Subsidy requirements in a restructured rail network

Else, Peter

doi:10.1016/0967-070x(96)00006-6

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Partial assessments of the ® rst national experiences have started to appear in the literature. The British model, in particular, has already given rise to a number of articles (see, for example, Else 1996, Preston 1996, Nash 1993, White 1998. So have the Swedish (Larsson andEkstroÈ m 1993, Hansson andNilsson 1991), the German (Bowers 1996, Wolf 1996 and the French (Crozet and Heroin 1998) experiences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

European passenger rail reforms: A comparative assessment of the emerging models

Monami¹

2000

Transport Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides a comprehensive framework for analysing and comparing the various institutional models and regulatory arrangements that have recently emerged from the restructuring of European passenger rail industries. The framework identi® es seven key dimensions that can be used to describe these models and arrangements. It shows how these dimensions are connected with one another in a complex web of interactions. Empirical material gathered on the passenger rail industries of ® ve EU Member States, i.e. Belgium, France, Germany, the UK, and Sweden is used, as well as extrapolation to highlight the costs and bene® ts (incentive properties) associated with alternative arrangements and contract features and to show how certain dimensions can be traded-oOEagainst one another to optimize the industry's performance.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

European passenger rail reforms: A comparative assessment of the emerging models

Monami¹

2000

Transport Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has largely focused on: state grants and subsidies as an electoral issue (Else, 1996); the electoral dimension to rail regulation (McLean and Foster, 1992); the influence of state-trades union relations on voting patterns (Howell, 1999); parties' programmes on competition and regulation (Charlton et al, 1997); electoral debate on nationalisation (Pagoulatos, 2005); policy actors' attitudes to aspects of rail policy (Ludvigsen et al, 2013); the electoral salience of rail policy and environmentalism (Carter, 1992); party pledges on rail modernisation (Liow, 2005) and the electoral politics of rail closures (Loft, 2006). Accordingly, in order to address the dearth of work exploring the origins of rail transport policy in electoral discourse the following draws upon the theory of 'issuesalience' (RePass, 1971;Robertson, 1976); a conceptualisation whereby key importance lies not only on party issue-positions but on the prominence and attention afforded to different issues in their campaigns; ergo the more an issue is emphasised by a party (making it 'salient'), the greater the likelihood it will attract voters who share similar concerns.…”

Section: Electoral Politics: the Formative Phase Of Rail Transport Pomentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed-methods analysis of political parties׳ manifesto discourse on rail transport policy: Westminster, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish elections 1945–2011

Chaney

2014

Transport Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study addresses a key lacuna by exploring the role of electoral politics in shaping public policy on rail transport in (quasi-)federal systems of governance. Attention centres on issue-salience and policy framing in party manifestos in state-wide and regional elections. The findings reveal a significant rise in issue-salience in parties' Westminster election programmes; with Right -and Left-ofcentre parties increasingly advocating mixed economy approaches to rail transport as part of the wider rise of 'valence politics'. The analysis also reveals how devolution may lead to the territorialisation of rail transport policy. In contrast to parties' Westminster programmes, regional manifesto discourse evidences a general rejection of neo-liberalism and stronger support for state control and/or not-forprofit rail operators. Overall, the findings underline the formative nexus between political representation and public policy -and show how, in the wake of state decentralisation, policy framing is contingent on 'regional' socio-economic factors and party politics, including state-building by civic nationalist parties. (Note to editors: the following are the only changes madeotherwise the revised paper is the same as that reviewed by the referees). Reviewer #1:This paper analyses election material from the main political parties since 1945, to see both whether the emphasis given to rail policy has changed over time and whether devolution of rail decisions to Scotland and Wales has affected coverage of rail policy. However, it must be said that many of the statements analysed are of broad philosophical approach (e.g. it is good to involve the private sector) rather than specific proposals. It finds that attention to rail policy has increased over time and that what each political party says does vary between countries since devolution. However, it must be said that many of the latter differences either may be because of geographical differences (HSR may have more relevance to Scotland than to Wales) or because they deal with details (e.g. availability of discounted fares, wifi) rather than broad approach. Author ResponseI am very grateful to the reviewer for the helpful and constructive comments and suggestions. Regarding the first point: "many of the statements analysed are of broad philosophical approach… rather than specific proposals". Yes, the aim here is to use a well-established methodology (applied across a broad range of other policy areas, and issues -but not, to date, rail policy) of looking at the language parties use in attempting to appeal to voters. This offers insight into the political origins of policy and the underpinning motivations behind state policy on rail transport (seen as an aspect of social welfare/ affordable transport for all -or environmentally beneficial -or means of boosting economic development through improved infrastructure, etc. This complements traditional analyses of policy implementation for example. I"ve taken care to summarise the importance of this approach one th...

show abstract

Where does Demand for Public Transport Stand?

Gutiérrez¹

2005

Competition &Amp; Ownership in Land Passenger Transport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Subsidy requirements in a restructured rail network

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

European passenger rail reforms: A comparative assessment of the emerging models

European passenger rail reforms: A comparative assessment of the emerging models

Mixed-methods analysis of political parties׳ manifesto discourse on rail transport policy: Westminster, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish elections 1945–2011

Where does Demand for Public Transport Stand?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About