IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v11y2004i3p251-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rail operation-infrastructure separation: the case of Kobe rapid transit railway

Author

Listed:
  • Mizutani, Fumitoshi
  • Shoji, Kenichi

Abstract

Vertical separation in the rail industry is common in Europe, but evaluation of the policy has been insufficient. The main purpose of this paper is to explain one method of operation-infrastructure separation as practiced in the case of Kobe Kosoku, a unique rail infrastructure owning company in Japan, as well as to discuss practical coordination problems related to structuring separation. Our overall conclusion is that vertically separated systems do not have significant advantages over vertically integrated systems in terms of the maintenance costs of infrastructure. In fact, the results of our analysis of infrastructure maintenance costs indicate that vertically separated systems might not be significantly different from vertically integrated ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Mizutani, Fumitoshi & Shoji, Kenichi, 2004. "Rail operation-infrastructure separation: the case of Kobe rapid transit railway," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 251-263, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:11:y:2004:i:3:p:251-263
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967-070X(03)00086-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Cantos Sánchez, P., 2001. "Vertical relationships for the European railway industry," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 77-83, April.
    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. Emmanuel, Bougna Tchofo & Crozet, Yves, 2014. "Beyond the “bundling vs unbundling” controversy: What is at stake for the French railway?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 393-400.
    3. Nash, Chris & Nilsson, Jan-Eric & Link, Heike, 2011. "Comparing three models for introduction of competition into railways – is a Big Wolf so Bad after all?," Working papers in Transport Economics 2011:19, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    4. Fumitoshi Mizutani, 2005. "Regulation and Deregulation in the Japanese Rail Industry," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(4), pages 10-15, 01.
    5. Matthias Finger & Pierre Messulam (ed.), 2015. "Rail Economics, Policy and Regulation in Europe," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15711.
    6. Phang, Sock-Yong, 2007. "Urban rail transit PPPs: Survey and risk assessment of recent strategies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 214-231, May.
    7. Francisco Gildemir Ferreira Silva, 2022. "Brazilian railways separability infrastructure/operations: investigation by production indicators," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(7), pages 1-25, July.
    8. 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.
    9. Chang, Zheng & Phang, Sock-Yong, 2017. "Urban rail transit PPPs: Lessons from East Asian cities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 106-122.
    10. Fumitoshi Mizutani & Shuji Uranishi, 2013. "Does vertical separation reduce cost? An empirical analysis of the rail industry in European and East Asian OECD Countries," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 31-59, January.
    11. repec:ces:ifodic:v:3:y:2005:i:4:p:14567569 is not listed 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. Wetzel, Heike & Growitsch, Christian, 2006. "Economies of Scope in European Railways: An Efficiency Analysis," IWH Discussion Papers 5/2006, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    2. Julien Lévêque, 2007. "Allotissement et rendements d'échelle : application aux réseaux de transport ferroviaire," Post-Print halshs-00280396, HAL.
    3. Major, Iván, 2004. "A korlátozó szabályozástól az ösztönző szabályozásig. A közlekedés szabályozása az Európai Unióban és Magyarországon [From restricting regulation to incentive regulation. Transport regulation in th," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 501-529.
    4. Mette Asmild & Torben Holvad & Jens Hougaard & Dorte Kronborg, 2009. "Railway reforms: do they influence operating efficiency?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 617-638, September.
    5. Miguel Urdánoz & Catherine Vibes, 2013. "Regulation and cost efficiency in the European railways industry," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 217-230, June.
    6. Thomas Ehrmann & Karl-Hans Hartwig & Torsten Marner & Hendrik Schmale, 2009. "Specific Investments and Ownership Structures in Railways – An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers 12, Institute of Transport Economics, University of Muenster.
    7. Slack, Brian & Vogt, Alexander, 2007. "Challenges confronting new traction providers of rail freight in Germany," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 399-409, September.
    8. 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.

    More about this item

    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:eee:trapol:v:11:y:2004:i:3:p:251-263. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    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.