors involved in the process (politicians, media and civil society groups) made strategic use of scientific evidence on pollution, in order to bring forward their own agendas",
keywords = "acceptability, road pricing, air pollution, sustainable transport, car use, referendum, congestion charge, transport policy",
author = "Giulio Mattioli and Mario Boffi and Matteo Colleoni",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
note = "2012 Berlin Conference on Evidence for Sustainable Development ; Conference date: 05-10-2010 Through 06-10-2010",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Milan’s pollution charge

T2 - sustainable transport and the politics of evidence

AU - Mattioli, Giulio

AU - Boffi, Mario

AU - Colleoni, Matteo

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - The city of Milan, one of the most car-dependent and polluted in Europe, is also among the few to have introduced a road pricing measure. The story of how this happened is of great interest, for it shows how EU regulations, scientific evidence and political action at the local level have concurred to bring about change in the city’s transport policy. Unlike the well-known cases of London and Stockholm, it is concerns for the levels of pollution (rather than congestion) that have led to the introduction of the “Ecopass” scheme in 2008. Accordingly, in the following years the public debate has focused on the effectiveness of this pollution charge in reducing PM10 – a pollutant with adverse health impacts. Based on the analysis of media coverage and official reports, this paper argues that EU regulations had a crucial role in determining the newsworthiness of PM10 in Milan. Media and public concerns have then put increasing pressure on politicians to find a solution to the “emergency”. The dubious effectiveness of Ecopass in reducing PM10 levels then has had two kinds of consequences. First, the scheme was upgraded to a congestion charge in 2012, following the results of a bottom-up referendum in which a large majority of voters demanded both an upgrade and an extension of the Ecopass area: this stands in stark contrast with the experience of other cities, where voters have turned down charging schemes (e.g. Edinburgh, Manchester). Second, the new city administration has recently implemented a monitoring system for Black Carbon, a new PM metric that is more suitable to prove the effectiveness of traffic restrictions. Overall, the paper shows how all actors involved in the process (politicians, media and civil society groups) made strategic use of scientific evidence on pollution, in order to bring forward their own agendas

AB - The city of Milan, one of the most car-dependent and polluted in Europe, is also among the few to have introduced a road pricing measure. The story of how this happened is of great interest, for it shows how EU regulations, scientific evidence and political action at the local level have concurred to bring about change in the city’s transport policy. Unlike the well-known cases of London and Stockholm, it is concerns for the levels of pollution (rather than congestion) that have led to the introduction of the “Ecopass” scheme in 2008. Accordingly, in the following years the public debate has focused on the effectiveness of this pollution charge in reducing PM10 – a pollutant with adverse health impacts. Based on the analysis of media coverage and official reports, this paper argues that EU regulations had a crucial role in determining the newsworthiness of PM10 in Milan. Media and public concerns have then put increasing pressure on politicians to find a solution to the “emergency”. The dubious effectiveness of Ecopass in reducing PM10 levels then has had two kinds of consequences. First, the scheme was upgraded to a congestion charge in 2012, following the results of a bottom-up referendum in which a large majority of voters demanded both an upgrade and an extension of the Ecopass area: this stands in stark contrast with the experience of other cities, where voters have turned down charging schemes (e.g. Edinburgh, Manchester). Second, the new city administration has recently implemented a monitoring system for Black Carbon, a new PM metric that is more suitable to prove the effectiveness of traffic restrictions. Overall, the paper shows how all actors involved in the process (politicians, media and civil society groups) made strategic use of scientific evidence on pollution, in order to bring forward their own agendas

KW - acceptability

KW - road pricing

KW - air pollution

KW - sustainable transport

KW - car use

KW - referendum

KW - congestion charge

KW - transport policy

M3 - Paper

ER -