Toll Rate Policies of India: A Review,Comparison,and Inferences

Abstract

Tolling as a method of financing transportation systems is becoming increasingly common worldwide. The collection of fees from road users under public-private partnership agreements is based on prescribed toll fees/rates. According to the prevailing level of human, traffic, environmental and economic development, these toll rate policies vary from country to country. In India, road toll rates are prescribed by the Gazette of India: Extraordinary (Part II Section 3 sub-section [i]) published by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways under the National Highways Act, 1956. Each year, the toll rates for each toll facility in India are set as per the National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008. There is now a need to revisit the policies on fixing toll rates in India. The present study presents a critical literature review of the toll rate policies in India and other developed and developing countries. The study provides a comparison of the different vehicle classes considered for toll rates and it is found that most of the classifications are based on gross vehicle weight (GVW) and on number of wheels and axles. Additionally, the toll rates for different nations are compared and it is found that Indian toll rates are lower than those of the developed countries. Finally, the research gaps are given for further research.

Keywords

planning and analysis transportation finance sustainability and resilience transportation and society transportation in the developing countries transport economics and finance

Tolling as a method of financing transportation systems is becoming more common worldwide. It is mainly done for revenue generation, demand management, and congestion management ( 1 ). Privately funded projects are developed on a public-private partnership (PPP) basis in which the construction and maintenance cost is recovered from the facility users for a specified time as per the consignment agreement. PPP projects have three main aims: (a) attracting private capital investment, (b) increasing efficiency and the use of available resources, and (c) reforming sectors by reallocation of roles, incentives, and so forth ( 2 ). In PPP projects, four main stakeholders are of interest: government, consumers, investors, and employees. In Asia, six types of contractual agreements are considered under the PPP sector, including “Build Operate Transfer” (BOT) and “Build Operate Own” (BOO) ( 2 ). For these PPP projects, the financial feasibility is checked using indicators such as return on equity, rate of return, annual debt service coverage ratio, net present value, and many more ( 3 ). In PPP projects, the Concession Agreement plays a pivotal role in the repayment method, debt-to-equity ratio, life span of the project, and so forth ( 4 ). In India, toll charges on highways must conform with the guidelines given by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) ( 4 ). In PPP projects, the return on investment (ROI) from the project and the toll charges will depend on the total project cost; a higher cost of construction may benefit the private partner at the expense of the user community ( 4 ). The PPP model helps to attract different private firms and thus brings in new innovative solutions with reduction of the cost of the desired project. Further, to cater to the ever-increasing traffic from globalization, tolling is also used for demand management, thus increasing the share of carpooling and public transportation. Nowadays, demand-based pricing to cater to the traffic on limited road space is another objective of tolling. The toll roads are also called turnpikes or toll-ways. Toll roads provide users with more safety and comfort and reduced travel time, as well as reduced environmental effects of traffic.

The determination of toll rates is an area of interest to researchers all over the world. Various developing countries like China have defined the toll rates based on past experience and methodologies used in similar locations ( 5 ). The elasticity-based model is proposed for setting the toll rates depending on the traffic volume considering quantitative and qualitative datasets. Chu and Tsai ( 6 ) developed models for congestion charges depending on the vehicle class according to the degree of damage caused by different classes of vehicle. The maintenance cost-based cost function is used to increase welfare. Iseki and Li ( 7 ) developed a mechanism for the determination of toll rates during peak and non-peak hours, considering seven different vehicle classes, based on the total construction and maintenance costs and vehicle emission costs. Davis ( 8 ) studied the variation of toll rates with inflation rates for a 50-year period in the United States. He found a significant increase in toll rates for passenger cars and commercial vehicles, by 3.2% and 3.6%, respectively, after 1960 while the average consumer price index (CPI) increased by 4%. Albalate et al. ( 9 ) studied the different regulations and policies on the tolled network and toll rates in Europe. They found that toll rates vary from country to country and within countries too. The toll rates were decided considering the capital costs, concession length, the average cost of toll in the nearby toll stations already in operation, operational and maintenance costs, rate of return, environmental costs, and even on the concessionaire’s wishes. The toll rate setting mechanism for Colorado is given by High Performance Transportation Enterprise, Colorado ( 10 ), as shown in Figure 1. The toll rate setting depends on the speed requirement, increase in CPI, debt financing, and operation and maintenance costs.

Vajdic et al. ( 11 ) developed a linear equation to determine the minimum toll rate based on financial and technical constraints such as construction life and concession period; different costs are included such as construction, operation, maintenance cost, interest rates, debt maturity, inflation rates, and so forth. Figure 2 gives a graphical representation for determining the weighted average toll rate based on construction cost and annual average daily traffic.

In another study by Vajdic et al. ( 12 ), an acceptable toll rate was found using a probabilistic approach. The log-logistic probability distribution function was used for weighted average toll rate distribution. They found that the probabilistic theory can capture some uncertainty in the toll rate determination and the project risk involved.

The above literature shows that different criteria are considered for setting toll rates with variations in methodology for determining toll rates for normal tolls (i.e., without congestion pricing). David ( 13 ) explained the development of highways in Japan since 1956 where, because of limited funds, debt financing was considered for the development of highways. Japan used the uniform toll rate system to promote the use of high-speed highways by the population at large. From that review, it can be seen that toll rates in Japan are relatively higher than in other developed nations. This is because many bridges and tunnels need to be constructed for highways in hilly terrain; the higher cost of the building of earthquake-resistant structures; and applying the full repayment principle.

From the above literature review, it is concluded that the toll rates for any facility should be high enough for the debt of project construction and maintenance to be covered. On the other hand, they should meet the efficiency criteria to regulate the demand for toll facilities. Further, it is clear from the review that various factors should be considered for determining toll rates. In India, road toll rates are determined as per the Gazette of India: Extraordinary (Part II Section 3 sub-section [i]), published by a division of MoRTH under the National Highways Act, 1956. At the time of writing, the toll rates for each toll facility in India were set as per the National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules 2008 ( 14 ). As these rules were developed over a decade ago, there is a need to review the policies on fixing the toll rates in India. Further, it is observed that the toll rates are revised annually according to the Wholesale Price Index (WPI), but that does not consider the uncertainty in the WPI brought about by extraordinary conditions such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the present study provides a critical literature review of the toll rate policies in India and other developed and developing countries for a thorough knowledge of different policy implications, and a comparison can be made between them. Further, decisions about toll rates are involved in the preliminary decision-making process in a highway construction project; so it is necessary to have detailed knowledge about them, so that it should not affect the objective of the tolled project. For the present study, the authors developed a database using historical research papers, government gazettes of different countries, toll road websites, and newspapers.

Scenario of Indian Toll Road Network

India has the second largest road network in the world, with a length of 5.87 lakh (587,000) km, of which National Highways (NHs) constitute about 1.325 lakh (132,500) km, approximately 22.57% ( 15 ). Though the percentage of NHs is low, about 40% of the daily traffic travels on them. The distribution of NHs is not uniform throughout India ( 16 ). According to MoRTH ( 16 ), Maharashtra has the highest share of NHs (13.35%). On the other hand, considering the density of NH per 1,000 square kilometers, Diu Daman is at the top with a density of 196.4 km/1,000 km² ( 16 ), followed by Chandigarh (134.0 km/1,000 km²) and then Delhi (105.9 km/1,000 km²).

The first toll road was built in Madhya Pradesh in 1995 and operated on a manual toll collection (MTC) basis. Tamil Nādu and Telangana have the most toll roads, while the highest toll collection is in Rajasthan, followed by Maharashtra. India has around 525 toll plazas on NHs, with a total toll collection in the financial year 2018–2019 of about ₹92.59 billion ( 15 ).

Commuters face delays at the toll plazas, especially during peak hours, because of the manual operations ( 17 – 19 ). To decrease the delays, in 2014 the Government of India (GOI) started electronic toll collection (ETC) using radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags, locally known as FASTag ( 20 , 21 ). FASTag is a chip fitted to a vehicle, enabling automatic deduction of the toll amount when the vehicle passes the zone of RFID located in the FASTag lane. FASTag has the benefits of reducing travel time, delay, and vehicular emissions. FASTag is a subsystem of intelligent transport systems widely used in other nations like the United States, European countries, and China.

GOI has developed a closed toll system for a six-lane expressway. The first expressway comprises the 135 km Eastern Peripheral Expressway, and the other is the 135 km Western Peripheral Expressway, connecting NH-1 and NH-2 from western and eastern Delhi. This is the first project for a closed tolling system in India ( 15 ).

Innovative Ways to Fund Transport Infrastructure in India

Many countries are addressing issues like harsh climate, degree of urbanization, level of trade dependency, an aging road and highway infrastructure, limited finances, issues of road safety, and environmental considerations through their policy interventions at different levels. India is a vast country with diverse geographical and climatic conditions coupled with severe economic constraints. The road infrastructure requirements for Himalayan regions in the North (cold weather and high altitude) and the North East regions are completely different from those in the rest of the country. Road safety is a global issue, and India is no exception. India has a coastline of 6,700 km and providing connectivity to all the major ports is another challenge. GOI has laid down a framework for the synchronized development of infrastructure in the country so that the requirements of the next decades can be fulfilled. Although India has significantly invested in and improved its transportation infrastructure since the year 2000 to meet the upcoming demand, the country has much more to achieve.

GOI has taken various initiatives to achieve its transportation infrastructure goals. The National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) is one such initiative by GOI for the financial years 2019–2025 ( 22 ). It aims to improve project preparation and attract investments into infrastructure. To cope with the expected high growth, the NIP will act as an enabler to attract the required investment funds. About $277 billion in the NIP (approximately 19.20% of the total) is allocated to the development of road infrastructure. The other initiative is the Bharatmala Pariyojana (India Garland Scheme), an investment program with more than $100 billion for road infrastructure development ( 23 ). It can be seen from Figure 3 that about 40% (approximately $113 billion) is allowed under Bharatmala Pariyojana. It will connect more than 550 districts with a target length of 38,400 km.

A national master plan for multi-modal connectivity was launched by GOI in November 2021, known as the PM Gati Shakti. A total of 16 ministries of the central government are working together to plan and implement infrastructure connectivity projects.

Moreover, the principal development financial institutions have set up the National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development (NBFID) for financing infrastructure projects in India ( 24 ). The NBFID has an authorized share capital of ₹1 trillion. Further, the provision of interest-free loans for a longer term (50 years) to the state governments was made in the Union Budget 2023–2024 to boost infrastructure development.

The North East region has harsh climatic conditions with hilly terrain, heavy rainfall, poor soil conditions, poor road safety, and other environmental constraints. The average cost of constructing and maintaining highways there is higher than the national average cost ( 25 ). To address this issue, MoRTH has formulated the Special Accelerated Road Development Programme for North East (SARDP-NE) to develop transport infrastructure in the North East.

Along with funding opportunities through real estate investment trusts (REITs) and infrastructure investment trusts (InvITs), India has also introduced new and simpler investment opportunities for a broader range of retail investors ( 26 ). Further, the hybrid annuity model has boosted PPP projects as it gives relief to both parties (public and private) in balanced risk ( 27 ). Asset management through the Toll Operate Transfer (TOT) model gives the right to the concessionaire to collect tolls from road users traveling on NHs ( 28 ). The TOT plan is executed for public-funded projects under the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI), which allows the concessionaire to operate and maintain the highway with the payment of a lump sum amount to the NHAI for the concession period ( 29 ).

Additionally, the Model Concession Agreements for projects under PPP, such as BOT, TOT, and so forth, allow flexibility in the concession period in response to variation in traffic growth ( 30 , 31 ). For each percent increase and decrease (limited to the specified value, for example, 5% for BOT projects [ 30 ]), provisions are made for changes in the concession period. This helps the concessionaire to recover its investment. Further, the collection of user fees after the completion of 75% of the highway, and after the concession period, at reduced rates (40% of the total) helps to generate revenue for the financial needs ( 32 ). Lastly, GOI also tries to obtain funds from the New Development Bank (NDB), a multilateral development bank established by the BRICS states (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) ( 33 ).

Toll Rate Policy in India

Figure 4 gives a brief idea about the development of the toll rate policy in India. The collection of fees from road users under the PPP is referred to as the toll fee/rate. These policies vary from country to country according to prevailing levels of human, traffic, environmental, and economic development.

As discussed earlier, in India, the toll rates are prescribed by the Gazette of India: Extraordinary (Part II Section 3 sub-section-[i]) published by a division of MoRTH. After Independence, the first rules on toll rates were published in 1964 for temporary bridges. After that, the first revision was carried out in 1997, and the latest version, the National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 (NHFR-2008), was published in 2008. Minor revisions are made to NHFR-2008 each year, as shown in Figure 4.

National Highways (Temporary Bridges) Rules, 1964

The first rules for toll rates were developed by GOI in the National Highways (Temporary Bridges) Rules, 1964 (NHR-1964) ( 34 ). The rates of fees were given for temporary bridges constructed on NHs; GOI was the authority to collect fees. In NHR-1964, tolls were imposed on different modes of transportation such as palkee, dolly, rath, or bullock-drawn carriage, as well as animals such as dogs, camels, asses, sheep, horses, and elephants.

In 1964, vehicles such as the palkee, dolly, and so forth, were commonly used; thus, these tolls were collected from travelers. Travelers also often rode animals, like camel, horses, and elephants; thus, the toll charges were applied to road users using animals for transportation services. Moreover, by the 1960s, India was exposed to new modes of transportation such as motorcycles, trucks, buses, motor cars, and so forth. The toll rates ranged from ₹0.02 (sheep) to ₹50 (loaded truck or passenger bus). Further, 50% discounts were given to unloaded motor vehicles; for example, a loaded rickshaw cost up to ₹0.25 and an unloaded rickshaw was ₹0.12.

National Highways (Rate of Fee) Rules, 1997

The first revision of the toll rates policies was the National Highways (Rate of Fee) Rules, 1997 ( 35 ). This rule is applied to the structures mentioned in Figure 5. The rates as per Table 1 were applied to users for the use of ferries, permanent bridges, temporary bridges, or tunnels on any section of NH or bridges or both. For instance, for construction projects with a value below ₹50 crores (500 million rupees), toll rates (₹ per vehicle) for light commercial vehicles (LCV)/minibuses were double and those for trucks/buses and multiaxle vehicles (MAV) were triple the tolls for cars/jeeps.

Table 1.

Toll Rates for Different Vehicle Classes (Rule 3 Sub-Rule 1)

Initial cost of the bridge and its approaches (₹ in crores)	Toll rates (₹/vehicle)
Initial cost of the bridge and its approaches (₹ in crores)	Car/jeep, etc.	Light commercial vehicle/minibus	Truck/bus or multiaxle vehicle
Below 50	5	10	15
50–75	10	10	25
75–100	10	15	30
100–125	15	20	40
125–150	15	20	40
150–200	15	25	50
Above 200	20	30	60
Toll capping rate (Rule 3 sub-rule 2)	₹0.40 per km	₹0.70 per km	₹1.40 per km

The toll rate applied to the projects of converting of existing two-lane highways to four-lane highways shall be within the capping rates given in Table 1 (prices in June 1997). These rates are reviewed and changed every five years based on the WPI.

National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008

The rules developed by MoRTH are now called the National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules, 2008 (NHFR-2008) ( 14 ). This document was prepared with due modification to the rules of 1997.

Levy of the Fee (Rule 3)

The toll tax or fee is levied on the users of any section of NH, permanent bridge, tunnel, or bypass forming parts of an NH (referred to as “tolled section” in the present study). The base year for NHFR-2008 is taken as the period between April 1, 2007 and March 31, 2008. Some of the points given under Rule 3 of NHFR-2008 are:

Public-funded projects, such as any section of the NH, permanent bridge, tunnel, or bypass forming the parts of the NH, may levy toll fees 45 days after completion of the project.

For private-funded projects, the fee should be taken as per the agreement signed with the concessionaire concerned.

Vehicles such as two-wheelers, three-wheelers, animal-drawn vehicles, and tractors are exempt from the payment of the fees for using the tolled section. The reasons are: first, they are not allowed on the tolled section if other service roads (provided parallel to the NH for access by users of the adjoining land) or alternative roads (road of minimum 10 m width and length not exceeding more than 20% of the tolled road) are available for them to travel on.

If the users of two-wheelers, three-wheelers, animal-drawn vehicles and tractors drive/travel on a tolled section after the provision of an alternative route or service road, then they are charged 50% of the fees of car users.

The toll fee, after calculation, should be rounded off to the nearest multiple of 5 rupees.

Base Rate of Fee (Rule 4)

The rates of fees that are levied on road users are determined by Equation 1. The toll rates are kept constant for both public-funded and private-funded projects.

(Toll rate)_{i} = (Base rate)_{i} \times Length of road

(1)

where

$(Toll rate)_{i}$ = toll rate for ith category of vehicle (₹)

$(Base rate)_{i}$ = base toll rate for ith category of vehicle (₹/km)

Length of road = toll road section (km).

The base rate for different vehicle classes using the NH (i.e., NHs having four or more lanes) is given in Table 2. Here, the cost for Class I, that is, vehicle class of car, jeep, van, or light motor vehicle, is considered as a base rate of ₹0.65, and with the use of different multiplicative factors, the base rates of different vehicle classes such as LCV, bus, heavy commercial vehicle, and so forth, are determined. The different vehicle classes are determined based on gross vehicle weight (GVW), number of axles, and passenger capacity.

Table 2.

Base Rates for Different Vehicle Classes (Rule 4 Sub-Rule 2)

Vehicle category	Base rate of fee (₹/km)	Description
Car, jeep, van or light motor vehicle	0.65	Vehicle class gross vehicle weight (GVW) <7,500 kg Passenger carrying capacity 12 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
Light commercial vehicle, light goods vehicle or minibus	1.05	GVW 7,500–12,000 kg Passenger carrying capacity of more than 12 but less than 32 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
Bus or truck	2.20	GVW 12,000–20,000 kg Passenger carrying capacity of more than 32 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
Heavy construction machinery, earthmoving equipment, or multiaxle vehicle	3.45	3 to 6 axles GVW 20,000–60,000 kg
Oversized vehicles	4.20	7 or more axles GVW >60,000 kg

Note: For projects of two-lane national highways requiring more than ₹10 million/km of investment, fees are levied at 60% of the rates provided in Table 2.

If the construction cost of a permanent bridge, tunnel, or bypass exceeds ₹100 million, then the base rates in Table 3 are used (Section 4 sub-section 4). Here, the rates for car, jeep, and so forth are considered as the base, and using the multiplicative factor of 1.50, 3.00, 4.50, and 6.00, toll rates for LCV, truck, HCM, and oversized vehicle are obtained.

Table 3.

Base Rate for Different Vehicle Classes Exceeding Construction Cost of more than ₹100 million (Rule 4 Sub-Rule 4)

Cost of permanent bridge, bypass, or tunnel (₹ million)	Base rate (₹/vehicle/trip)
Cost of permanent bridge, bypass, or tunnel (₹ million)	Car, jeep, van or light motor vehicle	Light commercial vehicle, light goods vehicle, or minibus	Truck or bus	Heavy construction machinery, earthmoving equipment, or multiaxle vehicle	Oversized vehicle
100–150	5.00	7.50	15.00	22.00	30.00
>150–1,000	1.00	1.50	3.00	4.50	6.00
>1,000–2,000	0.75	1.15	2.25	3.40	4.50
>2,000	0.50	0.75	1.50	2.25	3.00

Figure 6 provides the use of the rules in a project cost with threshold of ₹500 million. The construction cost here is the cost assessed by the Executive Authority before the bid from the concessionaire (private-funded projects) or the cost assessed six months before completion of project (public-funded projects).

Table 2 shows the base rate of toll taxes for different vehicles classified for levying the tolls, and Table 3 shows the base rate for toll taxes for different facilities according to the construction cost. ROI is based on the total project cost; it can be seen that for the lower project cost, the toll is calculated using the charges in Table 2 (Rule 4 sub-rule 2 of NHFR-2008). On the other hand, when the project cost increases above a certain level, construction costs attract different toll taxes (Rule 4 sub-rule 4 of NHFR-2008 and Figure 6). These different toll taxes are thus aimed toward the ROI for the particular project. Further, the toll taxes for different vehicle classes are determined based on GVW which is linked to the damage that will be caused by a particular vehicle class. As overburdened vehicles may cause more damage/fractures to the pavement, extra high tariff charges are applied to them for using the highway ( 36 , 37 ).

Annual Revision of Fees (Rule 5)

The annual revision of fees should be carried out on April 1 every year at the rate of 3% without compounding. This rate is applied to the base rates given in Tables 2 and 3. The applicable rate of fee can be calculated with the help of Equation 2.

Applicable rate of fee = base rate + base rate \times (\frac{WPI A - WPI B}{WPI B}) \times 0.4

(2)

where

Applicable rate of fee = rate which is payable by the user

Base rate = the rate given in Tables 2 and 3 with a 3% rate of annual revision

WPI A = WPI of the week ending on or the subsequent to January 1 immediately preceding the date of the revision

WPI B = WPI of the week ending on January 6, 2007 (i.e., 208.7)

0.4 = WPI restricted to 40% (Rule 5 sub-rule 2).

Collection of Fees (Rule 6)

The toll fees shall be collected by the central government authority, or executive authority, or by the concessionaire.

Fees can be paid by cash or smart card.

No additional charges are applied if the payment is made by smart card.

Receipts should be given compulsorily to cash users, and for smart card users, receipts should be provided on demand.

Location of Toll Plaza (Rule 8)

The location of the toll plaza, as a matter of toll rate policy, is necessary as the tolls are imposed on users based on the distance of road (Equation 1). The minimum distance between two toll plazas should be 60 km in one direction (Figure 7). The concessionaire can be given permission to build a toll plaza within 60 km with permission from the executive officer. For toll collection at a permanent bridge, tunnel or bypass, the distance between two toll plazas can be less than 60 km with due permission (Figure 7). This may be compared with Vietnam, where the allowable distance between two toll plazas is 70 km, so it is discounted by 10km in India ( 38 ). On the other hand, in China, the minimum distance between two toll plazas should be 50 km ( 39 ). Further, the criteria for toll plazas near municipal boundaries are illustrated in Figure 7. The minimum distance from a municipal or local town area limit should be 10 km.

Discounts (Rule 9)

Discounts on toll rates are available to frequent users, by both private concessionaires and the executive authority. For example, 1.5 times the fee for a one-way journey is applicable for a maximum of two journeys within 24 h from the time of payment. Further, two-thirds of the fee payable is applicable for 50 single journeys within one month from the date of payment.

Persons living within 20 km of the toll plaza may pay for a monthly pass, in the amount of ₹150 per month (revised annually as per Rule 5), for noncommercial vehicles. If a service road or alternative road is provided, then the monthly pass is not acceptable and local residents are required to use the alternative road. Further, no pass is issued to any person residing within 20 km but not passing the toll plaza.

Improvements to NHFR-2008

National Highway Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules (NHFAR), 2010

For two-lane NH projects requiring investment of more than ₹25 million per kilometer, fees are levied at 60% of the fees provided in Table 2 ( 40 ). The revision in rule is made with an increase in ₹15 million/km.

The word “bypass” is omitted from Rule 4 sub-rule 4 (Table 3 and Figure 5).

A new rule is added, “If the construction cost of the bypass is equal to or more than ₹100 million, then the toll rates are 1.5 times [those] of Table 2” (Rule 4 sub-rule 2). When the cost of a bypass is equal to or more than ₹100 million, then the bypass is considered separately for toll rate calculation (i.e., not included as part of an NH). If the cost of the bypass is less than ₹100 million, then it is considered as part of an NH, and the toll rate is calculated as per Table 2.

Rule 5 is also revised with the use of “WPI of December of preceding year” instead of “week ending on or subsequent to 1^st January.”

NHFAR-2011

The Rule 4 sub-rule 2 fees, that is, base rates, are modified and applied to six different vehicle classes instead of five (NHFR-2008) ( 41 ). Table 4 shows the revised base rates.

Further, Rule 4 sub-rule 4 was also revised, as shown in Table 5. The base rates for the newly introduced vehicle categories are given.

The central government shall collect the fee at the reduced rate (40% of the fee on the date of transfer of tolled section) for public-funded projects after the end of tenure as per the Concession Agreement (revision in Rule 6 sub-rule 6). These rates are revised annually as per Rule 5.

A discount of 50% is provided to commercial vehicles (vehicles without National Permit) having the registration certificate related to a particular district and traveling on a tolled section within the same district (inserted as a new sub-rule in Rule 9). If a service road or alternative road is available, then no such concession is provided for such vehicles.

Table 4.

Revised Base Rates for Vehicles (Rule 4 Sub-Rule 2)

Category no.	Vehicle category	Base rate of fee (₹/km)	Description
1	Car, jeep, van, or light motor vehicle	0.65	Vehicle class gross vehicle weight (GVW) < 7,500 kg Passenger carrying capacity 12 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
2	Light commercial vehicle, light goods vehicle, or Minibus	1.05	GVW 7,500–12,000 kg Passenger carrying capacity of more than 12 but less than 32 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
3	Bus or truck (two axles)	2.20	GVW >12,000–20,000 kg Passenger carrying capacity of more than 32 + 1 driver (Motor Vehicle Act, 1988)
4	Three-axle commercial vehicles	2.40	3 axles GVW ≥25,000 kg
5	Heavy construction machinery, earth moving equipment, or multiaxle vehicle	3.45	3 to 6 axles GVW 25,000–60,000 kg
6	Oversized vehicles	4.20	7 or more axles GVW >60,000 kg

Table 5.

Revised Base Rates for Vehicles (Rule 4 Sub-Rule 4)

Cost of permanent bridges and tunnels (₹ in million)	Base rate (₹/vehicle/trip)
Cost of permanent bridges and tunnels (₹ in million)	Car, jeep, van, or light motor vehicle	Light commercial vehicle, light goods vehicle, or minibus	Truck or bus	Three-axle commercial vehicle	Heavy construction machinery, earth moving equipment, or multiaxle vehicle	Oversized vehicle
100–150	5.00	7.50	15.00	16.50	22.00	30.00
>150–1,000	1.00	1.50	3.00	3.30	4.50	6.00
>1,000–2,000	0.75	1.15	2.25	2.45	3.40	4.50
>2,000	0.50	0.75	1.50	1.65	2.25	3.00

NHFAR-2013

NHFR-2008 from now onwards is referred to as the “Principal rules.”

Rule 4 sub-rules 3 and 4, that is, the rule of 60% of toll rate for projects of two-lane NH requiring more than ₹10 million/km of investment, and Table 3 and revised Table 5, are omitted ( 42 ).

Rule 4 sub-rule 9 is added instead. It states that the toll rate is applied as 75% of the base rates as per Table 5 (Rule 4 sub-rule 4) for NHs which are upgrading from four-lane to six-lane. These rates are applied from the date of project commencement to the date of project completion without annual revision of toll rates. The collection of toll fares should not be allowed for delayed projects.

Further, toll rates for expressways are to be 1.25 times the rates specified in Table 4 (Rule 4 sub-rules 2 and 7).

The toll rate for standalone structures (bridges, tunnels, or flyovers) can be calculated by converting the cost of the structure (excluding the cost of approaches) into equivalent terms of highway/expressway. This can be done by normalizing (dividing) the cost of the standalone structure by the equalization factor, that is, the average cost per kilometer of highway/expressway as of April 1 of that year. These standalone facilities are provided as an alternative to an existing facility or a new facility to provide benefits in travel time savings and vehicle operating costs (Rule 4 sub-rule 10).

The toll rates are applied as 60% of the base rates in Table 4 (Rule 4 sub-rule 2) for highways with paved shoulders having two or more lanes but less than four lanes and with a minimum of 3 m of widening as an improvement (Rule 4 sub-rule 11).

For an overloaded vehicle, the excess load has to be removed from the vehicle before traveling on a tolled section. If such a vehicle travels on the tolled section, the driver must pay 10 times the toll fare for its vehicle category.

NHFAR-2014

Rule 4 sub-rule 10 has been revised as the toll rate for the standalone structure is calculated by multiplying the equivalent length of the structure by a factor of 10 instead of normalization by the average cost per kilometer of highway/expressway ( 43 ). The standalone structure of less than 60 m is considered a part of the highway, while a standalone structure having a length more than 60 m is considered as a separate entity for calculating toll rate ( 44 ).

The word “smart card” is replaced by “FASTag,” as the FASTag was introduced officially in 2014. Further, any vehicle without FASTag using the FASTag lane has to pay a double toll fee for its vehicle category as a penalty.

NHFAR-2016

“Toll plaza” is referred to as “fee plaza” ( 45 ).

FASTag lanes of the fee plaza are added.

NHFAR-2017

The word “tractor” is replaced by “tractor cum harvester” in the principal rules ( 46 ).

NHFAR-2018

If the vehicle user has a valid FASTag (in working condition and with a credit balance) but fails to pay the toll with the FASTag because of malfunction of the FASTag infrastructure, then no fee is taken from the vehicle user, and the user should be permitted to pass freely without stopping. A receipt for the zero-fee transaction must be given to the vehicle user (Rule 6 sub-rule 3) ( 36 , 37 ).

Overloaded vehicles are allowed to use the tolled section on payment of excess fees. The multiplication factors for different excess loads over permissible GVW (%) are 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 for 0–20, >20–40, >40–60, >60–80, and >80, respectively (Rule 10 sub-rule 1A).

NHFAR-2020

A vehicle without valid and functional FASTag using the FASTag lane has to pay double the toll rate specified for that vehicle category ( 47 ).

Comparison of Vehicle Categories With Other Countries

Toll rates vary with the different vehicle classes in different countries. The classification of vehicles depends on different criteria for toll rate collection. Most criteria involve GVW, height, number of axles, number of wheels, emissions, and so forth. The different vehicle classifications are given in Table 6. The toll rate in India is based on GVW, number of axles, and number of passenger seats. Five vehicle categories were given in the principal rules (NHFR-2008), revised to six in NHFR-2011. In Serbia, a total of four different vehicle classes are distinguished for toll taxes ( 48 ): motorcycles, three-wheelers, “quads,” and vans and vans with trailers. GVW is also considered for vans and vans with trailers with a limiting value of 3,500 kg. The other factors considered are the total height and the number of axles. France has levied taxes for five different vehicle classes based on GVW, number of axles, and height of vehicle ( 49 ). Unlike Serbia, in France, intermediate vehicles, buses, HGVs, motorcycles, tricycles, and light vehicles are considered for toll taxes. Italy, Indonesia, and United Kingdom (UK) also have toll taxes for five vehicle classes ( 50 – 52 ), mostly depending on the number of axles instead of GVW. Sri Lanka has the fewest vehicle classes of all, that is, three classes. They are based on the number of axles and wheels and are only levied for buses, trucks, and lorries, not for cars and motorcycles( 53 ). In Belarus, the vehicle classes are based on the number of axles and GVW ( 54 ). Lastly, Malaysia has seven vehicle classes depending on the number of axles ( 55 ). Germany is unique in that the toll rates laid down by the German Federal Trunk Road Toll Act depend on the distance traveled, given in cents per kilometer, which include emission cost, infrastructure cost, and noise pollution cost. The tolls are levied as a lump sum amount of noise pollution cost, but the toll rate for infrastructure cost depends on the number of axles and GVW. The vehicles are divided into six major emission categories as Class A (Euro-6), Class B (Euro-5), Class C (Euro-4 and Euro-3 + PRC-2), Class D (Euro-3, Euro-2 + PRC-1), Class E (Euro-2), and Class F (Euro-1, Euro-0). PRC (Particulate Reduction Classes) are retrofitting standards to lower particulate emissions. The toll rates are higher for vehicles in Class F than those in Class A with the same axle load and wheels. This is because the Class F emission vehicles are older and create more emissions than Class A.

Table 6.

Comparison of Vehicle Classes Considered for Toll Rate

Vehicle categorization based on	Class-1	Class-2	Class-3	Class-4	Class-5	Class-6	Class-7	Reference
1. India
Gross vehicle weight (GVW)	GVW <7,500 kg	GVW 7,500–12,000 kg	GVW 12,000–20,000 kg	GVW20,000–25,000 kg	GVW 25,000–60,000 kg	GVW >60,000 kg	NA	( 41 )
Passenger carrying capacity	12 + 1 driver	More than 12 but less than 32 + 1 driver	More than 32 + 1 driver	NA	NA	NA
Number of axles	2	2	2	3	3–6	7 or more
Vehicles included	Car, jeep, van, or light motor vehicle	Light commercial vehicle, light goods vehicle, or minibus	Bus or truck	Three-axle commercial vehicles	Heavy construction machinery, earth moving equipment, or multi axle vehicle	Oversized vehicle
2. Serbia
Number of axles (wheels)	NA	2	2	2 and 3	4 or more (including trailer)	NA	NA	( 48 )
Vehicle height at the first axle, measured vertically from the pavement	NA	≤1.3 m	≤1.3 m	>1.3 m (vans)	>1.3 m
Total height of vehicle	NA	≤1.9 m	≤1.9 m (van with trailer) >1.9 m (Van)	>1.9 m (both)	NA
GVW	NA	≤3,500 kg	≤3,500 kg	>3,500 kg (vans) ≤3,500 kg (vans with trailer)	>3,500 kg
Vehicles included	Motor vehicles with the characteristics of motorcycles, three-wheelers and quads	Vans	Vans and vans with trailer	Vans and vans with trailer	NA
3. France
Total height of the vehicle	Less than 2 m	2–3 m	3 m or more	4 m or more	NA	NA	NA	( 49 )
GVW* (for trains, towing vehicle only)	≤3,500 kg	≤3,500 kg	>3,500 kg	>3,500 kg	NA
Number of axles	NA	NA	2	3 or more	NA
Vehicles included	Light vehicles	Intermediate vehicles	HGV or bus with two axles	HGV or bus	Motorcycle, motorcycle with sidecar, tricycle
4. Germany
Emission class of vehicle	Euro 6	Euro 5, EEV-1	Euro 4, Euro 3 + with particulate reduction class (PRC) 2 *	Euro 3, Euro 2 + with particulate reduction class 1 *	Euro 2	Euro 1, Euro 0	NA	( 56 )
GVW	7,500–11,990 kg	12,000–18,000 kg	>18,000 kg	>18,000 kg	NA	NA
Number of axles	2	2	3	4	NA	NA
5. Italy
Number of axles	2	2	3	4	5 or more	NA	NA	( 50 )
Total height of the vehicle	≤1.3 m	>1.3 m	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	( 50 )
6. UK
Number of wheels	2 or less	4 or more	4 or more	4 or more	4 or more	NA	NA	( 51 )
Number of axles	NA	2	More than 2	2	More than 2, less than 6
Total height of the vehicle	Under 1.3 m	Under 1.3 m	Under 1.3 m	1.3 m or over	1.3 m or over
7. Sri Lanka
Number of axles	2	2	>2	NA	NA	NA	NA	( 53 )
Number of wheels	4	6	NA	NA	NA
Vehicle included	NA	Buses, lorries and trucks	Combination buses and trucks and lorries	NA	NA
8. Belarus
Number of axles	2	2	3	4	NA	NA	NA	( 54 )
GVW	≤3,500 kg	>3,500 kg	>3,500 kg	>3,500 kg		NA	NA	( 54 )
9. Indonesia
Number of axles	2	2	3	4	5 or more	NA	NA	( 52 )
Vehicles included	Sedan, jeep, pickup truck, small truck and bus	Truck	Truck	Truck	Truck	NA	NA	( 52 )
10. Malaysia
Number of axles	2	2	2	2	3	4	5 or more	( 55 )
Number of wheels	NA	NA	4	5 or 6	NA	NA	NA
Vehicles included	Motorcycles	Motorcycles with sidecars commercial vehicles having 3 wheels car inclusive station wagon	Lorry, van, and bus	Lorry, van, and bus	Bus and truck	NA	NA

Note: HGV = heavy goods vehicle; NA = not available.

Particulate reduction classes are retrofitting standards to lower particular emissions.

In summary, France, UK, Belarus, Malaysia, and other countries use as criteria the number of wheels and axles, the overall height of vehicles, and GVW. In countries such as Serbia, France, and Malaysia, tolls are applied to motorcycles and motorcycles with sidecars, too, which is not the case in India, Germany, Sri Lanka, UK, Belarus, and Italy. In Germany, the toll rates are applied to vehicle categories with a GVW of more than 7,500 kg (7.5 tons). This shows the difference between the developed and developing countries in the collection of tolls.

Toll rates that depend on the number of axles or GVW are set on the basis of the damage to the tolled facility, that is, damage to the highways and parts of highways caused by vehicles of different sizes while driving on them. On average, there are five different classes. In Malaysia, vehicles are classified into seven classes according to the number of axles.

Not only the toll rates but also the toll collection methodology is varied. Tolls are collected by MTC, automatic coin machines, ETC, managed lanes, high occupancy toll lanes, and new congestion pricing.

Comparison of Base Toll Rates

Toll roads are developed for better facilities and financed by the collection of tolls. The sustainable toll sections should provide users with faster and more affordable services. The toll revenues thus consist of the operation and maintenance costs and, in some cases, debt payments.

Figure 8 compares Indian base toll rates with those of other developed and developing countries. Figure 8, a and b , show the comparison of the base toll rate per kilometer ($/km) for cars and heavy vehicles, respectively. It can be seen that the base toll rates ($/km) for India are low compared with other countries. Here, the base toll rates of different countries and some US states are taken from different references. The basis of comparing the base toll rates is a meta-analysis of base toll rates considering both developed and developing nations. It can be seen that the developed nations have higher toll rates than India for both vehicle classes. These differences can be attributed to differences in vehicle growth rates and traffic densities. This analysis gives us an idea of the maximum capping possible for toll rates. The average base toll rate in India for a car is $ 0.014/km and for trucks $ 0.078/km. In Vietnam, another developing country, the base toll rate for a car is about 3.20 times that of India. Moreover, the highest base toll rates per kilometer for a car are observed for Spain ($ 0.1064/km), followed by Pennsylvania turnpikes ($ 0.0932/km) ( 57 ). These rates are about 7.60 and 6.65 times those of Indian base toll rates. Further, it is observed from Figure 8 that the base toll rates are different for ETC and MTC. The base toll rates using the ETC system are found to be low compared with the MTC system. This is because of the benefits obtained from the ETC system with decreased processing time and thus less delay. Further, it also shows the different toll rates for cash payments and ETC, which can be further taken for developing countries like India for collection of tolls, and also for promoting the ETC payment system.

Figure 8b shows the Indian base toll rates per kilometer for heavy vehicles compared with those of different countries and US state toll roads. The highest base toll rates for heavy vehicles are observed in the Philippines ($ 0.52/km). The average base toll rate per kilometer is $ 0.1722/km. Further, it is seen that in Germany, the base toll rates per kilometer are higher for vehicles in Class F.

Though the base toll rates in India are lower than in developed countries, the revenue generation is greater because of high road traffic volumes in India. The total registered vehicles in India grew at a compound annual growth rate of 9.9% between 2006 and 2016 ( 58 ). This increase in growth rate and vehicle ownership affects the increasing traffic on roads. India is now in the second position globally in the extent of its road network, with more than 58.97 lakh (5,897,000) km of roads. India has approximately 4.87 km of roads per 1,000 people ( 59 ). The length of NHs saw an annual growth rate of 7.3% from 2010/11 to 2015/16. In other developing countries, such as Vietnam, with lower traffic densities and higher ownership of motorcycles, the toll rates are higher compared with India ( 60 ). Since user fees will be one of the major sources of revenue for the sustainable development of expressways, whether by the government directly or through PPP projects, it will be important to study the toll setting carefully to ensure that the tolls are set at the desirable rate that balances socioeconomic considerations with financial returns.

Conclusion and Way Forward

Tolling is a way of revenue generation and of controlling congestion and environmental pollution. In the present study, the toll rate policies are studied for India and for other countries. The toll policies in India have been applied since 1964, and were revised in 2008 and again in 2011. Our review reveals the toll rates per kilometer for different vehicle classes (based on GVW) in different conditions, such as cost of construction, cost of bridges, tunnels, bypasses, overloading, discounts for local users, and so forth. The toll rates, as explained, depend on the construction cost and thus the ROI totally depends on the toll rate levied. As per the National Highway Regulation of Fees (NHFR), only construction costs are considered for tolls. The other factors are discounts and fines for local travelers and overloaded vehicles. The toll rates given in NHFR are for dedicated toll roads. When parallel roads are available, they are generally free to use. Generally, the cost of construction is recovered from the toll taxes within a stipulated time period. If the cost of construction is not recovered within that period, then GOI has provision to increase the agreement period ( 61 ).

Moreover, the toll rates and vehicle categories depending on different factors are studied. It is found that in most countries tolls are collected in the form of infrastructural fees that depend on vehicle GVW and the number of wheels and axles. Only in Germany do tolls depend on air pollution, noise pollution, and infrastructural costs. Further, it is found that the toll rate decision depends on different criteria such as capital costs, concession length, the average cost of tolls in nearby toll stations already in operation, operational and maintenance costs, rate of return, environmental costs, the value of time assumption, and even on the concessionaire’s wishes.

The above literature review presents the following research gaps for further study in Indian conditions.

The base toll rates are given based on vehicle class, but the procedure to calculate the base rates is not mentioned. The literature suggests that different criteria should be considered for determining the base toll rates ( 50 , 52 , 56 , 62 ). Further, the value of time and willingness to pay the toll should also be considered for deciding base toll rates ( 63 ).

Further, in India, MoRTH has decided that the increment in toll rates per year is linked with WPI. Such continuous increases in toll rates might not always be acceptable to users, especially when they are not linked to service levels. Further, unavoidable circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic affect the WPI and thus finally affect toll collection ( 64 ).

The toll rates are applied differently for ETC and cash users in developed countries. Such policies of different toll rates are to be developed for Indian conditions.

The study conducted for variable pricing for the Lee County project in Florida (applied congestion pricing on selected toll roads) found a travel time saving (TTS) of about 8.80 to 13.30% ( 65 ), where the TTS costs were about $40,000 on average per year. Burris et al. ( 66 ) studied the willingness to pay for HOV (high occupancy vehicles), and they found that mean TTS varied between 1.05 and 1.16 min for using express lanes. The authors found that the value of time varies between $49 per hour and $54 per hour, according to revealed preference survey. Tseng et al. ( 67 ) studied the effect of ETC lanes instead of MTC lanes on TTS and carbon emissions saving. They found that with the implementation of ETC, about 60.10% of total travel time was saved. Along with the travel time, the authors found that emissions reduced by 12.40% by switching from cash to ETC payment. Janson and Levinson ( 68 ) found that TTS varied from 2.40 s/km to 6.70 s/km with the use of HOV lanes. Interestingly, they found that with increase in price, demand also increased. Abou-Senna ( 69 ) found, with the help of dynamic feedback assignments, users experienced TTS of about 10% to 16%. Abou-Senna concluded that time, distance, and tolls are important parameters considered by users for choosing a particular link. Rouhani and Niemeier ( 70 ) concluded that spatially variable tolls are more effective in TTS than flat tolls. They found that implementation of spatially variable tolls resulted in TTS of 18% to 1,083%. Further, they concluded that the flow dependent pricing should be in respect to the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio. Casady et al. ( 71 ) carried out a benefit-cost analysis of seven US projects and concluded that the motorist could save about 4 to 5 min per trip with the use of managed lanes. They also found that a TTS of 1 to 2 min in general purpose lanes as the best case scenario. Thus, in summary, it can be said that the policies of lane base pricing such as HOV, High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes, zonal and cordon pricing, and time of day pricing are found to be effective for TTS, increasing road safety, and reducing environmental pollution. Such policies are not yet applied in India and arguably they should be applied to achieve traffic management and congestion mitigation for Indian conditions.

The toll rate policies of other countries that consist of environmental effects such as air and noise pollution for charging vehicles, should be considered in the Indian context. Toll rates should be applied based on not only infrastructural costs but also emission and noise pollution costs.

The toll rates for State Highways in India vary from one state to another depending on rates gazetted by the government of each particular state. Further, the toll rates vary for roads according to size: single-, double-, intermediate-, and four-lane and more ( 72 ). Uniformity should be maintained throughout the country, and it can be done by developing a framework for toll determination for Indian conditions.

India is a developing country, and GOI tries to attract funding from different agencies through PPP projects. Further, with increasing urbanization and population, the pollution levels of Indian cities have crossed the threshold values. The pollution at toll plazas includes high proportions of carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, and so forth. The pollution level at the toll plazas is high and may create health issues for frequent drivers and tollbooth workers ( 73 , 74 ). To deal with such congestion, charging is an efficient tool used in developed countries to optimize social welfare and curtail emission levels ( 75 ). Such policies are not in practice in India and can be taken for dealing with financial and environmental issues. Further, road safety is an important highway issue; converting traditional toll plazas to all ETC lanes can increase the safety of operations ( 76 ). Abuzwidah and Abdel-Aty ( 76 ) found that by converting hybrid toll plazas to all electronic lanes decreased total crashes by 20%. Additionally, PPP projects and highway concessions can also be used to increase road safety ( 77 ). Gordin et al. ( 78 ) also found that open road tolling (ORT) helped to reduce crashes by 70%. Practices such as ORT can be implemented for TTS and enhanced safety ( 68 , 78 , 79 ).

A meta-analysis factor adjustment of GVW, toll rate adjustments by country, vehicle class, and other variables would be a good avenue to explore further, including purchasing power parity adjustments.

Footnotes

Author Contributions

The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: C. Bari, A. Dhamaniya, S. Chandra; data collection: C. Bari, A. Dhamaniya, S. Chandra; analysis and interpretation of results: C. Bari, A. Dhamaniya, S. Chandra; draft manuscript preparation: C. Bari, A. Dhamaniya, S. Chandra. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research has been partly funded by the DST-DAAD project “Warrants for Automation of Toll Plazas Under Mixed Traffic Conditions.” (Project number: - DST/INT/DAAD/P-14/2020). The present study is a part of the project.

ORCID iDs

Chintaman Bari

Ashish Dhamaniya

References

Persad

Walton

C. M.

Hussain

Toll Collection Technology and Best Practices. Project 0-5217: Vehicle/License Plate Identification for Toll Collection Applications. Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, 2007, pp. 1–38.

Asian Development Bank (ADB). Public-Private Partnership Handbook. Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong, Philippines, 2008.

UNESCAP. A Guidebook on Public-Private Partnership Projects in Infrastructure. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511974403.

Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in Infrastructure Projects Public Auditing Guidelines. Comptroller and Auditor General of India, New Delhi, 2009.

Jia

Tian

Z. Z.

Toll Rates and Related Factors on China’s Highways. Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2002. 1812: 22–26.

Chu

Tsai

Road Pricing Models with Maintenance Cost. Transportation, Vol. 31, 2004, pp. 457–477.

Iseki

An Empirical Analysis of the Pricing Structure of Toll Facilities Based on Social Costs of Driving by Vehicle Class and Its Effects on Traffic, Toll Revenue, Emission, and ESAL. 93rd Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2013, pp. 1–24.

Davis

R. W.

III . U.S. Toll Roads Since 1950 Trends in Toll Rates per Mile Compared with Inflation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2014. 2450: 144–151.

Albalate

Bel

Fageda

Privatization and Regulatory Reform of Toll Motorways in Europe. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2009, pp. 295–318.

10.

HPTE Board. Toll Rate Setting and Adjustment. High Performance Transportation Enterprise, Colorado, February, 2019.

11.

Vajdic

Mladenovic

Queiroz

Estimating Minimum Toll Rates in Public Private Partnerships. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 48, 2012, pp. 3400–3407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1304.

12.

Vajdic

Mladenovic

Queiroz

Probabilistic Approach to Evaluate Acceptable Toll Rates in Road Concessions. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2017. 2670: 9–15.

13.

David

The Japanese Experience with Highway Development. Journal of Infrastructure Development, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2014, pp. 17–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0974930614543044.

14.

Ministry of Shipping Road Transport and Highways. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Rules. Controller of Publications, Delhi, December, 2008, pp. 1–28.

15.

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). Annual Report. Government of India, New Delhi, 2019.

16.

MoRTH. Density Distribution of National Highways. Government of India, New Delhi, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.125084; https://morth.nic.in/sites/default/files/Density_1.pdf.

17.

Bari

C. S.

Navandar

Y. V.

Dhamaniya

Delay Modelling at the Manually Operated Toll Plazas Under Mixed Traffic Conditions. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology, Vol. 11, 2022, pp. 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2020.10.001.

18.

Bari

C. S.

Chopde

Dhamaniya

Lane Choice Behavior at Toll Plaza Under Mixed Traffic Conditions Using TODIM Method: A Case Study. Transportation in Developing Economies, Vol. 8, 2022.

19.

Bari

C. S.

Chandra

Dhamaniya

Arkatkar

Navandar

Y. V.

Service Time Variability at Manual Operated Tollbooths Under Mixed Traffic Environment: Towards Level-of-Service Thresholds. Transport Policy, Vol. 106, 2021, pp. 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.03.018.

20.

Bari

C. S.

Chandra

Dhamaniya

Service Headway Distribution Analysis of FASTag Lanes Under Mixed Traffic Conditions. Physica A, Vol. 604, 2022, p. 127904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2022.127904.

21.

Bari

C. S.

Chandra

Dhamaniya

Development of Toll Equivalency Factors for FASTag Lanes Under Mixed Traffic Conditions. Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2023. 2677: 829–845.

22.

Ministry of Commerce and Industry. National Infrastructure Pipeline. https://indiainvestmentgrid.gov.in/national-infrastructure-pipeline. Accessed December 7, 2022.

23.

Kearney. Harnessing the Opportunities in India’s Transportation Infrastructure. https://www.kearney.com/infrastructure/article/-/insights/harnessing-the-opportunities-in-india-s-transportation-infrastructure. Accessed December 7, 2022.

24.

Ministry of Finance Corporate Affairs and Information & Broadcasting. The National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and Development (NBFID) Bill, 2021. NBFID Bill. https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-national-bank-for-financing-infrastructure-and-development-bill-2021. Accessed December 7, 2022.

25.

North Eastern Council Government of India. Transport and Communication. https://necouncil.gov.in/nec-project-sector/transport-and-communication. Accessed December 7, 2022.

26.

Khullar

Financing Road Infrastructure. Invest India. https://www.investindia.gov.in/team-india-blogs/financing-road-infrastructure. Accessed December 7, 2022.

27.

Roads and Highways. Invest India. https://www.investindia.gov.in/sector/roads-highways. Accessed December 7, 2022.

28.

Saluja

NHAI to Raise over Rs 85k Crore via Asset Recycling: Nitin Gadkari. The EconomicTimes, 1. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/infrastructure/nhai-to-raise-over-rs-85k-crore-via-asset-recycling-nitin-gadkari/articleshow/71001945.cms?from=mdr. Accessed December 7, 2022.

29.

MoRTH. TOT: Monetization of Public Funded, Operational National Highway Projects. https://morth.nic.in/standard-tot-documents#:~:text=InTOTModel%2Ctheright,lump-sumamounttoNHAI. Accessed December 7, 2022.

30.

MoRTH. Public Private Partnership in National Highways: Model Concession Agreement. Government of India, New Delhi, 2020.

31.

National Highway Authority of India (NHAI). Public Private Partnership in Tolling, Operation, Maintenance & Transfer of Highways. Model Concession Agreement. October, 2017, Government of India, New Delhi.

32.

MoRTH. Guidelines for Ensuring Provisions for the Highway Proects Being Undertaken on Operation, Maintenance and Transfer (OMT) Basis for Issuing Fee Notification. Office Memorandum, June 7, 2013, Government of India, New Delhi.

33.

UN-OHRLLS. Financing Infrastructure in the Transport Sector in Landlocked Developing Countries: Trends, Challenges & Opportunities. UN-OHRLLS, New York, 2017.

34.

Central Government. The National Highways (Temporary Bridges) Rules, 1964. Gazette of India, New Delhi, 1964, pp. 1–3.

35.

Central Government. The National Highways (Rate of Fee) Rules, 1997. Gazette of India, New Delhi, 1997, pp. 1–2.

36.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. September, 2018, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–3.

37.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. May, 2018, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–2.

38.

VITRANSS 2. Appendix: ITS Master Plan. The Comprehensive Study on the Sustainable Development of Transportation System in Vietnam (VITRANSS 2), Japan Inernational Cooperation Agency (JICA) Ministry of Transport, Vietnam, 2008, pp. 2–21.

39.

Zhang

Current State and Development of Motorway Toll Collection System in China. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 7, 2009, pp. 1–10.

40.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. December, 2010, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–7.

41.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Second Amendment Rules. October, 2011, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–2.

42.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. Controller of Publications, Delhi, 2013, pp. 1–4.

43.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. Controller of Publications, Delhi, 2014, pp. 1–2.

44.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Second Amendment Rules. Controller of Publications, Delhi, 2014, pp. 1–2.

45.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. December, 2016, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–2.

46.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection) Amendment Rules. March, 2017, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–2.

47.

MoRTH. The Gazette of India. The National Highways Fee (Determination of Rates and Collection), Amendment Rules. May, 2020, Controller of Publications, Delhi, pp. 1–2.

48.

Public Enterprise Roads of Serbia. Calculate Toll Rate on Desired Section. https://www.putevi-srbije.rs/index.php/en/kategorizacija-vozila-cenovnik-putarine-2. Accessed June 15, 2020.

49.

tolls.eu. Motorway Tolls France. https://www.tolls.eu/france. Accessed June 15, 2020.

50.

tolls.eu. Motorway Tolls Italy. https://www.tolls.eu/italy. Accessed June 15, 2020.

51.

tolls.eu. Motorway Tolls United Kingdom. https://www.tolls.eu/united-kingdom; https://www.m6toll.co.uk/pricing/#pricing-guides. Accessed June 16, 2020.

52.

ITS Master Plan. The Comprehensive Study on the Sustainable Development of Transportation System in Vietnam (VITRANSS 2). https://openjicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/12000048_04.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2020.

53.

Sri Lanka Minister of Roads and Highways. The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. http://www.exway.rda.gov.lk/expressway/resources/pdf/2166-49_E.pdf. Accessed June 15, 2020.

54.

Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Belarus. Electronic Toll Collection System “BelToll.”Embassy of the Republic of the Belarus in Socialist Republic of Vietnam. https://vietnam.mfa.gov.by/en/embassy/news/c38dacc8c9e36f12.html. Accessed June 16, 2020.

55.

PLUS. Vehicle Classes. https://www.plus.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=42&Itemid=148&lang=en. Accessed June 16, 2020.

56.

tolls.eu. Motorway Tolls Germany. https://www.tolls.eu/germany. Accessed June 15, 2020.

57.

MnDOT. Minnesota Tolling Study Report Modern Tolling Practices and Policy Considerations. The Minnesota Department of Transportation, January, 2018, pp. 1–106.

58.

MoRTH. Road Transport Year Book (2015-16). Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways Transport Research Wing, New Delhi.

59.

MoRTH. Basic Road Statics of India 2016-17. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, New Delhi, 2019.

60.

EDS. The World Bank Analytical and Advisory Activity Report. Expressway Development Strategy for Vietnam, December, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1179/136485908X337463; https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/zh/199241468329682265/pdf/694780ESW0P0960Vietnam0201090final.pdf.

61.

Trial Balance Private Sector Financing for Road Projects in India. Asian Development Bank, Mandaluyong, Philippines, 2015.

62.

Government Notifications. The Gazette of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. The National Thoroughfares Act, No. 40 of 20008. March, 2020, pp. 1–4. http://www.rda.gov.lk/supported/aboutrda/RDA%20act.pdf.

63.

Sinha

Toll Road Financing. Session on Finance, 2023. https://ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/files/documents/toolkits/Cross-Border-Infrastructure-Toolkit/Cross-Border%20Compilation%20ver%2029%20Jan%2007/Session%202%20-%20Finance/Finance_05%20Toll%20Road%20Financing%20-%2029%20Jan%2007.pdf.

64.

https://www.Outlookindia.Com/Newsscroll/Detrimental-Impact-of-Covid2019-on-Economy-to-Affect-Transport-Infra-Icra/1797096. Accessed April 30, 2021.

65.

Burris

M. W.

Application of Variable Tolls on Congested Toll Road. Journal of Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 129, No. 4, 2003, pp. 354–361. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2003)129:4(354).

66.

Burris

Nelson

Kelly

Gupta

Cho

Willingness to Pay for High-Occupancy Toll Lanes: Empirical Analysis from I-15 and I-394. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012. 2297: 47–55.

67.

Tseng

P. H.

Lin

D. Y.

Chien

Investigating the Impact of Highway Electronic Toll Collection to the External Cost: A Case Study in Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 86, 2014, pp. 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.10.019.

68.

Janson

Levinson

HOT or Not Driver Elasticity to Price on the MnPASS HOT Lanes. Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 44, No. 1, 2014, pp. 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2014.04.008.

69.

Abou-Senna

Congestion Pricing Strategies to Investigate the Potential of Route Diversion on Toll Facilities Using En-Route Guidance. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), Vol. 3, No. 1, 2016, pp. 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2016.01.003.

70.

Rouhani

O. M.

Niemeier

Flat Versus Spatially Variable Tolling: A Case Study in Fresno, California. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 37, 2014, pp. 10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.03.017.

71.

Casady

C. B.

Gómez-Ibáñez

J. A.

Schwimmer

Toll-Managed Lanes: A Simplified Benefit-Cost Analysis of Seven US Projects. Transport Policy, Vol. 89, 2020, pp. 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.02.001.

72.

Works Department. The Orissa Gazette. Section 13 of the Orissa State Roads Tolls Act, 2010 (Orissa Act 6 of 2010). June, 2011, Director of Printing, Stationery and Publication, Cuttack, India, pp. 1–9.

73.

Bari

C. S.

Navandar

Y. V.

Dhamaniya

Vehicular Emission Modeling at Toll Plaza Using Performance Box Data. Journal of Hazardous, Toxic, and Radioactive Waste, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2020, pp. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153-5515.0000550.

74.

Sehgal

Suresh

Sharma

V. P.

Gautam

S. K.

Assessment of Outdoor Workers’ Exposure to Air Pollution in Delhi (India). International Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 72, No. 1, 2015, pp. 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2014.965937.

75.

Domon

Hirota

Kono

Managi

Matsuki

The Long-Run Effects of Congestion Tolls, Carbon Tax, and Land Use Regulations on Urban CO₂ Emissions. Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 92, 2022, p. 103750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2021.103750.

76.

Abuzwidah

Abdel-Aty

Safety Assessment of the Conversion of Toll Plazas to All-Electronic Toll Collection System. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 80, 2015, pp. 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.03.039.

77.

Alves

P. J.

Emanuel

Pereira

R. H. M.

Highway Concessions and Road Safety: Evidence from Brazil. Research in Transportation Economics, Vol. 90, 2021, p. 101118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2021.101118.

78.

Gordin

Klodzinski

Santos

Safety Benefits from Deployment of Open Road Tolling for Main-Line Toll Plazas in Florida. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2011. 2229: 85–92.

79.

Yang

Ozbay

Bartin

Effects of Open Road Tolling on Safety Performance of Freeway Mainline Toll Plazas. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2012. 2324: 101–109.