Assessing the Efficient Cost of Sustaining Britain's Rail Network: Perspectives based on Zonal Comparisons
The objective of this paper is to inform the debate on how efficiency targets for Network Rail (formerly Railtrack) should be set during the 2002/03 Interim Review and beyond. Given the problems experienced during the 2000 Periodic Review, which focused on external benchmarks, we propose an internal benchmarking approach, drawing on data for seven geographical zones within Railtrack. Our approach mirrors the yardstick competition method used in other UK regulated industries. Two efficiency measurement techniques are applied to this data. Our results suggest that Railtrack (as a whole) delivered substantial real unit cost reductions in the early years after privatisation, although these savings were largely offset by the post-Hatfield cost increases. However, looking forward, zonal efficiency differences suggest that the company could make significant savings in future years by applying best practice consistently across the network. © The London School of Economics and the University of Bath 2004
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpe:jtecpo:v:38:y:2004:i:2:p:157-190. 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: (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.