RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    끝나지 않은 철도 구조개혁 -상하분리를 중심으로 한 평가와 향후 정책방향- = A Study of Railway Reform Focused on the Effect of Vertical Separation and Future Policy Direction

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A99656487

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Currently big debate is reopened about the way of management for Suseo-departing KTX due to start in 2015, arguing that whether it should be contracted-out to private operator to achieve more efficiency or it should be run by KORAIL after re-integrating infrastructure and operation. The heart of this conflict is related with effectiveness of vertical separation and thus specific question; do we need to complete railway reform by accomplishing vertical separation through introducing real competition or not? Vertical separation policy has been adopted by many European countries as a part of railway reform package to allow new entrance and competition to the operation sector separated from infrastructure sector which tends to be natural monopoly with enormous sunk cost. Following this, Korean government also separated former National Railroad Administration into KORAIL and KR in 2004. Until recently, however, neither there have been theoretic discussions nor empirical analyses to identify possible effectiveness of vertical separation. This study tackled the issue and revealed that Korean rail sector enjoys high level of efficiency both before and after separation through Data Envelopment Analysis and international comparison. This conclusion proves against the notion that vertical separation should be re-integrated due to inefficiency of separation policy, but does not support either the notion that higher efficiency could be achieved through perfect separation. However, as higher level of efficiency came from monopoly system and is not related with higher level of service, it gives limited policy implication that reasonable way of introducing more competition should be reviewed further, which was original objective of vertical separation.
    번역하기

    Currently big debate is reopened about the way of management for Suseo-departing KTX due to start in 2015, arguing that whether it should be contracted-out to private operator to achieve more efficiency or it should be run by KORAIL after re-integrati...

    Currently big debate is reopened about the way of management for Suseo-departing KTX due to start in 2015, arguing that whether it should be contracted-out to private operator to achieve more efficiency or it should be run by KORAIL after re-integrating infrastructure and operation. The heart of this conflict is related with effectiveness of vertical separation and thus specific question; do we need to complete railway reform by accomplishing vertical separation through introducing real competition or not? Vertical separation policy has been adopted by many European countries as a part of railway reform package to allow new entrance and competition to the operation sector separated from infrastructure sector which tends to be natural monopoly with enormous sunk cost. Following this, Korean government also separated former National Railroad Administration into KORAIL and KR in 2004. Until recently, however, neither there have been theoretic discussions nor empirical analyses to identify possible effectiveness of vertical separation. This study tackled the issue and revealed that Korean rail sector enjoys high level of efficiency both before and after separation through Data Envelopment Analysis and international comparison. This conclusion proves against the notion that vertical separation should be re-integrated due to inefficiency of separation policy, but does not support either the notion that higher efficiency could be achieved through perfect separation. However, as higher level of efficiency came from monopoly system and is not related with higher level of service, it gives limited policy implication that reasonable way of introducing more competition should be reviewed further, which was original objective of vertical separation.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 엄태호, "철도산업의 경쟁력 강화를 위한 철도구조 변화에 대한 논의 : 정책전문가 인식조사를 중심으로" 53-76, 2013

    2 건설교통부, "철도산업 구조개혁 기본계획" 건설교통부

    3 이용상, "철도구조개혁의 정책과정에 관한 연구" 729-740, 2003

    4 성명준, "철도구조개혁 성과분석: 운영비용을 중심으로" 1395-1411, 2009

    5 우윤석, "주·토공 통합의 효율성 평가: 자료포락분석을 통한 지방공기업과의 재무제표상 비교를 중심으로" 한국도시행정학회 22 (22): 73-98, 2009

    6 김현웅, "자료포락분석 기법을 이용한 우리나라 철도수송의 효율성 측정" 한국철도학회 12 (12): 542-547, 2009

    7 모창환, "유럽철도 민영화의 시사점" (3) : 88-92, 2003

    8 박진경, "우리나라와 일본 철도산업의 수직분리방안에 대한 비용 측면에서의경제적 타당성 분석" 45 : 97-114, 2007

    9 이재훈, "우리나라 철도산업의 효율성 분석" 교통연구원 2004

    10 EC., "White Paper-European Transport Policy for 2010: Time to Decide" EC 2001

    1 엄태호, "철도산업의 경쟁력 강화를 위한 철도구조 변화에 대한 논의 : 정책전문가 인식조사를 중심으로" 53-76, 2013

    2 건설교통부, "철도산업 구조개혁 기본계획" 건설교통부

    3 이용상, "철도구조개혁의 정책과정에 관한 연구" 729-740, 2003

    4 성명준, "철도구조개혁 성과분석: 운영비용을 중심으로" 1395-1411, 2009

    5 우윤석, "주·토공 통합의 효율성 평가: 자료포락분석을 통한 지방공기업과의 재무제표상 비교를 중심으로" 한국도시행정학회 22 (22): 73-98, 2009

    6 김현웅, "자료포락분석 기법을 이용한 우리나라 철도수송의 효율성 측정" 한국철도학회 12 (12): 542-547, 2009

    7 모창환, "유럽철도 민영화의 시사점" (3) : 88-92, 2003

    8 박진경, "우리나라와 일본 철도산업의 수직분리방안에 대한 비용 측면에서의경제적 타당성 분석" 45 : 97-114, 2007

    9 이재훈, "우리나라 철도산업의 효율성 분석" 교통연구원 2004

    10 EC., "White Paper-European Transport Policy for 2010: Time to Decide" EC 2001

    11 Cantos Sanchez, P., "Vertical and Horizontal Separation in the European Railway Sector: Effects on Productivity" Fundacion BBVA 2008

    12 Cantos, P., "Vertical and Horizontal Separation in the European Railway Sector & its Effects on Productivity" 44 (44): 139-160, 2010

    13 Cantos, P., "Vertical Relationships for the European Railway Industry" 8 : 77-83, 2001

    14 Firebel, G., "Vertical Integration, Competition and Efficiency in the Rail Industry" Institut D'Econmie Industrielle 2005

    15 De Bijl, P., "Towards a Liberalised Postal Market" TILEC, Tilburg University 2003

    16 Preston, J., "The Transaction Cost Economics of Railways" 7 (7): 6-15, 2002

    17 Laabsch, C., "The Impact of Vertical Separation on the Success of the Railways" 2 : 120-128, 2012

    18 Driessen, G., "The Impact of Competition on Productive Efficiency in European Railways" Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, Netherlands 2006

    19 Williamson, O., "The Economic Institutions of Capitalism" The Free Press 1985

    20 Drew, J., "The Benefits for Rail Freight Customers of Vertical Separation and Open Access" 29 (29): 223-237, 2009

    21 Growitsch, C., "Testing for Economies of Scope in European Railways: An Efficient Analysis" University of Lüneburg 2007

    22 Ivaldi, M., "Subadditivity Tests for Network Separation with and Application to U.S. Railroads" 7 (7): 159-171, 2008

    23 Pittman, R., "Structural Separation to Create Competition? The Case of Freight Railways" 4 (4): 181-196, 2005

    24 De Bijl, P., "Structural Separation and Access in Telecommunications Markets" 2003

    25 OECD, "Structural Reform in the Rail Industry, In Competition and Regulation, Structural Reform in the Rail Industry" OECD 2005

    26 Hearsch, J., "Structural Change in Railway Organizations: An Assessment of Recent Experience of Privatisation, Vertical and Horizontal Separation and Intra Modal Competition" South African Railways 2001

    27 Button, K., "Regulation of Transport Markets" 103 (103): 1017-1027, 1993

    28 OECD., "Railways: Structure, Regulation and Competition Policy" Committee on Competition Law and Policy. OECD 1998

    29 UNECE, "Railway Reform. Informal Document SC. 2 No. 3, Working Party on Rail Transport, 66 Session"

    30 ECMT., "Railway Reform and the Charges for the Use of Infrastructure" OECD 2005

    31 Ponti, M., "Railway Liberalization from a Public Choice Perspective" 7 (7): 38-46, 2002

    32 Friebel, G., "Railway (De) Regulation: A European Efficiency Comparison" Institut D'Econmie Industrielle 2003

    33 Bitzan, J., "Railroad Costs and Competition: The Implication of Introducing Competition to Railroad Networks" 37 (37): 201-225, 2003

    34 Mizutani, F., "Rail Operation-Infrastructure Separation: The Case of Kobe Rapid Transit Railway" 11 : 251-263, 2004

    35 Merkert, R., "Looking beyond Separation: A Comparative Analysis of British, German and Swedish Railways from a New Institutional Perspective" 2008

    36 Harris, K., "Jane's World Railways 2010-2011, 5th Edition" IHS Global Ltd 2010

    37 Ksoll, M., "Integration of Infrastructure and Transport: An Assessment from Industrial Economic and Railway Perspective" 2004

    38 Jensen, A, "Economic Impacts of Swedish Railway Deregulation: A Longitudinal Study" 43 : 516-534, 2007

    39 van de Velde, D., "Economic Effects of Vertical Separation in the Railway Sector" CER(Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies) 2012

    40 Mizutani, F., "Does Vertical Separation Reduce Cost? An Empirical Analysis of the Rail Industry in European and East Asian OECD Countries" 43 : 31-59, 2013

    41 Ivaldi, M., "Density and Integration Effects on Class I Freight Railroads" 19 : 161-182, 2001

    42 Jensen, A., "Competition in Railway Monopolies" 34 : 267-287, 1998

    43 Kurosaki, F., "An Analysis of Vertical Separation of Railways" University of Leeds 2008

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2023 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2018-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2001-07-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    1999-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.69 1.69 1.76
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.83 1.8 1.759 0.69
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼