Like many cities, Singapore has suf

Like many cities, Singapore has suffered from the environmental effects of a growing car-driving
population: congestion resulting in longer travel times for cars and public transport alike, air pollution, wear and tear on roads, and a lower quality of life for those living and working in heavily congested areas. Because car drivers do not naturally bear the substantial costs they impose on society,charging for urban road use is theoretically appealing. The success of Singapore's Area Licensing Scheme demonstrates its practical appeal as well.
In 1975, cars represented half of Singapore's 280,000 registered vehicles and were owned at a rate of one per 16 people. In an attempt to reduce central city traffic from 25% to 30% during peak hours, the city implemented a scheme that charged drivers for using roads in the city center during these hours. Specifically, the city aimed to: a) reduce car use within certain areas during particular times; b) leave economic activity unaffected; c) enact a scheme that was easy to implement and enforce; and d) provide those no longer driving into the inner city with attractive travel alternatives. The area pricing scheme required vehicles traveling through the city center at peak hours to purchase a daily or monthly license, raised daytime parking fees within this area, and instituted a park-and-ride service to facilitate easy non-car commuting. Buses, cycles, and cars with four or more passengers were exempted from the licensing requirements.
The scheme had the following effects. Above all, it achieved a traffic reduction of 73% in the restricted zone during peak hours. In addition, business seemed largely unaffected, and although the park-andride option was not heavily utilized the city found the overall scheme easy to implement and enforce. Carpools increased from 10% to 40% of all traffic. Thirteen per cent of car-owning commuters traveling into the zone switched to public transport, and about the same percentage changed their commuting time to pre-peak hours. For those who did not change their habits to avoid the zone during peak hours, the monthly average commuting cost rose from US $64 to US $95. More significantly, all but one-tenth of “through zone” commuters changed their route or departure time to avoid licensing fees. Travel speeds increased by 10% on incoming roads and by 20% on zone roads. There were additional environmental benefits. Although other pollutants were difficult to measure, the level of carbon monoxide declined significantly during the hours the scheme was in effect. Central city residents and shoppers reported greater ease and safety in getting around, less fumes, and generally happier living and shopping conditions.
Generally, all affected groups concurred that the impact on Singapore was positive, with motorists being the only ones to perceive themselves as worse off, though not badly so. Their perceptions were accurate since they were, in fact, shouldering more of the social costs of their car use. With an initial return on investment of 77% (which rose to 95% with an increase in license fees) the scheme achieved its goals without undue budgetary costs. Less quantifiable, but more significant may be the long-term benefits, specifically the road construction or future congestion that may be avoided due to changed habits and attitudes towards public transit and car use.
In another part of the world, Santiago, Chile suffered from a similar congestion and pollution problem in the late 1980s, as did Singapore in the mid-1970s, but for a different reason. Ten years earlier the Santiago urban public bus system was completely deregulated and made a free access system. This resulted in rapid expansion of the bus fleet to 13,000 buses, 40% above the optimum (rentmaximizing) level. Congestion resulted both from the excessive number of buses and the lack of coordination of bus stops. Transport-related emissions grew as a result of the large number of buses and taxis scouting the city streets for passengers, the very low speed, and the lack of minimum standards of quality. Despite the formation of an operators' organization, the “Consejo Superior del Transport,” which was able to raise prices, excess congestion continued because most buses were depreciated and continued to operate with low occupancy as long as they covered their operating costs (Hartje et. al., 1994).
To relieve congestion in the streets of central Santiago, a new law was passed in 1991 to enable the Ministry of Transportation to establish regulations regarding minimum quality of service, air pollution, and access to congested roads. A number of innovations were introduced under this law. First, buses and taxicabs older than 18 years were bought by the government for their scrap value and retired. By 1994, as much as one-third of the fleet was to be retired. Second, a registry for public transport vehicles was established, and entry was limited to new vehicles. Third, service quality and air emission standards were introduced. Fourth, the rights of access by buses and taxis to roads congested by these vehicles were auctioned. To ensure compliance and reduce enforcement costs, only incorporated companies were allowed to bid, thus providing a strong incentive for incorporation of small operations into companies or cooperatives. The selection criteria included quality of proposed service, air emission characteristics, and frequency on specific lines to ensure that the reduction came from frequency reduction not from change in spatial structure of lines (Hartje et. al., 1994).

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Like many cities, Singapore has suffered from the environmental effects of a growing car-drivingpopulation: congestion resulting in longer travel times for cars and public transport alike, air pollution, wear and tear on roads, and a lower quality of life for those living and working in heavily congested areas. Because car drivers do not naturally bear the substantial costs they impose on society,charging for urban road use is theoretically appealing. The success of Singapore's Area Licensing Scheme demonstrates its practical appeal as well.In 1975, cars represented half of Singapore's 280,000 registered vehicles and were owned at a rate of one per 16 people. In an attempt to reduce central city traffic from 25% to 30% during peak hours, the city implemented a scheme that charged drivers for using roads in the city center during these hours. Specifically, the city aimed to: a) reduce car use within certain areas during particular times; b) leave economic activity unaffected; c) enact a scheme that was easy to implement and enforce; and d) provide those no longer driving into the inner city with attractive travel alternatives. The area pricing scheme required vehicles traveling through the city center at peak hours to purchase a daily or monthly license, raised daytime parking fees within this area, and instituted a park-and-ride service to facilitate easy non-car commuting. Buses, cycles, and cars with four or more passengers were exempted from the licensing requirements.The scheme had the following effects. Above all, it achieved a traffic reduction of 73% in the restricted zone during peak hours. In addition, business seemed largely unaffected, and although the park-andride option was not heavily utilized the city found the overall scheme easy to implement and enforce. Carpools increased from 10% to 40% of all traffic. Thirteen per cent of car-owning commuters traveling into the zone switched to public transport, and about the same percentage changed their commuting time to pre-peak hours. For those who did not change their habits to avoid the zone during peak hours, the monthly average commuting cost rose from US $64 to US $95. More significantly, all but one-tenth of “through zone” commuters changed their route or departure time to avoid licensing fees. Travel speeds increased by 10% on incoming roads and by 20% on zone roads. There were additional environmental benefits. Although other pollutants were difficult to measure, the level of carbon monoxide declined significantly during the hours the scheme was in effect. Central city residents and shoppers reported greater ease and safety in getting around, less fumes, and generally happier living and shopping conditions.Umumnya, Semua kelompok yang terkena dampak setuju bahwa dampak pada Singapore adalah positif, dengan pengendara menjadi satu-satunya untuk menganggap diri mereka sebagai lebih buruk, meskipun tidak begitu buruk. Persepsi mereka yang akurat karena mereka adalah, pada kenyataannya, memanggul lebih dari biaya sosial dari penggunaan mobil mereka. Dengan awal investasi 77% (yang naik ke 95% dengan peningkatan biaya lisensi) skema mencapai target tanpa biaya anggaran yang tidak semestinya. Kurang diukur, tetapi lebih signifikan mungkin manfaat jangka panjang, khususnya pembangunan jalan atau masa depan kemacetan yang dapat dihindari karena kebiasaan berubah dan sikap terhadap penggunaan umum transit dan mobil.In another part of the world, Santiago, Chile suffered from a similar congestion and pollution problem in the late 1980s, as did Singapore in the mid-1970s, but for a different reason. Ten years earlier the Santiago urban public bus system was completely deregulated and made a free access system. This resulted in rapid expansion of the bus fleet to 13,000 buses, 40% above the optimum (rentmaximizing) level. Congestion resulted both from the excessive number of buses and the lack of coordination of bus stops. Transport-related emissions grew as a result of the large number of buses and taxis scouting the city streets for passengers, the very low speed, and the lack of minimum standards of quality. Despite the formation of an operators' organization, the “Consejo Superior del Transport,” which was able to raise prices, excess congestion continued because most buses were depreciated and continued to operate with low occupancy as long as they covered their operating costs (Hartje et. al., 1994).To relieve congestion in the streets of central Santiago, a new law was passed in 1991 to enable the Ministry of Transportation to establish regulations regarding minimum quality of service, air pollution, and access to congested roads. A number of innovations were introduced under this law. First, buses and taxicabs older than 18 years were bought by the government for their scrap value and retired. By 1994, as much as one-third of the fleet was to be retired. Second, a registry for public transport vehicles was established, and entry was limited to new vehicles. Third, service quality and air emission standards were introduced. Fourth, the rights of access by buses and taxis to roads congested by these vehicles were auctioned. To ensure compliance and reduce enforcement costs, only incorporated companies were allowed to bid, thus providing a strong incentive for incorporation of small operations into companies or cooperatives. The selection criteria included quality of proposed service, air emission characteristics, and frequency on specific lines to ensure that the reduction came from frequency reduction not from change in spatial structure of lines (Hartje et. al., 1994).