Question

你好，帮我翻译一下这段话吧。谢谢

The ‘cash out’ strategy examined in the research
presented here was a new concept for most of the
participants. This coupled with the fact that changes to
work place parking policy can incite significant resistance,
as shown in previous work (Farrell and O’Mahony, 2005)
and the fact that the answers are stated preference
responses, need to be taken into consideration when
reviewing the results. It would be important to estimate
the error generated in the results of this research due to the
survey instrument type by conducting a trial in a number of
employer locations.
It can be noted from the results that the policy of cash
outs might only influence part of the population. About
30% gave a high preference to giving up their space for a
year and receiving a payment in lieu. This particular result
was higher than the authors expected. On the basis of this
result, even allowing for the possibility of the halo effect,
the authors consider that the result is sufficiently positive to
suggest that ‘cash outs’, as part of an integrated package of
demand management measures, could deliver a reduction
in car use. Further work would require that (1) the survey be
conducted at a number of other employer locations in
the city (2) an employer run a ‘cash out’ scheme so that revealed preferences could be compared with the stated
preference results from this work and (3) public consulta-
tion be conducted by a transport agency in Dublin to
educate the public on these measures in a way that presents
them as giving positive benefits to the city.

Answer 1

在此项调查中提到的现金支付策略对于大多数参与者来说是一个全新的概念。与之伴随的事实就是工作场所停车政策的改变会激起员工的强烈抵制，正如之前2005年发表的《法雷尔与欧·马赫尼》的结果那样，而且在回顾调查结果时，优先反应的回答所阐明的事实需要考虑在内。通过在若干工作场所实施一项试验，来评估由于调查仪器类型导致调查结果出现的偏差是很重要的。从调查结果可以注意到现金支付政策只会影响一部分人。大约30%的人比较乐意一年之内不去占用停车场地，并因此得到一笔钱。这个特殊的结果比作者的预期值要高。在这一结果的基础上，尽管有可能产生连锁反应，作者认为这一结果已足够充分证明作为需求管理对策重要组成部分，现金支出策略能够减少车辆的使用量。进一步工作需要做的是：(1)在同一城市的其他若干工作场所进行调查(2)老板实施现金支付制度，以便将透露出的首选项和从此项工作中得出的规定选项进行比较。（3）都柏林一交通部门进行公众咨询，在某种程度上教育大众这些措施是对城市有积极意义的。