IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/usi/wpaper/578.html

Price and Quality Regulation in a Physical Network Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Emanuela Michetti

Abstract

Our paper models the relationship between price and quality regulation in a physical network industry. The analysis is closely inspired by some of the major regulatory features of the current organisation of the British railways industry, even though its insights have more general implications. Our model focuses on the combination of price and quality regulation and accounts for the existence of entry costs which create a competitive advantage for the incumbents in the competitive franchise bidding. We show that the effectiveness of the quality control is nonmonotone in the quality standard set by the Regulator. Moreover, we advance that price regulation negatively affects the extent to which the service quality can be controlled. By partially subsidising the entry costs, the Regulator can intensify the competition for the market and improve the regulation of the service quality. Nevertheless, since entry costs subsidisation involves social costs (e.g., distortionary taxation), the Regulator faces a trade-off between price regulation, on the one hand, and quality regulation and entry costs subsidisation, on the other hand.

Suggested Citation

  • Emanuela Michetti, 2009. "Price and Quality Regulation in a Physical Network Industry," Department of Economics University of Siena 578, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    • Handle: RePEc:usi:wpaper:578
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.deps.unisi.it/quaderni/578.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oliver E. Williamson, 1976. "Franchise Bidding for Natural Monopolies -- in General and with Respect to CATV," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 7(1), pages 73-104, Spring.
    2. Luisa Affuso & David Newbery, 2002. "The Impact of Structural and Contractual Arrangements on a Vertically Separated Railway," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 33(1), pages 83-92.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Freddy Huet & Simon Porcher, 2013. "Innovation and regulatory outcomes: evidence from the public-private contracts for water supply in France," Chapters, in: Mehmet Ugur (ed.), Governance, Regulation and Innovation, chapter 9, pages 216-236, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Pittman, Russell, 2007. "Options for Restructuring the State-Owned Monopoly Railway," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 179-198, January.
    3. Abbott, Malcolm & Cohen, Bruce, 2016. "The privatization and de-privatization of rail industry assets in Australia and New Zealand," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 48-56.
    4. Rui Cunha Marques & Álvaro Fonseca, 2010. "Market structure, privatisation and regulation of Portuguese seaports," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 145-161, March.
    5. Arblaster, Margaret & Zhang, Chrystal, 2020. "Liberalisation of airport air traffic control: A case study of Spain," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 38-47.
    6. Luc Baumstark & Claude Ménard & William Roy & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2005. "Modes de gestion et efficience des opérateurs dans le secteur des transports urbains de personnes," Post-Print halshs-00103116, HAL.
    7. Nick Wills‐Johnson, 2008. "Separability and Subadditivity in Australian Railways," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 84(264), pages 95-108, March.
    8. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2004. "The Efficiency of Public Sector Outsourcing Contracts: A Literature Review," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n29, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    9. Brennan, Timothy J., 2000. "The Economics of Competition Policy: Recent Developments and Cautionary Notes in Antitrust and Regulation," Discussion Papers 10716, Resources for the Future.
    10. Saplacan, Roxana, 2008. "Competition in electricity distribution," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 231-237, December.
    11. Branko Bubalo, 2012. "Social costs of public service obligation routes—calculating subsidies of regional flights in Norway," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 125-140, July.
    12. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1991. "Economic Perspectives on Privatization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(2), pages 111-132, Spring.
    13. Sherman, Roger, 1989. "Institutional design for monopoly regulation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 5(2-3), pages 245-257.
    14. Marian Moszoro, 2013. "Overcoming Opportunism in Public-Private Project Finance," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 25(1), pages 89-96, March.
    15. Senguttuvan, P.S, 2005. "Impact of Air Transport Liberalization and the role of framing Economic Mechanism in Airport Regulation and Competition – Modern Approach towards Regulating Public Utility Industry," 46th Annual Transportation Research Forum, Washington, D.C., March 6-8, 2005 208168, Transportation Research Forum.
    16. Ruiz Diaz, Gonzalo, 2017. "The contractual and administrative regulation of public-private partnership," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 109-121.
    17. Eshien Chong & Carine Staropoli & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2014. "Auction versus Negotiation in Public Procurement: Looking for Empirical Evidence," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00512813, HAL.
    18. Angenendt, Nicole & Müller, Gernot & Stronzik, Marcus & Wissner, Matthias, 2007. "Stromerzeugung und Stromvertrieb – eine wettbewerbsökonomische Analyse," WIK Discussion Papers 297, WIK Wissenschaftliches Institut für Infrastruktur und Kommunikationsdienste GmbH.
    19. Eduardo Engel & Ronald Fischer & Alexander Galetovic, 2000. "How to Auction an Essential Facility when Underhand Integration is Possible," Documentos de Trabajo 79, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    20. Mary M. Shirley, 1997. "POLICY ARENA: The Economics and Politics of Government Ownership," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(6), pages 849-864.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy
    • L9 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:usi:wpaper:578. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Fabrizio Becatti (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/desieit.html .

    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.