IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v138y2016icp78-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Horizontal versus vertical separation in railway networks: Implications for network quality

Author

Listed:
  • Cui, Shana
  • Besanko, David

Abstract

This paper analyzes the relationship between network quality and organizational structure in railway systems. We consider two options: vertical separation and horizontal separation. We derive the Nash equilibrium network qualities in a two-stage game. In general, the comparison of network quality between the two organizational structures is ambiguous. However, unless the regulated access fee under vertical separation is sufficiently large, horizontal separation is likely to dominate vertical separation. This is reinforced if horizontal separation enables service complementarities.

Suggested Citation

  • Cui, Shana & Besanko, David, 2016. "Horizontal versus vertical separation in railway networks: Implications for network quality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 78-80.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:138:y:2016:i:c:p:78-80
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.12.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176515005042
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.12.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonio Estache & Andrea Goldstein & Russell Pittman, 2001. "Privatization and Regulatory Reform in Brazil: The Case of Freight Railways," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 203-235, June.
    2. Chris Nash, 2006. "Europe: Alternative Models for Restructuring," Chapters, in: José A. Gómez-Ibáñez & Ginés de Rus (ed.), Competition in the Railway Industry, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. 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.
    4. Haucap, Justus & Klein, Gordon J., 2012. "How regulation affects network and service quality in related markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 521-524.
    5. de Rus, Ginés & Socorro, M. Pilar, 2014. "Access pricing, infrastructure investment and intermodal competition," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 374-387.
    6. José A. Gómez-Ibáñez & Ginés de Rus (ed.), 2006. "Competition in the Railway Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4213.
    7. Pittman, Russell, 2011. "Risk-averse restructuring of freight railways in China," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 152-160.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mizutani, Fumitoshi, 2020. "A comparison of vertical structural types in the railway industry: A simple mathematical explanation model," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Zong, Yueqi & Wu, Jianhong & Yu, Kemei & Yang, Xutao, 2023. "Efficiency benchmarking and its determinants in high-speed railways: Reference for China," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Carlos Gutiérrez-Hita & Aurora Ruiz-Rua, 2019. "Competition in the railway passenger market: The challenge of liberalization," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, , vol. 20(2), pages 164-183, June.
    4. Yu, Kemei & Wu, Jianhong & Wang, Kun & Zhang, Anming & Zheng, Shiyuan & Wang, Yixiao & Li, Hongchang, 2023. "Restructuring Chinese railways from a cost-efficient perspective—A hedonic cost function analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    5. Cui, Shana & Pittman, Russell & Zhao, Jian, 2018. "Restructuring the Chinese Freight Railway: Two Scenarios," MPRA Paper 88407, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. David Besanko & Shana Cui, 2016. "Railway restructuring and organizational choice: network quality and welfare impacts," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 164-206, October.
    2. Laurino, Antonio & Ramella, Francesco & Beria, Paolo, 2015. "The economic regulation of railway networks: A worldwide survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 202-212.
    3. Pittman, Russell, 2011. "Risk-averse restructuring of freight railways in China," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 152-160.
    4. Huang, Wencheng & Zhang, Yue & Shuai, Bin & Xu, Minhao & Xiao, Wei & Zhang, Rui & Xu, Yifei, 2019. "China railway industry reform evolution approach: Based on the Vertical Separation Model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 546-556.
    5. Javier Campos, 2015. "La competencia en el ferrocarril: un análisis del nuevo marco institucional en Europa y en España," Policy Papers 2015-12, FEDEA.
    6. Wang, Yixiao & Pels, Eric & Teunter, Ruud H. & Sun, Luoyi & Wu, Jianhong, 2023. "Railway liberalization, airport congestion toll, and infrastructure pricing: Modelling and numerical analysis for European and Chinese markets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    7. David Besanko & Shana Cui, 2019. "Regulated versus negotiated access pricing in vertically separated railway systems," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 1-32, February.
    8. Beria, Paolo & Quinet, Emile & de Rus, Gines & Schulz, Carola, 2012. "A comparison of rail liberalisation levels across four European countries," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 110-120.
    9. Nakamura, Eri & Sakai, Hiroki, 2020. "Does vertical integration facilitate coordination between infrastructure management and train operating units in the rail sector? Implications for Japanese railways," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    10. Pittman, Russell, 2016. "Reforming and Restructuring Ukrzaliznytsia: A Crucial Task for Ukrainian Reformers," MPRA Paper 76028, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Juan J. Montero, 2014. "Rail Transport: A Balance Sheet," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers p0413, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    12. Pellegrini, Paola & Rodriguez, Joaquin, 2013. "Single European Sky and Single European Railway Area: A system level analysis of air and rail transportation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 64-86.
    13. Mizutani, Fumitoshi & Uranishi, Shuji, 2020. "An analysis of the inter-effect of structural reforms and rail mode share," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    14. Pittman Russell, 2015. "Railways Restructuring and Ukrainian Economic Reform," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 87-107, June.
    15. Cui, Shana & Pittman, Russell & Zhao, Jian, 2018. "Restructuring the Chinese Freight Railway: Two Scenarios," MPRA Paper 88407, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Russell Pittman, 2009. "Competition Issues in Restructuring Ports and Railways, Including Brief Consideration of these Sectors in India," EAG Discussions Papers 200906, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
    17. Eriksson, Martin & Pettersson, Thomas, 2012. "Adapting to liberalization: government procurement of interregional passenger transports in Sweden, 1989–2008," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 182-188.
    18. Asker, John, 2008. "Subsidizing (and taxing) business procurement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(7), pages 1629-1643, July.
    19. Ginés de Rus, 2014. "The economic evaluation of infrastructure investment. Some inescapable tradeoffs," Working Papers 2014-16, FEDEA.
    20. Kuang, Zhonghong & Lian, Zeng & Lien, Jaimie W. & Zheng, Jie, 2020. "Serial and parallel duopoly competition in multi-segment transportation routes," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).

    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:eee:ecolet:v:138:y:2016:i:c:p:78-80. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.