2009
DOI: 10.2148/benv.35.1.43
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rail Privatization and Competitive Tendering in Europe

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The argument is that the competitive process, or even the threat of competition, disciplines even state-owned firms to improve efficiency. This finding has been observed in many industries in many countries around the world (see for example , Domberger et.al., 1986;1987;and Alexandersson, 2009). In our case, at one level the findings may not be surprising: private firms are found to be more efficient than state-owned operators.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 42%
“…The argument is that the competitive process, or even the threat of competition, disciplines even state-owned firms to improve efficiency. This finding has been observed in many industries in many countries around the world (see for example , Domberger et.al., 1986;1987;and Alexandersson, 2009). In our case, at one level the findings may not be surprising: private firms are found to be more efficient than state-owned operators.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 42%
“…In some countries, privatization is used to finance the high costs of this type of rails. Furthermore, many researchers have investigated the privatization of high-speed rails in many countries [5]. The arrival of high speed rail technology requires a comprehensive and integrated approach of government authorities and an incentive to attract investors in this sector.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main expected impact of competition for the market is reduced unit cost. For example, in Germany and Sweden rail tendering led to 20-30% savings (Alexanderson, 2009, andAlexandersson andHulten, 2007) whilst in the Netherlands rail tendering led to 20-50% savings (van Dijk, 2007). Bus tendering in Great Britain led to unit cost reductions of up to 50% up to 2000, although there have been increases since, whilst elsewhere reductions of 35% were typical where there is also restructuring (Preston, 2005).…”
Section: Trendsmentioning
confidence: 99%