European railway deregulation: an overview of market organization and capacity allocation

References

• Abbott, M., and B. Cohen. 2017. “Vertical Integration, Separation in the Rail Industry: a Survey of Empirical Studies on Efficiency.” European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 17 (2): 207–224.
   Google Scholar
• Adif. (2020). “Network Statement 2020.”
   Google Scholar
• Ait-Ali, A., J. Eliasson, and J. Warg. 2020a. “Are Commuter Train Timetables Consistent With Passengers’ Valuations of Waiting Times and In-Vehicle Crowding”? VTI Working Papers, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ait-Ali, A., J. Warg, and J. Eliasson. 2020b. “Pricing Commercial Train Path Requests Based on Societal Costs.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 132: 452–464.
   Google Scholar
• Ait Ali, A. 2020. Methods for Capacity Allocation in Deregulated Railway Markets Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary, Linköping University Electronic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alexandersson, G., and K. Rigas. 2013. “Rail Liberalisation in Sweden. Policy Development in a European Context.” Research in Transportation Business & Management 6: 88–98.
   Google Scholar
• Asmild, M., T. Holvad, J. L. Hougaard, and D. Kronborg. 2009. “Railway Reforms: do They Influence Operating Efficiency?” Transportation 36 (5): 617–638.
   Google Scholar
• ÖBB-Infrastruktur. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Bouf, D., Y. Crozet, and J. Leveque. 2005. “Vertical Separation, Disputes Resolution and Competition in Railway Industry.” Thredbo 9, 9th conference on competition and ownership in land transport, 5-9 september 2005, Lisbonne., Lisbon Lisbon Technical University.
   Google Scholar
• Broman, E., J. Eliasson, and M. Aronsson. 2018. “A Mixed Method for Railway Capacity Allocation.” 21st Meeting of the Euro Working Group on Transportation 2018. Braunschweig.
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y. 2004. “European Railway Infrastructure: Towards a Convergence of Infrastructure Charging?” International Journal of Transport Management 2 (1): 5–15.
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y. 2016a. “Introducing Competition in the European Rail Sector.” Discussion Paper prepared for the Roundtable on Assessing regulatory changes in the transport sector.
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y. 2016b. Liberalisation of Passenger Rail Services - France.
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y. 2018. Case Study – France: Logic and Limits of Full Cost Coverage. Track access charges: reconciling conflicting objectives. CERRE, CERRE & University of Lyon (LAET).
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y., J. Haucap, B. Pagel, A. Musso, C. Piccioni, E. Voorde, T. Vanelslander, and A. Woodburn. 2014. Development of Rail Freight in Europe: What Regulation Can and Cannot Do - Policy Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Crozet, Y., C. Nash, and J. Preston. 2012. “Beyond the Quiet Life of a Natural Monopoly: Regulatory Challenges Ahead For Europe’s Rail Sector.” Policy paper, CERRE, Brussels, December 24.
   Google Scholar
• DB-Netze. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• EC. 1991. Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the Development of the Community's railways, European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC. 2001. Directive 2001/14/EC on the Allocation Of Railway Infrastructure Capacity and the Levying of Charges for the Use of Railway Infrastructure And Safety Certification, EU Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• EC. 2012. Directive 2012/34/EU on Establishing a Single European railway area, EU Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• EC. 2016a. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/545 of 7 April 2016 on Procedures and Criteria Concerning Framework Agreements for the Allocation of Rail Infrastructure Capacity, European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• EC. 2016b. Fourth Railway Package of 2016, European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• ECMT. 2005. Railway Reform and Charges for the Use of Infrastructure, European Conference of Ministers of Transport.
   Google Scholar
• Friebel, G., M. Ivaldi, and C. Vibes. 2010. “Railway (De)Regulation: A European Efficiency Comparison.” Economica 77 (305): 77–91.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, S. 2003. “Allocation of Capacity in the Rail Industry.” Utilities Policy 11 (1): 39–42.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbo, E. P. 1993. “Airport Capacity: Representation, Estimation, Optimization.” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 1 (3): 144–154.
   Google Scholar
• Hansson, L., and J. E. Nilsson. 1991. “A new Swedish Railroad Policy: Separation of Infrastructure and Traffic Production.” Transportation Research Part a-Policy and Practice 25 (4): 153–159.
   Google Scholar
• Infrabel. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• IRG. 2019. Seventh Annual Market Monitoring Working Document, Independent regulators’ group rail.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, A., and P. Stelling. 2007. “Economic Impacts of Swedish Railway Deregulation: A Longitudinal Study.” Transportation Research Part E-Logistics and Transportation Review 43 (5): 516–534.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, D., and C. Nash. 2008. “Charging for Scarce Rail Capacity in Britain: a Case Study.” Review of Network Economics 7: 1.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, M. 1999. Competition in Network Industries.
   Google Scholar
• Kozan, E., and R. Burdett. 2005. “A Railway Capacity Determination Model and Rail Access Charging Methodologies.” Transportation Planning and Technology 28 (1): 27–45.
   Google Scholar
• Lan, L. W., and E. T. J. Lin. 2005. “Measuring Railway Performance with Adjustment of Environmental Effects, Data Noise and Slacks.” Transportmetrica 1 (2): 161–189.
   Google Scholar
• Laurino, A., F. Ramella, and P. Beria. 2015. “The Economic Regulation of Railway Networks: A Worldwide Survey.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 77: 202–212.
   Google Scholar
• Link, H. 2004. “Rail Infrastructure Charging and on-Track Competition in Germany.” International Journal of Transport Management 2 (1): 17–27.
   Google Scholar
• Link, H. 2016. Liberalisation of Passenger Rail Services - Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Link, H. 2018. Case Study – Germany. Track access charges: reconciling conflicting objectives. CERRE, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin).
   Google Scholar
• Ludvigsen, J. 2009. “Liberalisation of Rail Freight Markets in Central and South-Eastern Europe: What the European Commission Can Do to Facilitate Rail Market Opening.” European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 9 (1): 46–62. doi:10.18757/ejtir.2009.9.1.3285.
   Google Scholar
• Merkert, R. 2012. “An Empirical Study on the Transaction Sector Within Rail Firms.” Transportmetrica 8 (1): 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Monami, E. 2000. “European Passenger Rail Reforms: A Comparative Assessment of the Emerging Models.” Transport Reviews 20 (1): 91–112.
   Google Scholar
• Murillo-Hoyos, J., M. Volovski, and S. Labi. 2016. “Rolling Stock Purchase Cost for Rail and Road Public Transportation: Random-Parameter Modelling and Marginal Effect Analysis.” Transportmetrica A: Transport Science 12 (5): 436–457.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, C. 2008. “Passenger Railway Reform in the Last 20 Years - European Experience Reconsidered.” Reforms in Public Transport 22: 61–70.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, C., Y. Crozet, H. Link, J.-E. Nilsson, and A. Smith. 2016. Liberalisation of Passenger Rail Services - Project Report.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, C., Y. Crozet, H. Link, J.-E. Nilsson, and A. Smith. 2018. Track Access Charges: Reconciling Conflicting Objectives - Project Report. CERRE, CERRE.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, C., J. E. Nilsson, and H. Link. 2013. “Comparing Three Models for Introduction of Competition Into Railways.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 47: 191–206.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, C. A., A. S. J. Smith, D. van de Velde, F. Mizutani, and S. Uranishi. 2014. “Structural Reforms in the Railways: Incentive Misalignment and Cost Implications.” Research in Transportation Economics 48: 16–23.
   Google Scholar
• Network-Rail. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, J.-E. 2002. “Towards a Welfare Enhancing Process to Manage Railway Infrastructure Access.” Transportation Research Part A 36 (5): 419–436.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, J.-E. 2016. Liberalisation of passenger rail services - Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson, J. E. 2018. “Case Study – Sweden: Track Access Charges and the Implementation of the SERA directive - promoting efficient use of railway infrastructure or not?” Track access charges: reconciling conflicting objectives. CERRE, VTI Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2005. Structural Reform in the Rail Industry. Competition Policy Roundtables.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2013. Recent Developments in Rail Transportation Services. Competition Policy Roundtables.
   Google Scholar
• ORR. 2017. “Track access guidance Office of Rail and Road.” http://www.orr.gov.uk/rail/access-to-the-network/track-access/guidance.
   Google Scholar
• Pena-Alcaraz, M. M. T. 2015. “Analysis of Capacity Pricing and Allocation Mechanisms in Shared Railway Systems.” PhD, MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Perennes, P. 2014. “Use of Combinatorial Auctions in the Railway Industry: Can the “Invisible Hand” Draw the Railway Timetable?” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 67: 175–187.
   Google Scholar
• Perez Herrero, M. 2016. “Rail Capacity Constraints: An Economic Approach.” PhD, Université Lumière Lyon 2.
   Google Scholar
• ProRail. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• RFI. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• SBB. 2020. Network Statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• SŽDC. 2020. “Network statement 2020.”.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 2016. Liberalisation of Passenger Rail Services - Britain.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., and C. Nash. 2018. Case Study – Great Britain. Track Access Charges: Reconciling Conflicting Objectives. CERRE, CERRE & University of Leeds.
   Google Scholar
• Smoliner, M. S., S. Walter, and S. Marschnig. 2018. “Optimal Coordination of Timetable and Infrastructure Development in a Liberalised Railway Market.” Journal of Management and Financial Sciences 33: 97–115.
   Google Scholar
• SNCF-Réseau. 2020. Network statement 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Stojadinović, N., B. Bošković, D. Trifunović, and S. Janković. 2019. “Train Path Congestion Management: Using Hybrid Auctions for Decentralized Railway Capacity Allocation.” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 129: 123–139.
   Google Scholar
• Talebian, A., B. Zou, and A. Peivandi. 2018. “Capacity Allocation in Vertically Integrated Rail Systems: A Bargaining Approach.” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 107: 167–191.
   Google Scholar
• Tomeš, Z., M. Kvizda, M. Jandová, and V. Rederer. 2016. “Open Access Passenger Rail Competition in the Czech Republic.” Transport Policy 47: 203–211.
   Google Scholar
• Tomeš, Z., M. Kvizda, T. Nigrin, and D. Seidenglanz. 2014. “Competition in the Railway Passenger Market in the Czech Republic.” Research in Transportation Economics 48: 270–276.
   Google Scholar
• Trafikanalys. 2014. Railway in Sweden and Japan - a comparative study.
   Google Scholar
• Trafikverket. 2020a. Järnvägsnätsbeskrivning 2020 - Prioriteringskriterier, Swedish Transport Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Trafikverket. 2020b. Network Statement 2020, Swedish Transport Administration.
   Google Scholar
• UIC. 2009. Noise Differentiated Track Access Charges, International Union of Railways.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Velde, D., C. Nash, A. Smith, F. Mizutani, S. Uranishi, M. Lijesen, and F. Zschoche. 2012. “Economic effects of Vertical Separation in the Railway Sector.” Report CER and Inno-V Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Yeung, R. 2008. Moving Millions: The Commercial Success and Political Controversies of Hong Kong's Railway. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
   Google Scholar