A Comment on 'Subsidisation of Urban Public Transport and the Mohring Effect'
Van Reeven (2008) argues that the Mohring effect is not relevant to the determination of transit subsidies because a profit-maximising monopolist would supply frequencies that are the same as, or greater than, those that are socially optimal. We find that his results depend on the reduction or elimination of the effect of fares on demand, causing optimal prices to be indeterminate within broad ranges. Consequently, his model is an unsatisfactory tool for discussing subsidies in general, and the optimal combination of fare and frequency in particular. © 2010 LSE and the University of Bath
Volume (Year): 44 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.bath.ac.uk/e-journals/jtep|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpe:jtecpo:v:44:y:2010:i:3:p:373-380. 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.