Transportation Funding Reframed

Listening to a recent episode of the Look Both Ways podcast with David Zipper and Wes Marshall connected me with some things I’d been thinking about lately, mainly the value proposition for certain transportation related to its location. In the episode they talk about why they believe robotaxis/autonomous vehicles, in the context of rural areas, would be beneficial versus in urban areas where they are just taking up limited available space. Right now these companies don’t find it profitable so they are focused on urban areas which are.

But that also gets me thinking about distances. A recent paper by Dana Rowengould and Harry Schukei in the Journal of Transportation and Land Use found that rural transportation is influenced more by regional access versus urban transportation more concerned with local access. This follows many overall discussions about access and to a certain extent Waldo Tobler’s First Law of Geography. “Everything is related to everything else, but near things are more related than distant things.”

They also found that local access in urban areas was more associated with mode choice and sustainable transportation than rural areas. What this tells me is that cars or car like options such as taxis might be one of many solutions for transportation insecurity and access improvements for non-drivers in rural areas. I don’t believe the same necessarily can be said for suburban areas considering many suburban trips are local access as well.

But distance is an interesting thing. At the moment there’s a heated discussion going on in many places around the country about what to do with the gas tax as it loses value due to reduced VMT and vehicle electrification. Many states are floating road user charges and the reflexive feeling from many rural communities is frustration because of the belief that they drive further and might pay more.

The Associated Press however found some unlikely allies of road user charges from conservatives who don’t believe that the gas tax is working for them. There are many more rural roads to take care of than there are drivers and in heavily tourist traveled areas people may not fill up at the local pump while traveling through. Additionally commercial vehicles and heavier trucks do a lot of damage to roads that can then damage farmer and rancher’s vehicles and produce they carry.

At the moment movement on this issue is aligning along partisan lines which is frustrating because there should be robust data driven discussion about what is needed and creating a broader discussion about access and transportation needs for everyone. A gas tax or even mileage tax discussion is going to keep us focused on a framework of vehicles alone instead of broadening the parameters to moving people. It might be the case that if we think about access in this local versus regional frame, we aren’t just talking about gas tax versus mileage tax but rather a system for funding accessible transportation.

In rural areas that might be funding for roads that facilitate commerce and autonomous transportation services. In urban areas that could be local street safety programs and transit in addition to non-agriculture freight movement. The need for people and goods to move around isn’t changed because of how we fund our systems. But perhaps the way we fund our transportation systems should change based on getting people safely to where they want to go.

***

For this intro post and more news in your inbox every morning, sign up for a two week free trial of The Overhead Wire Daily, our popular newsletter established in 2006.