{"title":"时速 130 公里限速的经济成本:成本效益分析的启示","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Two comments submitted in critique of our paper (Gössling et al. 2023) present an opportunity to discuss principles of CBA and their use in transport contexts. The critique needs to be discussed in context, as CBA is not an objective tool of evaluation and relies on specific assumptions. For this reason, we begin our response with an introduction to the German transport context, including developments in car ownership and background on the German Climate Protection Act that legally requires all economic sectors to reduce emissions. This framing is important to correctly understand our response to Sieg (2024) as well as Eisenkopf et al. (2024). Overall, we note that many of their criticisms lack merit, while others depend on viewpoint. We conclude that, specifically considering current price levels for fuels, our findings are not in question: a speed limit is warranted for welfare reasons; it is supported by a majority of the population; and it can help closing the emission gap in the transport sector. Findings are also discussed within the wider framework of “desirable” transport systems, illustrating the limitations of CBA and the dangers of tailoring results in ways that lend credibility to specific forms of transport governance, as apparently favored by Sieg (2024) and Eisenkopf et al. (2024).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51021,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The economic cost of a 130 km/h speed limit: Insights for cost-benefit analyses\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Two comments submitted in critique of our paper (Gössling et al. 2023) present an opportunity to discuss principles of CBA and their use in transport contexts. The critique needs to be discussed in context, as CBA is not an objective tool of evaluation and relies on specific assumptions. For this reason, we begin our response with an introduction to the German transport context, including developments in car ownership and background on the German Climate Protection Act that legally requires all economic sectors to reduce emissions. This framing is important to correctly understand our response to Sieg (2024) as well as Eisenkopf et al. (2024). Overall, we note that many of their criticisms lack merit, while others depend on viewpoint. We conclude that, specifically considering current price levels for fuels, our findings are not in question: a speed limit is warranted for welfare reasons; it is supported by a majority of the population; and it can help closing the emission gap in the transport sector. Findings are also discussed within the wider framework of “desirable” transport systems, illustrating the limitations of CBA and the dangers of tailoring results in ways that lend credibility to specific forms of transport governance, as apparently favored by Sieg (2024) and Eisenkopf et al. (2024).</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002039\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002039","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The economic cost of a 130 km/h speed limit: Insights for cost-benefit analyses
Two comments submitted in critique of our paper (Gössling et al. 2023) present an opportunity to discuss principles of CBA and their use in transport contexts. The critique needs to be discussed in context, as CBA is not an objective tool of evaluation and relies on specific assumptions. For this reason, we begin our response with an introduction to the German transport context, including developments in car ownership and background on the German Climate Protection Act that legally requires all economic sectors to reduce emissions. This framing is important to correctly understand our response to Sieg (2024) as well as Eisenkopf et al. (2024). Overall, we note that many of their criticisms lack merit, while others depend on viewpoint. We conclude that, specifically considering current price levels for fuels, our findings are not in question: a speed limit is warranted for welfare reasons; it is supported by a majority of the population; and it can help closing the emission gap in the transport sector. Findings are also discussed within the wider framework of “desirable” transport systems, illustrating the limitations of CBA and the dangers of tailoring results in ways that lend credibility to specific forms of transport governance, as apparently favored by Sieg (2024) and Eisenkopf et al. (2024).
期刊介绍:
Ecological Economics is concerned with extending and integrating the understanding of the interfaces and interplay between "nature''s household" (ecosystems) and "humanity''s household" (the economy). Ecological economics is an interdisciplinary field defined by a set of concrete problems or challenges related to governing economic activity in a way that promotes human well-being, sustainability, and justice. The journal thus emphasizes critical work that draws on and integrates elements of ecological science, economics, and the analysis of values, behaviors, cultural practices, institutional structures, and societal dynamics. The journal is transdisciplinary in spirit and methodologically open, drawing on the insights offered by a variety of intellectual traditions, and appealing to a diverse readership.
Specific research areas covered include: valuation of natural resources, sustainable agriculture and development, ecologically integrated technology, integrated ecologic-economic modelling at scales from local to regional to global, implications of thermodynamics for economics and ecology, renewable resource management and conservation, critical assessments of the basic assumptions underlying current economic and ecological paradigms and the implications of alternative assumptions, economic and ecological consequences of genetically engineered organisms, and gene pool inventory and management, alternative principles for valuing natural wealth, integrating natural resources and environmental services into national income and wealth accounts, methods of implementing efficient environmental policies, case studies of economic-ecologic conflict or harmony, etc. New issues in this area are rapidly emerging and will find a ready forum in Ecological Economics.