Abstract
Policy makers in the United States currently are grappling with the complex process of considering an improved regulatory framework to govern the national postal operator. The motivations for changing the present system, based on cost recovery, range from long-standing dissatisfaction with the status quo to recent fear that technological developments in communication threaten the core postal business.
...there are lessons to be learned from these and other progressive postal administrations’ efforts at reform, lessons which may prove workable at home. Many postal deregulation and privatization proponents cite the examples of foreign posts as blueprints for privatization of our postal system.
Congressman John M. McHugh
Chairman, Subcommittee on the Postal Service Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
United States House of Representatives
Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example.
Mark Twain
The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of either PricewaterhouseCoopers, the United States General Accounting Office, or the United States Postal Service.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Beesley, M.E., and S.C. Littlechild. 1989. “The Regulation of Natural Monopolies in the United Kingdom.” Rand Journal of Economics 20 (Autumn): 454–471.
Christensen, Laurits R. 1997. “Statement of Dr. Laurits R. Christensen.” Before the Subcommittee on the Postal Service, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, U.S. House of Representatives, April 8.
Cohen, Robert H., Edward H. Chu, William W. Ferguson, and Spyros S. Xenakis. 1996. “A Cross Sectional Comparison and Analysis of Productivity for 21 National Postal Administrations.” In Managing Change in the Postal and Delivery Industries, edited by Michael A. Crew and Paul R. Kleindorfer. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
Crew, Michael A., and Paul R. Kleindorfer. 1997. “The Postal Service in Transition: H.R. 22—The Postal Reform Act of 1997. ” Testimony before the Subcommittee on the Postal Service, Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, U.S. House of Representatives, April 16.
Knauth, Peter, and Friedhelm Dommermuth. 1996. “Reorganization of the Postal Sector in Germany.” In Diffusion of New Regulatory Approaches in the Postal Sector: Papers presented at the 4th Königswinter Seminar, edited by Ulrich Stumpf and Monika Plum. Wissenschaftliches Institut für Kommunikationsdienste.
Overdijk, Paul. 1996. “Postal Services: Competition in the Netherlands—Current Situation.” In Managing Change in the Postal and Delivery Industries, edited by Michael A. Crew and Paul R. Kleindorfer. Boston: Kluwer Academic Press.
Sharkey, Thomas M. 1996. Comments on “Legislative Proposals to Reform the Postal Law in the United States,” by James I. Campbell. In Diffusion of New Regulatory Approaches in the Postal Sector: Papers presented at the 4th Königswinter Seminar, edited by Ulrich Stumpf and Monika Plum. Wissenschaftliches Institut für Kommunikationsdienste.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Treworgy, D.E., Sharkey, T.M., Fronk, D.R., Kehoe, M.J. (1999). Price-Cap Regulation in the Postal Sector. In: Crew, M.A., Kleindorfer, P.R. (eds) Emerging Competition in Postal and Delivery Services. Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy Series, vol 31. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5122-2_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5122-2_21
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5080-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-5122-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive