Transportation

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 131–150

Are urban bus services natural monopolies?

  • Andrew W. Evans
Article

Abstract

Although Britain's local bus services have been open to free competition for more than three years, most have continued to be operated as monopolies by the original incumbents. Some competition has occurred, but the incumbents have usually driven off entrants. This paper uses findings from case-studies of competition and from deregulation generally to consider whether monopoly operation has inherent advantages over competitive operation. If so, urban bus routes would be natural monopolies. The evidence suggests that they may be, because single-operator services are more convenient for users.

Key words

bus deregulation bus competition bus markets contestability monopoly 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Balcombe RJ, Hopkin JM & Perrett KE (1988) Bus deregulation in Great Britain: a review of the first year. Transport and Road Research Laboratory Report 161, Crowthorne, Berkshire.Google Scholar
  2. Baumol WJ, Panzar JC & Willig RD (1988) Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industrial Structure, (revised). Brace Jovanovich. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
  3. Department of Transport (1984) Buses. Cmnd 9300, London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  4. Department of Transport (1990) Bus and Coach Statistics Great Britain 1989/90 London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  5. Evans A (1990) Competition and the structure of local bus markets. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 24:255–281.Google Scholar
  6. Forsyth PJ (1989) The effects of entry and potential entry on the success of deregulation. In: Domestic Aviation in Transition. Canberra: Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics.Google Scholar
  7. Gomez-Ibanez JA & Meyer JR (1987) Deregulating urban bus service: Britain's early experience and the lessons for the United States. Springfield: National Technical Information Service.Google Scholar
  8. Gwilliam KM, Nash CA & Mackie PJ (1985) Deregulating the bus industry in Britain — The case against. Transport Reviews 5:105–132.Google Scholar
  9. Mackie PJ & Preston JM (1988) Competition in the urban bus market: a case-study. PTRC Summer Annual Meeting, Seminar C: Public Transport Planning and Operations, 157–170.Google Scholar
  10. Mohring H (1972) Optimisation and scale economies in urban bus transportation. American Economic Review 62.Google Scholar
  11. Nash CA (1988) Integration of Public Transport: an Economic Assessment. In: Dodgson JS & Tophaml N (eds) Bus Deregulation and Privatisation Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
  12. White PR (1990) Bus deregulation: a welfare balance sheet. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 24 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  13. White PR & Turner R (1990). Overall impacts of bus deregulation in Britain. Transportation Planning and Technology (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  14. Windle RJ (1988) Transit policy and the cost of urban bus transportation. In: Dodgson J S & Topham N (eds) Bus Deregulation and Privatisation Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew W. Evans
    • 1
  1. 1.The Flinders University of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Transport Studies GroupUniversity College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations