Competition Issues in Privatisation: Lessons for the Railways

Adamson, Mike; Jones, W.S.; Pratt, Robin

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-11439-9_4

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As Adamson et al (1991) note,`co-ordination [is] inherent in the timetabling process, which in practical terms is impossible to replicate through market mechanisms' . While one might object in principle to such an absolute rejection of market forces in this area, practical experience in working a competition-orientated process suggests that train planning is not easily adapted to work within a competitive environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of railway privatization on train planning: a case study of the UK

Watson¹

2001

Transport Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The restructuring of the UK railway industry in preparation for privatization led to major changes being made to train planning processes. Subsequent train planning problems, some of which became very public, suggest that something went seriously wrong during the development or implementation of these revised processes. This paper investigates what went wrong and why, ® nding that several factors were involved, including the objectives the new processes were expected to meet and the software that was being developed to support the new processes. There are clear lessons to be learnt from the UK experience to inform debate on future railway restructuring initiatives.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of railway privatization on train planning: a case study of the UK

Watson¹

2001

Transport Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The firms' profit margins are higher than in a perfect situation due to imperfect conduct. Deregulation is supposed to alter the structure in a direction towards perfect market conditions, resulting in increased intensity in competition, which leads to an effective resource allocation (Adamson, Jones, and Pratt, 1991;Banister, 1990;Kay and Vickers, 1988), and lower prices (Backman, 1981).…”

Section: Theoretical Assumptions Underlying Decisions On Deregulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural conditions for static and dynamic competition after deregulation

Bengtsson

Marell

2006

Competitiveness Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the 1980’s and 1990’s deregulation had become the “recipe” for many countries’ economies to obtain increased efficiency and lower prices. Yet many empirical and theoretical studies of deregulation show that expectations rarely became fulfilled. The purpose of this paper is to develop the model of competition by introducing static and dynamic competition, which has different consequences for market performance. We claim that the development of static and/or dynamic competition post deregulation can be explained by structural conditions, both regarding entry barriers and customer influence. Four different competitive conducts are identified based on an explorative study of four deregulated industries: static, dynamic, hyper, and unheated competition.

show abstract

“…(Adamson et al, 1991) To resolve some of these problems, a process for simultaneously co-ordinating schedules is required. Hence all scarce capacity which critically affccted other stress points on the network would have to be simultaneously traded and subsequently operated in a co-ordinated manner to ensure efficient competition.…”

Section: Establishing a Competitive Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Train Service Co‐ordination in a Competitive Market

Starkie¹

1993

Fiscal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competition Issues in Privatisation: Lessons for the Railways

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

The effect of railway privatization on train planning: a case study of the UK

The effect of railway privatization on train planning: a case study of the UK

Structural conditions for static and dynamic competition after deregulation

Train Service Co‐ordination in a Competitive Market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About