Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 149–162 | Cite as

Distinguishing Multiproduct Economies of Scale from Economies of Density on a Fixed-Size Transport Network

Article
First Online:

Abstract

In order to produce a certain vector of flows over a fixed-size network, a transport firm has to choose, among many other things, a route structure. In accommodating increasing traffic, transport firms will adjust their route structure to minimize costs. However, transport industry structure analysis considers only, often implicitly, the case where the route structure is fixed. In this paper, economies of density, that represents the latter, are conceptually distinguished from economies of scale on fixed-size networks, S, where we allow the route structure to vary. Intuition with a simple example, evidence from the airline industry and the derivation of a formula to calculate S from an estimated cost function are provided. Results are both novel and encouraging. Transport firms, while closer to exhaust economies of density, would still have available sizeable economies of scale.

Keywords

Scale economies Returns to density Air transport networks 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baltagi BH, Griffin JM, Rich DP (1995) Airline deregulation: the cost pieces of the puzzle. Int Econ Rev 36(1):245–258Google Scholar
  2. Basso LJ, Jara-Díaz SR (2005) Calculation of economies of spatial scope from transport cost functions with aggregate output (with an application to the airline industry). J Transp Econ Policy 39:25–52Google Scholar
  3. Basso LJ, Jara-Díaz SR (2006) Is returns to scale with variable network size adequate for transport industry structure analysis? Transp Sience (in press)Google Scholar
  4. Braeutigam RR (1999) Learning about transport costs. In: Gomez-Ibañez J, Tye WB y Winston C (eds) Essays in transportation economics and policy. Brooking, Washington, District of Columbia, pp 57–97Google Scholar
  5. Brueckner JK, Spiller PT (1994) Economies of traffic density in the deregulated airline industry. J Law Econ 37:379–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caves DW, Christensen LR, Tretheway MW (1984) Economies of density versus economies of scale: why trunk and local airline costs differ. Rand J Econ 15:471–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caves DW, Christensen LR, Tretheway MW, Windle RJ (1985) Network effects and the measurement of returns to scale and density for U.S. railroads. In: Daughety AF (ed) Analytical studies in transport economics. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Filippini M, Prioni P (2003) The influence of ownership on the cost of bus service provision in Switzerland—an empirical illustration. Appl Econ 35:683–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gillen D, Oum TH, Tretheway M (1990) Airlines cost structure and policy implications. J Transp Econ Policy 24:9–34Google Scholar
  10. Hendricks K, Piccione M, Tan G (1995) The economics of hubs: the case of monopoly. Rev Econ Stud 62:83–99Google Scholar
  11. Ivaldi M, McCullough G (2001) Density and integration effects in class I US Freight railroads. J Regul Econ 19(2):161–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jara-Díaz SR (1982) The estimation of transport cost functions: a methodological review. Transp Rev 2:257–278Google Scholar
  13. Jara-Díaz SR, Basso LJ (2003) Transport cost functions, network expansion and economies of scope. Transp Res E 39:271–288Google Scholar
  14. Jara-Diaz SR, Cortés C (1996) On the calculation of scale economies from transport cost functions. J Transp Econ Policy 30:157–170Google Scholar
  15. Karlaftis M, McCarthy P (2002) Cost structures of public transit systems: a panel data analysis. Transp Res E 38:1–18Google Scholar
  16. Keeler JP, Formby JP (1994) Cost economies and consolidation in the U.S. airline industry. International Journal of Transport Economics 21(1):21–45Google Scholar
  17. Kumbhakar SC (1990) A reexamination of returns to scale, density and technical progress in US airlines. South Econ J 57:428–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kumbhakar SC (1992) Allocative distortions, technical progress and input demand in U.S. airlines: 1970:1984. Int Econ Rev 33(3):723–737Google Scholar
  19. Liu Z, Lynk EL (1999) Evidence on market structure of the deregulated US airline industry. Appl Econ 31:1083–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mizutani F (2004) Privetly owned railways' cost function, organization size and ownership. J Regul Econ 25(3):297–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oum TH, Zhang Y (1997) A note on scale economies in transport. J Transp Econ Policy 31:309–315Google Scholar
  22. Oum TH, Zhang A, Zhang Y (1995) Airline network rivalry. Can J Econ 28:836–857Google Scholar
  23. Panzar J (1989) Technological determinants of firm and industry structure. In: Schmalensee, R, Willig R (eds) Handbook of industrial organization. North-Holland, pp 3–59Google Scholar
  24. Panzar J, Willig R (1977) Economies of scale in multioutput production. Q J Econ 91:481–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Swan WM (2002) Airline route developments: a review of history. J Air Trans Manag 8:349–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tretheway MW, Oum TH (1992) Airline economics: foundations for strategy and policy. Center for Transportation Studies, University of British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Wei W, Hansen M (2003) Cost economics of aircraft size. J Transp Econ Policy 37:279–296Google Scholar
  28. Winston C (1985) Conceptual developments in the economics of transportation: an interpretive survey. J Econ Lit 23:57–94Google Scholar
  29. Xu K, Windle C, Grimm C, Corsi T (1994) Re-evaluating returns to scale in transport. J Transp Econ Policy 28:275–286Google Scholar
  30. Ying JS (1992) On calculating cost elasticities. Logist Transp Rev 28:231–235Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sauder School of BusinessThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversidad de ChileSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversidad de ChileSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations