Advertisement

Compensation Fund in Postal Service: A Step Forward After the Polish Case

  • S. RomitoEmail author
  • S. Gori
  • A. Rovero
Chapter
Part of the Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy book series (TREP)

Abstract

European Commission with the Decision SA.38869 (2014/N) has approved the Compensation Fund (CF) as a mean of financing the universal service net cost in Poland. In the light of this Decision, the paper examines firstly the features of a fair CF then the products of the universal service among different Countries, with a special focus on parcels and express courier. In the next section it is analyzed the difference between the parcel and express courier shipments in the light of prevailing market definitions in EC Decisions. As e-commerce shipments are boosting, the research also examines their characteristics and their eligibility to contribute to the CF. The paper concludes with a possible way forward after the Polish decision.

References

  1. AGCOM. (2015a). Delibera N. 396/15/CONS - Nuovi obiettivi statistici di qualità e nuove tariffe degli invii postali universali ai sensi dell’art. 1, comma 280 della legge 23 dicembre 2014, n. 190.Google Scholar
  2. AGCOM. (2015b). Delibera N. 298/17/CONS – Servizio Postale Universale: Analisi ed applicabilità del meccanismo di ripartizione e valutazione dell’eventuale costo netto per gli anni 2013 e 2014.Google Scholar
  3. Commission Notice. (2003), On the definition of relevant market for the purpose of Community competition law. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31997Y1209(01)&from=EN
  4. Copenhagen Economics. (2013). E-commerce and delivery –a study on the state of play of EU parcel markets with particular emphasis on e-commerce. European Commission DG Market.Google Scholar
  5. Copenhagen Economics. (2015). Study on the interchangeability of USO and non-USO services. Commissioned by EEA.Google Scholar
  6. Copenhagen Economics. (2017). Effects of changing USO in Norway – Final Report, 2017. Correos web site. http://www.correos.es/ss/Satellite/site/producto-paquete_azul-todos_paqueteria/detalle_de_producto-sidioma=es_ES
  7. Court Of Justice. (2017). Opinion of the Advocate General Campos Sánchez Bordona, Confetra and others, Joined Cases C 259/16 and C 260/16.Google Scholar
  8. Court of Justice Judgment. (2018). Confetra and Others, C 259/16.Google Scholar
  9. Decision of European Commission. (1999). Case No IV/M.1405 TNT Post Group/Jet Services.Google Scholar
  10. Decision of European Commission. (1999). Case No IV/M. 1347 – Deutsche Post/Securicor.Google Scholar
  11. Decision of European Commission. (1999). Case No IV/M. 1513 Deutsche Post/Danzas/Nedlloyd.Google Scholar
  12. Decision of European Commission. (2003). Case No COMP/M: 3155 Deutsche Post/Securicor.Google Scholar
  13. Decision of European Commission. (2005). Case No COMP/M 3971 Deutsche Post/Excel.Google Scholar
  14. Decision of European Commission. (2013). Case No COMP/M 6570 UPS/TNT Express.Google Scholar
  15. Decision of European Commission. (2015). SA.38869 (2014/N) - Compensation of Poczta Polska for the net of USO 2013–2015.Google Scholar
  16. Decision of European Commission. (2016). Case No COMP/M: 7630 FedexTNT ExpressGoogle Scholar
  17. Department of justice Antitrust Division USA. (1982). https://www.justice.gov/archives/atr/1982-merger-guidelines
  18. Department of justice Antitrust Division USA. (2003). Merger guidelines.Google Scholar
  19. Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. (2008, February 20).Google Scholar
  20. Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with amendments. (1997, December 15).Google Scholar
  21. EFTA Decision. (2015). Case No 277/15/COL - Exempting certain logistic services of Posten Norge AS from the application of Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors [2016/488].Google Scholar
  22. European Regulators group for Postal services (ERPG). (2013). ERGP opinion requested by the European Commission - European cross-border e-commerce parcels delivery and questions related to market analysis, 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/documents/14343/attachments/1/translations
  23. Gautier, A., & Paolini, D. (2011). Universal service financing in competitive postal markets: One size does not fit all. Review of Network Economics, 10, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Groupe La Poste. (2018). Catalogue des offres commerciales de la poste relevant du service universel postal 1er janvier 2018.Google Scholar
  25. International Postal Corporation. https://www.ipc.be/
  26. PostNL. (2018). Postal rates as of January 2018.Google Scholar
  27. Romito S, Gori S, Scarfiglieri G. (2017). Compensation fund in postal service a step forward after the Polish Case. Paper Presented at 25th Conference on Postal and Delivery Economics.Google Scholar
  28. WIK Consult. (2013). Main Developments in the Postal Sector (2010–2013). Study for the European Commission.Google Scholar
  29. WIK Consult. (2016). Future scenario devepolments in the Dutch postal markets - Study for the Ministry of Economic Affairs. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2016/12/14/future-scenario-developments-in-the-dutch-postal-market

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Poste ItalianeRomeItaly
  2. 2.School of Transnational GovernanceEuropean University InstituteFiesoleItaly

Personalised recommendations