IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increased coordination in public transport--which mechanisms are available?


  • Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard
  • Longva, Frode


After several years of New Public Management reforms within public transport, coordination seems to receive increased attention. With examples of actual as well as suggested changes taken from Denmark, Sweden and the UK the aim of the article is to analyse and classify the mechanisms utilized and suggested to increase coordination between core stakeholders within passenger railway services and bus services. Four distinctive mechanisms of coordination are suggested, namely organisational coordination, contractual coordination, partnership coordination and discursive coordination. Each coordination mechanism has its strengths and failures. The article also debates to what extent the mechanisms conflict with three core characteristics of New Public Management: Unbundling of the public sector into corporatized units; more contract-based competitive provision; and greater emphasis on output controls.

Suggested Citation

  • Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard & Longva, Frode, 2011. "Increased coordination in public transport--which mechanisms are available?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 117-125, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:18:y:2011:i:1:p:117-125

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Stanley, John & Hensher, David A., 2008. "Delivering trusting partnerships for route bus services: A Melbourne case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1295-1301, December.
    2. Gwilliam, Ken, 2008. "Bus transport: Is there a regulatory cycle?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1183-1194, November.
    3. Hensher, David A. & Stanley, John, 2008. "Transacting under a performance-based contract: The role of negotiation and competitive tendering," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1143-1151, November.
    4. Hood, Christopher, 1995. "The "new public management" in the 1980s: Variations on a theme," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(2-3), pages 93-109.
    5. Bo Enquist & Mikael Johnson & Carolina Camén, 2005. "Contractual governance for sustainable service," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 2(1), pages 29-53, April.
    6. Wall, Graham & McDonald, Mike, 2007. "Improving bus service quality and information in Winchester," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 165-179, March.
    7. O'Sullivan, Patrick J. & Patel, Toral, 2004. "Fragmentation in transport operations and the case for system integrity," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 215-225, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:trapol:v:63:y:2018:i:c:p:30-38 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Robert Hrelja & Fredrik Pettersson & Stig Westerdahl, 2016. "The Qualities Needed for a Successful Collaboration: A Contribution to the Conceptual Understanding of Collaboration for Efficient Public Transport," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(6), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Mu, Rui & de Jong, Martin, 2016. "A network governance approach to transit-oriented development: Integrating urban transport and land use policies in Urumqi, China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 55-63.
    4. King, David A. & Goldwyn, Eric, 2014. "Why do regulated jitney services often fail? Evidence from the New York City group ride vehicle project," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 186-192.
    5. Zeng, Amy Z. & Durach, Christian F. & Fang, Yan, 2012. "Collaboration decisions on disruption recovery service in urban public tram systems," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 578-590.


    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:eee:trapol:v:18:y:2011:i:1:p:117-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.