On Optimal Toll Design for Bosporus Crossings

Year 2022, , 121 - 144, 25.10.2022

Özgün Ekici

https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2022.04.06

Abstract

For many years, two toll bridges served commuter demand to cross the strait called Bosporus in Istanbul, Turkey. An underground connection called the Eurasian tunnel had been recently launched to relieve the strait's traffic. We study a simple transportation model that incorporates the forces that have come into play after the opening of the Eurasian tunnel. We find that for welfare maximisation, the premium paid for using the tunnel should be fixed in the two directions and not excessive. The current toll regime violates these features, and we recommend its amendment in light of our findings.

Keywords

Congestion, Toll Bridges, Mixed Duopoly, Regulation, Bosporus

Boğaziçi Geçişleri için Optimal Geçiş Ücreti Tasarımı Üzerine

Abstract

Uzun yıllar boyunca, İstanbul Boğazı’nı geçmek isteyen taşıtlara iki ücretli köprü hizmet verdi. Yakın bir zaman önce ise, Boğaz’da oluşan trafiği rahatlatmak amacı ile Avrasya tüneli adı verilen bir yeraltı bağlantısı hizmete açıldı. Bu çalışmada, Avrasya tünelinin açılmasından sonra devreye giren güçleri bünyesinde barındıran basit bir ulaşım modelini ele aldık. Yaptığımız analizler, refahın maksimizasyonu için, tünel kullanımı için ödenen primin iki yönde aynı olması ve aşırı olmaması gerektiğini ortaya koyuyor. Mevcut geçiş ücret rejimi bu özellikleri ihlal etmekte. Bulgularımızın ışığında mevcut geçiş ücret rejiminde iyileştirme yapılmasını öneriyoruz.

Keywords

Trafik Sıkışıklığı, Ücretli Köprü, Yarı Kamusal Düopol, Regülasyon, Boğaziçi

References

• Anderson, S.P. et al. (1997), “Privatization and efficiency in a differentiated industry”, European Economic Review, 41(9), 1635-1654.
• Aydın, M. et al. (2019), Türkiye Sosyal-Siyasal Eğilimler Araştırması-2018, Kadir Has Üniversitesi.
• Bös, D. (2015), Pricing and price regulation: an economic theory for public enterprises and public utilities, Elsevier, Advanced Textbooks in Economics Nr. 34.
• Casadesus-Masanell, R. & P. Ghemawat (2006), “Dynamic mixed duopoly: A model motivated by Linux vs Windows”, Management Science, 52(7), 1072-1084.
• Cassidy, M.J. et al. (2011), “Macroscopic Fundamental Diagrams for Freeway Networks: Theory and Observation”, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2260(1), 8-15.
• Condon, T. (1994), “Privatization: A Theoretical Treatment, Dieter Bös, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1991, ix + 315 pp., index, $65.00”, Journal of Comparative Economics, 19(2), 281-285.
• Cremer, H. et al. (1989), “The public firm as an instrument for regulating an oligopolistic market”, Oxford Economic Papers, 41(2), 283-301.
• Czerny, A. et al. (2014), “Hub port competition and welfare effects of strategic privatization”, Economics of Transportation, 3(3), 211-220.
• de Fraja, G. & F. Delbono (1989), “Alternative strategies of a public enterprise in oligopoly”, Oxford Economic Papers, 41(1), 302-311.
• Estrin, S. & D. de Meza (1995), “Unnatural monopoly”, Journal of Public Economics, 57(3), 471-488.
• Fujiwara, K. (2007), “Partial privatization in a differentiated mixed oligopoly”, Journal of Economics, 92, 51-65.
• Geroliminis, N. & C.F. Daganzo (2008), “Existence of urban-scale macroscopic fundamental diagrams: Some experimental findings”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(9), 759-770.
• Geroliminis, N. & J. Sun (2011), “Properties of a well-defined macroscopic fundamental diagram for urban traffic”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 45(3), 605-617.
• Harris, R.G. & E.G. Wiens (1980), “Government Enterprise: An Instrument for the Internal Regulation of Industry”, The Canadian Journal of Economics, 13(1), 125-132.
• Ishibashi, I. & T. Matsumura (2006), “R&D competition between public and private sectors”, European Economic Review, 50(6), 1347-1366.
• Kara Yolları Genel Müdürlüğü (2016), 2015 Trafik ve Ulaşım Bilgileri.
• Kara Yolları Genel Müdürlüğü (2019), 2018 Trafik ve Ulaşım Bilgileri.
• Mantin, B. (2012), “Airport complementarity: Private vs government ownership and welfare gravitation”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(3), 381-388.
• Matsumura, T. & O. Kanda (2005), “Mixed Oligopoly at Free Entry Markets”, Journal of Economics, 84, 27-48.
• Matsushima, N. & T. Matsumura (2003), “Mixed oligopoly and spatial agglomeration”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 36(1), 62-87.
• Merrill, W.C. & N. Schneider (1966), “Government Firms in Oligopoly Industries: A Short-Run Analysis”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(3), 400-412.
• Nett, L. (1993), “Mixed oligopoly with homogeneous goods”, Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 64(3), 367-393.
• Nisan, N. et al. (2007), Algorithmic Game Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Qin, F. et al. (2017), “The welfare effects of nationalization in a mixed duopoly public transport market”, Operational Research, 17, 593-618.
• Saberi, M. & H.S. Mahmassani (2012), “Exploring Properties of Networkwide Flow-Density Relations in a Freeway Network”, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2315(1), 153-163.
• Yang, H. & A. Zhang (2012), “Effects of high-speed rail and air transport competition on prices, profits and welfare”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 46(10), 1322-1333.