Ownership structure and cost efficiency: A study of publicly owned passenger-bus transportation companies in India

Bhattacharyya, Arunava; Kumbhakar, Subal C.; Bhattacharyya, Anjana

doi:10.1007/bf01073494

Cited by 50 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also in earlier studies has it been indicated that it is reasonable to divide between different types of public ownership (e.g. Bhattacharyya et al, 1995).…”

Section: Ownership Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Competitive tendering and structural changes: An example from the bus industry

Mathisen

Solvoll

2008

Transport Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article evaluates the structural changes that have taken place in the Norwegian bus industry after competitive tendering was introduced in 1994 in order to show that this procurement mechanism implies more than just efficiency gains. In a long-term view the many takeovers and increasing ownership links among the transport companies may weaken the competitive element of tendering and lead to an unwanted market situation with only a limited number of suppliers. To maintain market competition, the transport authorities should differentiate their procurement strategy and use competitive tendering together with other public procurement approaches.2

show abstract

“…Also in earlier studies has it been indicated that it is reasonable to divide between different types of public ownership (e.g. Bhattacharyya et al, 1995).…”

Section: Ownership Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Competitive tendering and structural changes: An example from the bus industry

Mathisen

Solvoll

2008

Transport Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This paper uses the true random effects (TRE) model proposed by Greene (2005), who extends conventional models by including an additional random intercept which captures unobserved heterogeneity. This model can be illustrated as we parameterize the standard deviation of the one-sided inefficiency term such that after Bhattacharyya et al (1995).…”

Section: Econometric Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…the half-normal error term. This approach is proposed by Bhattacharyya et al (1995) and Hadri et al (2003) who suggest among others, to assign factors which are under the control of firms (managerial determinants) to the inefficiency term. 9 This aligns with Kerstens (1996) who notes that subsidies influence efficiency, but not the transformation of inputs to outputs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost Efficiency and Subsidization in German Local Public Bus Transit

Nieswand

Walter²

2010

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract Subsidies are considered important means to facilitate the provision of public transit, yet the empirical evidence implies that they can have harming effects on costs and possibly also on operators' performance. This paper examines the impacts of deficit-balancing subsidies on the cost inefficiency of local public bus companies in Germany, where a complex system allocates ample financial support. Our empirical analysis relies on a unique dataset of 33 companies observed over a period of up to twelve years for a total of 231 observations. We employ a stochastic frontier cost function for panel data that account for unobserved heterogeneity and provide firm-specific, time-varying inefficiency estimates. Further, we allow variations in the optimal technology by randomizing some cost functions' coefficients in one of our model specifications. Subsidies directly enter the inefficiency function as a heteroscedastic variable. We find a positive effect of subsidies on the standard deviation of inefficiency, which implies that the range of companies' inefficiency increases with the level of subsidies relative to total costs. However, we also find that non-subsidized firms perform better in terms of cost efficiency. Terms of use: Documents in JEL Codes: C13, D24, L92

show abstract

“…The results show that technical inefficiency effects tend to be significantly influenced by the factors measuring environmental degradation and irrigation infrastructure. More influential contributions are due to Kalirajan and Shand (1989) [2], Kalirajan and Flinn (1983) [3], Ali and Flinn (1989) [4], Coelli and Battese (1996) [5], Heshmati and Kumbhakar (1997) [6] and Kumbhakar and Bhattacharyya (1992) [7), Bagi and Huang (1983) [8] and Bhattacharyya, Kumbhakar and Bhattacharyya (1995) [9]. This paper is written in the following four sections.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Technical Efficiency of Paddy Cultivators: A Study of Hailakandi District in Assam

Gupta¹

2013

IOSR-JHSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ownership structure and cost efficiency: A study of publicly owned passenger-bus transportation companies in India

Cited by 50 publications

References 12 publications

Competitive tendering and structural changes: An example from the bus industry

Competitive tendering and structural changes: An example from the bus industry

Cost Efficiency and Subsidization in German Local Public Bus Transit

Determinants of Technical Efficiency of Paddy Cultivators: A Study of Hailakandi District in Assam

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About