Liberalization of Network Industries in the European Union: Evolving Policy Issues

Finger, Matthias; Laperrouza, Marc

doi:10.4337/9780857930477.00027

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The existence of markets in certain segments (those open to competition) may help to reach certain reform objectives such as the reduction of government subsidies, but it makes the governance of the entire system more complex because competitive and non-competitive markets do not always co-exist easily. As a result, railway markets and policy-making have evolved hand-in-hand during liberalisation processes (Finger and Laperrouza 2011). Over time, the railway stakeholders (policy-makers, operators, infrastructure managers and customers) have learnt that markets only work up to a certain point in network industries and in railways in particular.…”

Section: Marc Laperrouzamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In spite of the heterogeneous nature of European railway market structures, over time, the emphasis on market creation has given way to the management of these markets and by extension to the management of competition (Finger and Laperrouza 2011). For instance, in the first phase of reforms during the 1990s, the European Commission placed a heavy emphasis on the introduction of competition in markets, on the creation of authorities in charge of regulating those markets as well as on determining network access pricing and slot allocation mechanisms.…”

Section: Comparison With Railway Market Reforms In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Politics of Marketising Asia

Carroll¹,

Jarvis²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Marc Laperrouzamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison With Railway Market Reforms In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics of Marketising Asia

Carroll¹,

Jarvis²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The sector‐specific regulators have particular jurisdiction over technological matters. Additionally, they supervise the provision of public services in their sectors (Finger and Laperrouza ).…”

Section: The Emergence Of Sector‐specific Regulatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the European Union, some SOEs have been privatized while others have remained under public ownership but have been exposed to competition, especially in the context of the European Commission's (EC's) liberalization agenda. However, reform has been uneven with regard to deregulation, privatization and competition (Bernier , Finger and Laperrouza , Clifton et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, privatization has tended to take place in the telecommunications and the air transport sectors, but has been much less dominant in electricity, railways and postal services. Overall, corporatization – that is, the transformation of a certain part of the public administration, which is typically an agency that provides a public service, into a shareholding company that is fully owned by the government – has been a much more widespread phenomenon (Finger and Laperrouza ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Yes, No, Maybe: The Ambiguous Relationships Between State‐owned Enterprises and the State

Rentsch

Finger

2015

Ann Public Coop Econ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liberalization and the introduction of sector-specific regulators has caused the position of State-owned enterprises (SOEs) of network industries to change not only within national economies, but also vis-à-vis their respective States. In response, many SOEs are pursuing ambiguous strategies, simultaneously seeking autonomy and State protection. In turn, States, particularly in their roles as owners and regulators, have to rethink their relationships with SOEs. In French, German, and Swiss cases, both States and SOEs have motives to simultaneously maintain a close ('yes') and a distant ('no') relationship with one another. SOEs favour a close relationship to secure subsidization for the provision of public services, reduce financial risks, and build trust within collaboration. However, a distant relationship is more suitable for entrepreneurial autonomy and getting rid of the universal service obligation. From the State's perspective, a close relationship is desirable to ensure the stable provision of universal services, control politically and strategically important sectors and critical infrastructures, implement policy objectives, meet geopolitical objectives, and receive dividends as return on investment. A distant relationship is required to avoid bearing risk and to ensure freedom in regulating the public sector.

show abstract

Embedding organizational arrangements: towards a general model

Ménard

2014

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceNotwithstanding its major contributions, the 'Williamsonian' branch of New Institutional Economics suffers from black holes that recent developments have pinpointed. Rather than taking stock, this paper capitalizes on some of these developments to look ahead. Section 2 provides a reminder of the hard core of transaction cost economics (TCE) with an emphasis on problems that TCE has allowed to identify, particularly the richness of organizational arrangements, an issue that needs further investigation. Section 3 discusses how to better understand the embedment of organizational arrangements in their institutional environment. The concept of 'meso-institutions' is introduced as a mean to capture mechanisms providing the needed interface. Section 4 considers another neglected dimension that requires renewed attention: the interactions of organizational arrangements with technologies that partially define their setting. This paper proposes a roadmap to explore this issue, based on an ongoing research developed around the key concept of 'criticality'. Section 5 concludes

show abstract

Liberalization of Network Industries in the European Union: Evolving Policy Issues

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

The Politics of Marketising Asia

The Politics of Marketising Asia

Yes, No, Maybe: The Ambiguous Relationships Between State‐owned Enterprises and the State

Embedding organizational arrangements: towards a general model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About