Reducing traffic with “carrots”: A review of the evidence

Reducing traffic volumes is one way to reduce carbon emissions from the transport sector. Since increasing driving costs is often met with public resistance, high hopes are often pinned on the possibility to reduce traffic volumes by non-coercive policy measures, or “carrots”. Such measures include improvements of alternative modes, strategies that affect urban forms, and “soft measures” that aim to affect behaviour by providing information or changing norms and attitudes. This paper reviews the empirical evidence regarding such measures, focusing on their potential to reduce aggregate road traffic volumes in a national perspective. While such measures can yield significant other benefits, and may also reduce traffic volumes locally, our general conclusion is that their effects on aggregate traffic volumes appear small, especially from a climate policy perspective where emissions need to be cut radically and rapidly. While they are often motivated for several other reasons, overestimating their effects on aggregate traffic volumes may cause complacency, misallocations of scarce public resources and backlashes against climate policy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transportation Research Part A Policy and Practice
Published
2025-11-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2025.104735
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Urban Transport and Accessibility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reducing traffic with “carrots”: A review of the evidence

Maria Börjesson, Jonas Eliasson
2 citations
Transportation Research Part A Policy and Practice
Urban Transport and Accessibility
4.35
article

Reducing traffic with “carrots”: A review of the evidence

Maria Börjesson, Jonas Eliasson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Reducing traffic volumes is one way to reduce carbon emissions from the transport sector. Since increasing driving costs is often met with public resistance, high hopes are often pinned on the possibility to reduce traffic volumes by non-coercive policy measures, or “carrots”. Such measures include improvements of alternative modes, strategies that affect urban forms, and “soft measures” that aim to affect behaviour by providing information or changing norms and attitudes. This paper reviews the empirical evidence regarding such measures, focusing on their potential to reduce aggregate road traffic volumes in a national perspective. While such measures can yield significant other benefits, and may also reduce traffic volumes locally, our general conclusion is that their effects on aggregate traffic volumes appear small, especially from a climate policy perspective where emissions need to be cut radically and rapidly. While they are often motivated for several other reasons, overestimating their effects on aggregate traffic volumes may cause complacency, misallocations of scarce public resources and backlashes against climate policy.

Transportation Research Part A Policy and PracticeVol. 203
Linköping University (SE), Swedish Transport Administration (SE), Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (SE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Urban Transport and Accessibility
4.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Reducing traffic with “carrots”: A review of the evidence — Maria Börjesson, Jonas Eliasson · Transportation Research Part A Policy and Practice (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS