ABSTRACT
In terms of externalities that can occur in networks, infrastructure networks contain two distinctly different types of networks. The club type network is a network with actors who share a common goal and, therefore, their transaction chains are parallel. The club type actors in our example are the passengers of the Dutch Railways whose shared goal is to travel, using the railways for this purpose. Contrary to the club type network, actors in the web type network have complementary and/or supplementary goals rather than one common goal. Thus web type actors are linked in a serial, rather than parallel way. In our example the web type actors represent the Dutch Railway organization and its management. Problems appear when we consider the externalities of these two types of networks. The larger the number of passengers, club type actors, the better facilities can the Railway organization provide them with. However, once the passengers begin to use the railway network actively, congestion occurs. Passengers have to wait in long queues for tickets, cannot find a free seat in the trains and cannot travel comfortably. At the same time, the Railway organization does benefit from the high transaction volume in terms of revenue caused by many passengers paying for actual use of the trains. A high transaction volume creates agglomeration effects for the web type actors enabling them to specialize and reach economies of scale. In this contribution we attempt to elaborate on the above situation, aiming to conclude the effectiveness of the Dutch Railways, or rather the lack of it. For this purpose we use the systems perspective, analysing the feedback mechanisms that underlie the infrastructure network. Section 10.2 outlines the necessary network concepts and terms used in the chapter. The question of effectiveness is elaborated in Section 10.3 using the systems approach to analyse feedback processes within the Dutch Railways network. The main point is this: an infrastructure network cannot be judged based on the relationships involved, and perfectly
consistent and complementary relationships cannot be taken for granted. Analysing relationships as such does not lead to any conclusion as to the effectiveness of the network. Whether or not the network is effective will only expire, if relationships are considered with reference to the whole infrastructure network. Looking at networks this way however, leads to surprises. Networks which seemed to function effectively are in fact trapped in vicious circles from which there is no way out.
