Demiryollarında özelleştirme ve Türkiye açısından bir değerlendirme
Privatization of railways and a discussion about Türkish national railways
- Tez No: 46413
- Danışmanlar: PROF.DR. HALUK GERÇEK
- Tez Türü: Yüksek Lisans
- Konular: İnşaat Mühendisliği, Civil Engineering
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
- Yıl: 1995
- Dil: Türkçe
- Üniversite: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
- Enstitü: Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü
- Ana Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Sayfa Sayısı: 104
Özet
* The structure of costs and the breakdown of responsibilities must be made more transparent. Considerable funds are allocated to the railways without it being possible always to identify what they are used for, and the outcome. * The railways should be more independent of goverments. At present there is too much scope for interference. For example, the railways are obliged to procure equipment and supplies from domestic firms. It may be considered that this practice has led to the incompatibilities that exist between highspeed rail systems. * Forms of privatization are under way for some of the networks1 activities, particularly repairs, cleaning, construction and maintanence of rolling stock or lines. * Transforming railways into public or similar companies may be only a stage in the process of privatization while the state is still the owner. Nonetheless, managers more flexibility if rail undertakings were constituted under private law. Full privatization would transfer day-to-day and strategic decision-making to the private sector. The risks incurred would no longer by covered by the state. However, in the present circumtances it would not be feasible to sell the railways to stock market; it is important to bear in mind that privatization of railways would be accompanied by the removal of certain obligations if goverments were unwilling to provide financial compensation to operators for maintaining them. * Private car use has created a pattern of urban development to which the railways are not necessarily suited. They could therefore concentrate on high-speed services and trains which serve the outer suburbs of the major cities. As regards freight transport, combined transport and complete train sets have a future ahead of them provided that their productivity can be improved. As private operators will obviously select and expand profitable services, eventually the face of the networks could change considerably. In the light of this short looking to privatization and its aims the purpose of this study was to discuss whether the privatization is the proper way for rationalising the railways or not. Overlooking to the costs and benefits of railways and discussing the experiences of some countries which have been privatised or begin to privatise their railways, a decision will be made to establish the optimum model for TCDD (Turkish National Railways). In the second chapter, a brief explanation about privatization, privatization models and privatization orders is made. In the 3rd. chapter the privatization studies of Turkish Goverment hâs been stated. In the 4th. chapter, the cost problem of railway privatization and the characteristics of railways are explained briefly. The privatization models which has been discussed by the world ix
Özet (Çeviri)
SUMMARY PRIVATIZATION OF RAILWAYS AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT TURKISH NATIONAL RAILVVAYS (TCDD) Över last twenty years, there have been majör changes in many countries in the role and structure of the railway industry. Railway reform is as much about the vvorkings of transport markets as about the structure of railway enterprises. For an efficient and effective railway indusrtry it is necessary to create a competitively neutral transport market. Hovever, this is not sufficient to deliver improvement. Railvvay managers actually to plan, market and deliver services to customers vvhich will determine the success of railway reform. The subject of this thesis is to seek, does privatization is the only way to reform railvvay industry, how to privatize railways and can TCDD be reformed. Many countries are privatized their railways. However national approaches to privatization differs from country to country. Privatization can be examined in three stages: 1-Aims and nature of privatization. 2-Examples of privatization, 3-Establishing an optimum model for privatization of concerned country. Supervîsers have to identify two issues; what are the problems that goverments are seeking to resolve by privatising railways, how should privatization be defined? The first problem is the railvvay's deficits. Notvvithstanding marked differences from öne country to another, aids and subsidies are a heavy financial burden that Finance Ministers would like to see reduced. Users are paying less and less, vvhich means that the burden on the taxpâyers is rising accordingly. Aids and subsidies are increasing more rapidly than the rate of grovvth of goverment budgets, and of GDP to an even greater extent. This immediately rise the viquestiın of public service obligations and the degree to vvhich they should be offset financially by goverments. it is also raises questions concerning the extent to vvhich public undertakings are managed efficiently. This is the question of the future of the railvvays which is posed in a very specific context. A short look at history shows that many country rail undertakings were nationalised at a time when they were loosing a lot of money as a result of the competition from the roads and their heavy public service obligations. Today, the railvvays are experiencing similar deficits, hovvever, some experts advocate the opposite solution to nationalisation, namely, privatization. A rail undertaking can be said to be fully privatised only if three conditions are met: *the rail undertaking's public service obligations are abolished ör it is compensated properly for rneeting them; *the goverment selis the rail undertaking to private enterpreneurs who operate ît in accordance with commercial law; *the privatised undertaking must balance its accounts and enjoy freedom of management at ali times. in practice, the privatizations under way ör planned are far from meeting these criteria. They do, hovvever, have in common an assumption that their effects will be beneffîcials, for the following reasons: *Private enterprises must be competitive; they are therefore constantly seeking to cut their costs. in contrast, railvvays have a constant tendency to över their costs, due to either the management shortcomings ör to frequent pofitical interference in their strategic choices. For example, the goverment may require them to expand their workforces in order to promote employment, to purchase rolling stock from local suppliers as a form of industrial support ör to build lines for which there is no justification. *Besides, rationalising operations, a private operatör vvould be contantly seeking to innovate and improve the quality of services provided. This is the only way of halting the probable decline of the railvvays. *A privatised, profit-making railvvay vvould attract capital, thereby eassing the burden on public finances at a time when they are under particular pressure. viiOf course, the goverment would continue to subsidise certain unprofitable services which it wihed to maintain. Privatization reflects a resolve on the part of the authorities to run the railways as efficient transport undertakings rather than as goverment departments. Also, many networks are burdened by debt. The sale of their assets would make it possible to reduce their indebtedness, the scale of which restricts their invesment. Several experts considered that there were excellent managers in the railways but they were subject to constraints that were not to be found in other sectors. Frequent reference was made to the wide-scale interference in the form of pressure brought to bear on the railways' policy decisions or to the fact that the conditions of employment of rail workers differ from those in the other transport modes. It is very important to take account of, and to look at more closely, this latter point. The fact that the conditions of competition in rail are harmonised with those in other transport modes probably precludes an efficient privatization. It is very difficult for the railways, with their decreasing cost structure, to compete with small road operators who are just breaking even. This will be true irrespective of the institutional structure adopted for the railways, but it is clear that the private sector will not invest in rail undertakings if there seems very little chance of running them at a profit, as is the case at present. Managers must also be free to set management objectives, which presupposes that they are given a large amount of leeway in running the railways, especially with regard to manning levels. Many networks would have to reduce their workforces, all the more in that they would be providing only services that are profitable or that could become so. In fact, different degrees of privatization may be envisaged, the concept therefore needs to be qualified, since it covers approaches that vary from one country to the next. It is also important to note that privatization does not necessarily imply the abolition of the public service. On the other hand, if infrastructure development does remain a public prerogative, there are legitimate grounds for fearing that investment choices will be determined solely according the financial rate of return, and not take account of social costs and benefits. In particular, investment is likely to be postponed during an economic down-turn, which would mean that the quality of rail services would eventually suffer. As rail is in competition with the private car and air transport, it must be modernised continually to remain competitive. The conclusions of this discussion may be summed up as follows: * The desire to reduce subsidies is a paramount consideration in the plans to transform the railways. This is coupled, naturally, with a desire to improve their efficiency, to increase their productivity and even to operate them at a profit. VM* The structure of costs and the breakdown of responsibilities must be made more transparent. Considerable funds are allocated to the railways without it being possible always to identify what they are used for, and the outcome. * The railways should be more independent of goverments. At present there is too much scope for interference. For example, the railways are obliged to procure equipment and supplies from domestic firms. It may be considered that this practice has led to the incompatibilities that exist between highspeed rail systems. * Forms of privatization are under way for some of the networks1 activities, particularly repairs, cleaning, construction and maintanence of rolling stock or lines. * Transforming railways into public or similar companies may be only a stage in the process of privatization while the state is still the owner. Nonetheless, managers more flexibility if rail undertakings were constituted under private law. Full privatization would transfer day-to-day and strategic decision-making to the private sector. The risks incurred would no longer by covered by the state. However, in the present circumtances it would not be feasible to sell the railways to stock market; it is important to bear in mind that privatization of railways would be accompanied by the removal of certain obligations if goverments were unwilling to provide financial compensation to operators for maintaining them. * Private car use has created a pattern of urban development to which the railways are not necessarily suited. They could therefore concentrate on high-speed services and trains which serve the outer suburbs of the major cities. As regards freight transport, combined transport and complete train sets have a future ahead of them provided that their productivity can be improved. As private operators will obviously select and expand profitable services, eventually the face of the networks could change considerably. In the light of this short looking to privatization and its aims the purpose of this study was to discuss whether the privatization is the proper way for rationalising the railways or not. Overlooking to the costs and benefits of railways and discussing the experiences of some countries which have been privatised or begin to privatise their railways, a decision will be made to establish the optimum model for TCDD (Turkish National Railways). In the second chapter, a brief explanation about privatization, privatization models and privatization orders is made. In the 3rd. chapter the privatization studies of Turkish Goverment hâs been stated. In the 4th. chapter, the cost problem of railway privatization and the characteristics of railways are explained briefly. The privatization models which has been discussed by the world ixcountries are stated in the 5th. chapter. The models, that have been used by the countries, United Kingdom, Japan and Svvitzerland has been told in the 6th. chapter. The existing position of Turkish National Railways and the study of TCDD is explained in the 7th. and 8th. chapters.
Benzer Tezler
- Demiryollarının deregülasyonu küresel uygulamalar ve Türkiye için öneriler
The deregulation of railways global applications and proposals for Turkey
ELVAN ARSLAN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2017
TrafikGazi ÜniversitesiTrafik Planlaması ve Uygulaması Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. METİN ŞENBİL
- Türkiye'de demiryollarının serbestleştirilmesi
Liberalisation of railways in Turkey
MEHMET VAKUR KULAT
- Türkiye'de demiryollarının serbestleştirilmesi sürecinin iç ve dış dinamikler bağlamında değerlendirilmesi
The assesstment of the liberalization process of railways in Turkey in terms of internal and external dynamics
KENAN ÇALIŞKAN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2017
Kamu YönetimiAnkara Hacı Bayram Veli ÜniversitesiAcil Durum ve Afet Yönetimi Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ONUR ENDER ASLAN
- A framework for the conservation of Egirdir train station complex and its integration to the city
Eğirdir tren istasyonu kompleksinin korunması ve kent ile entegrasyonu üzerine bir değerlendirme
ALİ SİNAN
Yüksek Lisans
İngilizce
2019
MimarlıkOrta Doğu Teknik ÜniversitesiKültürel Mirası Koruma Ana Bilim Dalı
DR. FUAT GÖKÇE
- Demiryollarında boş yük vagonlarının dağıtılması
Başlık çevirisi yok
LÜTFÜ GÜRAN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
1998
İnşaat Mühendisliğiİstanbul Teknik Üniversitesiİnşaat Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ORAL TÜMAY