IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A comparison of rail liberalisation levels across four European countries

  • Beria, Paolo
  • Quinet, Emile
  • de Rus, Gines
  • Schulz, Carola

The paper presents the results of a research on railway regulation and liberalisation in Italy, France, Germany and Spain. The analysed fields of regulation are the relationship between the State and the rail companies, network access conditions by operators, slot allocating and pricing schemes and how public service obligations are defined, paid and regulated. The aim of the paper is to give a comparative overview of the rail regulation from a critical point of view, rather than descriptive. The regulatory frameworks are outlined and then assessed according to their implications on the liberalisation level and on the effective market opening. The conclusions are that the actual level of liberalisation is still scarce and only in some cases the opening level is increasing. Market penetration of newcomers is significant only in niche markets. An issue emerging from the work is the opposing attitude of incumbent railways against liberalisation and the role of decision makers in backing this behaviour. The strategies followed to limit the outcomes of the liberalisation process are different across the country sample. However, all the incumbents argue with the self-referential declaration of efficiency, public service obligations and they claim to be under an excessive and unfair foreign competition. These arguments are yet embedded in legislative, organisational and economic settings supporting these positions like the common ownership of network and services, the permanence of dominant positions and favourable financial conditions.

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.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/29142/1/MPRA_paper_29142.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 29142.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:29142
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Friebel, Guido & Ivaldi, Marc & Vibes, Catherine, 2004. "Railway (De)Regulation: A European Efficiency Comparison," CEPR Discussion Papers 4319, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Eric Monami, 2000. "European passenger rail reforms: A comparative assessment of the emerging models," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 91-112, January.
  3. Pedro Cantos & José Pastor & Lorenzo Serrano, 1999. "Productivity, efficiency and technical change in the European railways: A non-parametric approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 337-357, November.
  4. Alexandersson Gunnar & Hultén Staffan, 2008. "The Swedish Railway Deregulation Path," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, March.
  5. Gathon, H.-J. & Pestieau, P., . "Decomposing efficiency into its managerial and its regulatory components: The case of European railways," CORE Discussion Papers RP -1133, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  6. Russell Pittman, 2004. "Chinese Railway Reform and Competition: Lessons from the Experience in Other Countries," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, London School of Economics and University of Bath, vol. 38(2), pages 309-332, May.
  7. Pittman, Russell, 2007. "Options for Restructuring the State-Owned Monopoly Railway," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 179-198, January.
  8. Sánchez-Borràs, Marta & Nash, Chris & Abrantes, Pedro & López-Pita, Andrés, 2010. "Rail access charges and the competitiveness of high speed trains," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 102-109, March.
  9. Waters II, William G., 2007. "Evolution of Railroad Economics," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 11-67, January.
  10. Nash, Chris, 2008. "Passenger railway reform in the last 20 years - European experience reconsidered," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 61-70, January.
  11. Link, Heike & Nilsson, Jan-Eric, 2005. "Infrastructure," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 49-83, January.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:29142. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.