Workshop 1 Report: Developing an effective performance regime

Wijnand Veeneman and Andrew Smith

Research in Transportation Economics, 2014, vol. 48, issue C, 62-66

Abstract: This workshop discussed the challenges faced in developing performance regimes: in particular, the way in which public transport authorities secure the performance of their operator(s). Earlier Thredbo workshops focused mostly on setting and measuring performance standards and incentivizing performance. This year's workshop also looked more widely. The first additional topic was the context in which the performance regime is operating: how well is the market developed and what consequences does that have for the regime? The second was the maturity of the regime. Which conditions have to be fulfilled to have a fully-fledged and mature performance regime? These questions were addressed based on papers (and workshop participants) discussing performance in Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Greece, France, Ireland, Sweden, The Netherlands, Chile and Latin America more widely, and The United States. Key findings are that a wider set of conditions has to be in place to make a performance regime work. Appropriate technology is needed to capture good quality data. Mature institutions – that is, with the necessary legal powers to enforce contracts, guard against capture by the operators, and with appropriate staffing and resources – are also crucial. Maturity differs widely in the countries covered in the workshop, and thus different solutions are needed in different contexts. In particular, in situations of “low maturity”, regimes that place greater emphasis on passenger/demand metrics are likely to be more appropriate. The distinction between enforcing and incentivizing is also important in developing an appropriate performance regime. A suggested analytical framework for an effective performance regime which takes account of the above factors is set out, together with areas for future research. Obtaining greater information on the marginal costs and benefits of improving performance and also how better to benchmark complex and diverse operations against each other are key areas for future research. Other key research needs identified include: how to strike the right balance between enforcement versus seeking improvement; operationalizing KPIs (e.g. targeting frequency versus punctuality); and understanding real as opposed to assumed behavior by authorities and public and private operators.

Keywords: Contracts; Performance measurement; Tendering; Productivity and efficiency; KPIs; L14; D24 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885914000730
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:retrec:v:48:y:2014:i:c:p:62-66

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
https://shop.elsevie ... _01_ooc_2&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2014.09.032

Access Statistics for this article

Research in Transportation Economics is currently edited by M. Dresner

More articles in Research in Transportation Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().