IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v22y2002i03p271-297_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Wrong Type of Regulation? Regulatory Failure and the Railways in Britain and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Lodge, Martin

Abstract

Regulatory reform is often seen as a road paved by good intentions, but leading to ‘policy hell’. The example of the railways seems to represent a prime example of regulatory failure, not only in Britain but also in Germany. This article analyses the notion of ‘regulatory failure’ in the railway domain by taking an analytical and a comparative perspective. First, it introduces a variety of explanations as to why regulation can go wrong. Second, it considers the design and the consequent evolution of the regulatory regimes for the railways in Britain and Germany since the early 1990s. Both countries offer similar life-cycles of regulatory reform, however differing in design, perceived failures and advocated solutions. Finally, it discusses how the literature on regulatory failure contributes to the understanding of British and German railway regulation and argues that any regulatory regime is not only characterised by a conflict of interests, but also by conflicts of standards of appropriateness that lead to inherent tension and potential causes for failure.

Suggested Citation

  • Lodge, Martin, 2002. "The Wrong Type of Regulation? Regulatory Failure and the Railways in Britain and Germany," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 271-297, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:22:y:2002:i:03:p:271-297_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X02002015/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sampaio, Patrícia Regina Pinheiro & Daychoum, Mariam Tchepurnaya, 2017. "Two decades of rail regulatory reform in Brazil (1996–2016)," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 93-103.
    2. Fumitoshi Mizutani & Shuji Uranishi, 2013. "Does vertical separation reduce cost? An empirical analysis of the rail industry in European and East Asian OECD Countries," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 31-59, January.
    3. Lodge, Martin & Stern, Jon, 2014. "British utility regulation: Consolidation, existential angst, or fiasco?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 146-151.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:22:y:2002:i:03:p:271-297_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.