IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbb/docwpp/200409-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Liberalisation of network industries : Is the electricity sector an exception to the rule?

Author

Listed:
  • François Coppens

    (National Bank of Belgium, Microeconomic Information Department)

  • David Vivet

    (National Bank of Belgium, Microeconomic Information Department)

Abstract

For quite a long time, network industries used to be regarded as (natural) monopolies. This was due to these industries having some special characteristics. Network externalities and economies of scale in particular justified the (natural) monopoly thesis. Recently, however, a trend towards deregulation of such industries has been observed. This trend started with the successful introduction of competition in the telecommunications sector. The main reason behind this success is that the economies of scale have disappeared as a result of emerging new technologies. The successful deregulation in telecommunications is in line with micro-economic theory, which predicts an increase in efficiency and lower prices when markets are opened up to competition. The success in the telecommunications sector is often used as an argument for opening up other network industries to competition as well. In this paper we analyse whether this reasoning can be transposed to the electricity sector. It is argued that the two sectors, electricity and telecommunications, are similar in that they are both network industries which used to be characterised by economies of scale, and that technological progress might have put an end to this scale effect. There are however certain differences. Firstly, technological progress on the supply side was accompanied by a strong growth in demand in the telecommunications sector. This demand side effect is absent in electricity. Moreover, due to physical characteristics, the electricity sector seems to be more complicated: in order to introduce competition in the sector, it has to be split up into subsectors (production, transmission, distribution and supply). Competition is introduced in production and supply, transmission and distribution remain monopolies. This splitting up creates a new kind of costs, the so-called transaction costs. The paper is centered around two issues: (a) are the basic assumptions behind the theoretical model of the perfectly free market met in the deregulated subsectors? and (b) do the transaction costs (partly) offset possible price decreases in competitive segments ? There is no hard evidence that the hypotheses behind the theoretical model are met in the electricity sector, and there are strong indications that these transaction costs might be substantial. Moreover, in addition to the deregulation process, the electricity sector is also subject to other changes such as the internalisation of externalities (see the Kyoto protocol) and the debate on nuclear energy. These elements could exert an upward pressure on prices. Since electricity is ubiquitous, the deregulation process should be closely monitored.

Suggested Citation

  • François Coppens & David Vivet, 2004. "Liberalisation of network industries : Is the electricity sector an exception to the rule?," Working Paper Document 59, National Bank of Belgium.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbb:docwpp:200409-59
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nbb.be/doc/ts/publications/wp/wp59en.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaserman, David L & Mayo, John W, 1991. "The Measurement of Vertical Economies and the Efficient Structure of the Electric Utility Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 483-502, September.
    2. Guido Pepermans & Stef Proost, 2000. "The Liberalisation of the Energy Sector in the European Union," Energy, Transport and Environment Working Papers Series ete0003, KU Leuven, Department of Economics - Research Group Energy, Transport and Environment.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rimšaitė, Laura, 2019. "Corruption risk mitigation in energy sector: Issues and challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 260-266.
    2. Klaus Weyerstrass & Johannes Jaenicke, 2011. "Is more competition conducive to the macroeconomic performance in the euro area?," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 351-380, July.
    3. François Coppens, 2010. "The increased volatility of electricity prices for Belgian households," Economic Review, National Bank of Belgium, issue ii, pages 83-110, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tin Cheuk Leung & Kwok Ping Ping & Kevin K. Tsui, 2019. "What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-32, August.
    2. repec:ers:journl:v:xv:y:2012:i:sie:p:157-194 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Fetz, Aurelio & Filippini, Massimo, 2010. "Economies of vertical integration in the Swiss electricity sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1325-1330, November.
    4. Isabel Soares & Paula Sarmento, 2012. "Unbundling in the Telecommunications and the Electricity Sectors: How Far should it Go?," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 157-194.
    5. Triebs, T.P. & Pollitt, M.G. & Kwoka, J.E., 2010. "The Direct Costs and Benefits of US Electric Utility Divestitures," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1049, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    6. Tooraj Jamasb & Michael Pollitt, 2005. "Deregulation and R&D in network industries: the case of the electricity industry," Working Papers EPRG 0502, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    7. Felix Höffler & Sebastian Kranz, 2011. "Imperfect legal unbundling of monopolistic bottlenecks," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 273-292, June.
    8. Jamasb, T. & Mota, R. & Newbery, D. & Pollitt, M., 2004. "‘Electricity Sector Reform in Developing Countries: A Survey of Empirical Evidence on Determinants and Performance’," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0439, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. Simshauser, P., 2020. "Merchant utilities and boundaries of the firm: vertical integration in energy-only markets," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2039, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Bunn, Derek W. & Oliveira, Fernando S., 2007. "Agent-based analysis of technological diversification and specialization in electricity markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1265-1278, September.
    11. Lin, Boqiang & Wu, Wei, 2017. "Cost of long distance electricity transmission in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 132-140.
    12. François Coppens & David Vivet, 2006. "The single European electricity market: A long road to convergence," Working Paper Document 84, National Bank of Belgium.
    13. Ali Akkemik, K., 2009. "Cost function estimates, scale economies and technological progress in the Turkish electricity generation sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 204-213, January.
    14. France Krizanic & Zan Jan Oplotnik, 2017. "Factors of Electricity Prices in Selected Eu Member States after the Financial Crisis and During Significant Market Distortions," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 250-254.
    15. Ajayi, Victor & Weyman-Jones, Thomas & Glass, Anthony, 2017. "Cost efficiency and electricity market structure: A case study of OECD countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 283-291.
    16. Néstor Duch, 2005. "Vertical linkages, agglomeration and the organization of production in European regions," Working Papers 2005/6, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    17. Stephen P. King, 1997. "National Competition Policy," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 73(222), pages 270-284, September.
    18. John E. Kwoka, 2005. "The comparative advantage of public ownership: evidence from U.S. electric utilities," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 622-640, May.
    19. Bottasso, Anna & Conti, Maurizio & Piacenz, Massimiliano & Vannoni, Davide, 2011. "The appropriateness of the poolability assumption for multiproduct technologies: Evidence from the English water and sewerage utilities," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 112-117, March.
    20. Asantewaa, Adwoa & Jamasb, Tooraj & Llorca, Manuel, 2022. "Reforming Small Electricity Systems: Market Design and Competition," Working Papers 12-2022, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    21. Changqi Wu & Leonard K. Cheng, 2000. "Hong Kong's Business Regulation in Transition," NBER Chapters, in: Deregulation and Interdependence in the Asia-Pacific Region, pages 157-194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Welfare economics; market structure and pricing; organizational behaviour; transaction costs; property rights; Electric Utilities; Telecommunications.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • D41 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Perfect Competition
    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbb:docwpp:200409-59. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bnbgvbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.