The climate bonus, which was originally introduced according to the Climate Bonus homepage to promote climate-friendly behavior, is facing criticism. Robert Kalasek (SRF - TU Vienna) and the Austrian Association of Cities criticize that the distribution of funds is not effective. Instead of rewarding those who use environmentally friendly modes of transport, households with poor public transportation connections receive higher bonus payments. This leads to the individual costs resulting from the CO2 pricing being partially more than compensated based on the actual local conditions and individual behavior, thereby weakening the intended steering effect towards environmentally friendly mobility.
 

Inappropriate Criteria in Bonus Distribution
Furthermore, according to R. Kalasek, the appropriateness of the distinction based on the "Urban-Rural Typology" of Statistics Austria is being questioned. "If it were a concern of the legislator to provide a financial compensation to those population groups who, due to their place of residence, actually have inadequate public transport connections and therefore have no freedom of choice regarding mobility, then a direct link of the 'regional climate bonus' to the 'public transport quality class' of the respective location would be a more sensible criterion," says R. Kalasek. The public transport quality classes are available for every address in Austria. However, the distribution of the climate bonus takes place at the municipal level (or at the district level in Vienna) based on whether the address is in a more urban or rural municipality. "In determining the amount of the climate bonus, no differentiation is made along climate protection goals or based on actual spatial conditions," R. Kalasek explains.

You can find the complete press release on the climate bonus here, opens an external URL in a new window.