IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v39y2022i2p170-198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who owns the pipes? Utility ownership, infrastructure conditions, and methane emissions in United States natural gas distribution

Author

Listed:
  • Ryan P. Scott
  • Tyler A. Scott
  • Robert A. Greer

Abstract

Critical infrastructure systems that provide local public services are owned by a complicated array of public and private entities that are subject to disparate regulatory regimes. Determining whether and why performance differences between public and private service providers emerge in these different contexts is critical for understanding the efficacy of current management efforts and informing policy choices about how to deal with public and private service providers. This paper analyzes a census of all U.S. gas distributors and a more detailed sample of the largest utilities in the United States to model how sector and regional market concentration relate to infrastructure quality and leak volumes. Using safety reports, market data, and yearly infrastructure records submitted by gas distributors from 2010 to 2017, the article uses a series of Bayesian hierarchical models to show that publicly owned utilities report lower quality infrastructure (i.e., operation of pipelines with lower quality materials), but also self‐report significantly lower leak rates, all else equal. The article concludes by discussing potential explanations for this discrepancy, including the capital investment incentives private utilities face under cost‐of‐service pricing regulations and the fact that performance measurement capacity is itself a potential outgrowth of increased investment and expenditures. 提供地方公共服务的关键基础设施系统的所有权属于一系列受不同监管制度影响的、复杂的公共实体和私人实体。确定公共与私人服务提供商在这些不同情境下的表现是否存在差异以及背后的原因是什么,对理解当前管理举措的效能和形成有关如何应对公共与私人服务提供商的政策选择而言是关键的。本文分析了全美天然气分配商的统计数据和关于美国最大型公用事业的详细样本,以期对“部门和区域市场集中度如何与基础设施质量和天然气泄漏量相联系”一事进行建模。通过住用2010‐2017年间由天然气分配商提交的安全报告、市场数据以及年度基础设施记录,本文住用一系列贝叶斯层级模型表明,在其他条件不变的情况下,国有公用事业报告的基础设施质量更低(即,住用质量较差的材料进行管道操作),同时自我报告的天然气泄露率也显著更低。本文的结论探讨了这一差异背后可能的解释,包括私人公用事业提供商在服务成本定价规制情境下面临的资金投入激励,以及“表现衡量能力本身是投资和开支增加所自然产生的结果”这一事实。 Los sistemas de infraestructura crítica que brindan servicios públicos locales son propiedad de un conjunto complicado de entidades públicas y privadas que están sujetas a regímenes regulatorios dispares. Determinar si, y por qué, surgen diferencias de desempeño entre los proveedores de servicios públicos y privados en estos diferentes contextos, es fundamental para comprender la eficacia de los esfuerzos de gestión actuales e informar las opciones de política sobre cómo tratar con los proveedores de servicios públicos y privados. Este documento analiza un censo de todos los distribuidores de gas de EE. UU. Y una muestra más detallada de las empresas de servicios públicos más grandes de EE. UU. Para modelar cómo la concentración del mercado regional y sectorial se relaciona con la calidad de la infraestructura y los volúmenes de fugas. Utilizando informes de seguridad, datos de mercado y registros anuales de infraestructura presentados por distribuidores de gas de 2010 a 2017, el artículo utiliza una serie de modelos jerárquicos bayesianos para mostrar que las empresas de servicios públicos informan sobre infraestructura de menor calidad (es decir, operación de tuberías con materiales de menor calidad). pero también autoinforme tasas de fuga significativamente más bajas, todo lo demás igual. El artículo concluye discutiendo las posibles explicaciones de esta discrepancia, incluidos los incentivos de inversión de capital que enfrentan las empresas privadas de servicios bajo las regulaciones de precios por costo de servicio y el hecho de que la capacidad de medición del desempeño es en sí misma una consecuencia potencial del aumento de la inversión y los gastos.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryan P. Scott & Tyler A. Scott & Robert A. Greer, 2022. "Who owns the pipes? Utility ownership, infrastructure conditions, and methane emissions in United States natural gas distribution," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(2), pages 170-198, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:2:p:170-198
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12463
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12463
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12463?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tyler A Scott & Tima Moldogaziev & Robert A Greer, 2018. "Drink what you can pay for: Financing infrastructure in a fragmented water system," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 2821-2837, October.
    2. Lindsay, Cotton M, 1976. "A Theory of Government Enterprise," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 84(5), pages 1061-1077, October.
    3. Elizabeth A Albright & Deserai Crow, 2019. "Beliefs about climate change in the aftermath of extreme flooding," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Palmer, Karen & Ando, Amy, 1998. "Getting on the Map: The Political Economy of State-Level Electricity Restructuring," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-19-rev, Resources for the Future.
    5. Brown,Stephen J. & Sibley,David Sumner, 1986. "The Theory of Public Utility Pricing," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521314008.
    6. John Kwoka, 2006. "The Role of Competition in Natural Monopoly: Costs, Public Ownership, and Regulation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 29(1), pages 127-147, September.
    7. Julian Besag & Jeremy York & Annie Mollié, 1991. "Bayesian image restoration, with two applications in spatial statistics," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 43(1), pages 1-20, March.
    8. David E.M. Sappington & David S. Sibley, 1992. "Strategic Nonlinear Pricing under Price-Cap Regulation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 1-19, Spring.
    9. Scott, Ryan P. & Scott, Tyler A. & Greer, Robert A., 2019. "The environmental and safety performance of gas utilities in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    10. Catherine Hausman & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2019. "Price Regulation and Environmental Externalities: Evidence from Methane Leaks," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 73-109.
    11. David M. Konisky & Manuel P. Teodoro, 2016. "When Governments Regulate Governments," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(3), pages 559-574, July.
    12. Christopher Berry, 2008. "Piling On: Multilevel Government and the Fiscal Common‐Pool," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 802-820, October.
    13. Håvard Rue & Sara Martino & Nicolas Chopin, 2009. "Approximate Bayesian inference for latent Gaussian models by using integrated nested Laplace approximations," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(2), pages 319-392, April.
    14. Burns, Phil & Riechmann, Christoph, 2004. "Regulatory instruments and their effects on investment behavior," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3292, The World Bank.
    15. Gregory Pierce & Larry Lai & J.R. DeShazo, 2019. "Identifying and addressing drinking water system sprawl, its consequences, and the opportunity for planners’ intervention: evidence from Los Angeles County," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(12), pages 2080-2100, October.
    16. Burns, Phil & Riechmann, Christoph, 2004. "Regulatory instruments and investment behaviour," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 211-219, December.
    17. Andrew Massey, 2019. "Editorial: Innovation in public administration to leave no one behind," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(7), pages 455-457, October.
    18. Porcher, Simon, 2016. "Neither market nor hierarchy: concurrent sourcing in water public services," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82990, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Russell W. Mills & Christopher J. Koliba, 2015. "The challenge of accountability in complex regulatory networks: The case of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 77-91, March.
    20. Giovanni Fraquelli & Massimiliano Piacenza & Davide Vannoni, 2004. "Scope and scale economies in multi-utilities: evidence from gas, water and electricity combinations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(18), pages 2045-2057.
    21. Christopher R. Knittel, 2003. "Market Structure and the Pricing of Electricity and Natural Gas," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 167-191, June.
    22. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64, pages 416-416.
    23. Wallsten, Scott & Kosec, Katrina, 2008. "The effects of ownership and benchmark competition: An empirical analysis of U.S. water systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 186-205, January.
    24. Bouzarovski, Stefan & Petrova, Saska & Sarlamanov, Robert, 2012. "Energy poverty policies in the EU: A critical perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 76-82.
    25. Campbell, Alrick, 2018. "Cap prices or cap revenues? The dilemma of electric utility networks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 802-812.
    26. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2008. "The costs of failure: A preliminary assessment of major energy accidents, 1907-2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 1802-1820, May.
    27. Kuosmanen, Timo & Nguyen, Tuan, 2020. "Capital bias in the Nordic revenue cap regulation: Averch-Johnson critique revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    28. Walker, Gordon & Day, Rosie, 2012. "Fuel poverty as injustice: Integrating distribution, recognition and procedure in the struggle for affordable warmth," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 69-75.
    29. David M. Konisky & Tyler S. Schario, 2010. "Examining Environmental Justice in Facility‐Level Regulatory Enforcement," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(3), pages 835-855, September.
    30. Robin Gregory & Theresa Satterfield & David R. Boyd, 2020. "People, Pipelines, and Probabilities: Clarifying Significance and Uncertainty in Environmental Impact Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 218-226, February.
    31. Steven L. Puller & Jeremy West, 2013. "Efficient Retail Pricing in Electricity and Natural Gas Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 350-355, May.
    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. Nils C. Bandelow & Johanna Hornung & Ilana Schröder & Colette S. Vogeler, 2022. "Localities and infrastructures in science, technology, and environmental policy making," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(2), pages 118-119, March.

    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. Scott, Ryan P. & Scott, Tyler A. & Greer, Robert A., 2019. "The environmental and safety performance of gas utilities in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Dobbin, Kristin B. & Fencl, Amanda L., 2021. "Institutional diversity and safe drinking water provision in the United States," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. HyungGun Park, 2021. "Income sorting by specialized services: Service differentiation by overlapping governments," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2761-2775, November.
    4. Shreosi Sanyal & Thierry Rochereau & Cara Nichole Maesano & Laure Com-Ruelle & Isabella Annesi-Maesano, 2018. "Long-Term Effect of Outdoor Air Pollution on Mortality and Morbidity: A 12-Year Follow-Up Study for Metropolitan France," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-8, November.
    5. Mayer Alvo & Jingrui Mu, 2023. "COVID-19 Data Analysis Using Bayesian Models and Nonparametric Geostatistical Models," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Vanessa Santos-Sánchez & Juan Antonio Córdoba-Doña & Javier García-Pérez & Antonio Escolar-Pujolar & Lucia Pozzi & Rebeca Ramis, 2020. "Cancer Mortality and Deprivation in the Proximity of Polluting Industrial Facilities in an Industrial Region of Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Goodman, Christopher B, 2019. "Political Fragmentation & Economic Growth in U.S. Metropolitan Areas," SocArXiv dx75m, Center for Open Science.
    8. Massimo Bilancia & Giacomo Demarinis, 2014. "Bayesian scanning of spatial disease rates with integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA)," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 23(1), pages 71-94, March.
    9. Parkinson, Aidan & Guthrie, Peter, 2014. "Evaluating the energy performance of buildings within a value at risk framework with demonstration on UK offices," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 40-55.
    10. Douglas R. M. Azevedo & Marcos O. Prates & Dipankar Bandyopadhyay, 2021. "MSPOCK: Alleviating Spatial Confounding in Multivariate Disease Mapping Models," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 26(3), pages 464-491, September.
    11. Jonathan Wakefield & Taylor Okonek & Jon Pedersen, 2020. "Small Area Estimation for Disease Prevalence Mapping," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 88(2), pages 398-418, August.
    12. Julien Riou & Anthony Hauser & Anna Fesser & Christian L. Althaus & Matthias Egger & Garyfallos Konstantinoudis, 2023. "Direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality in Switzerland," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    13. Jaewoo Cho & Jae Hong Kim & Yonsu Kim, 2019. "Metropolitan governance structure and growth–inequality dynamics in the United States," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(3), pages 598-616, May.
    14. Isabel Martínez-Pérez & Verónica González-Iglesias & Valentín Rodríguez Suárez & Ana Fernández-Somoano, 2021. "Spatial Distribution of Hospitalizations for Ischemic Heart Diseases in the Central Region of Asturias, Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-10, November.
    15. Johnson, Blair T. & Sisti, Anthony & Bernstein, Mary & Chen, Kun & Hennessy, Emily A. & Acabchuk, Rebecca L. & Matos, Michaela, 2021. "Community-level factors and incidence of gun violence in the United States, 2014–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    16. Simona Benedettini & Federico Pontoni, "undated". "Electricity distribution investments: no country for old rules? A critical overview of UK and Italian regulations," IEFE Working Papers 50, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    17. Maike Tahden & Juliane Manitz & Klaus Baumgardt & Gerhard Fell & Thomas Kneib & Guido Hegasy, 2016. "Epidemiological and Ecological Characterization of the EHEC O104:H4 Outbreak in Hamburg, Germany, 2011," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Márcio Poletti Laurini, 2017. "A spatial error model with continuous random effects and an application to growth convergence," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 371-398, October.
    19. Pilar Murias & Beatriz Valcárcel-Aguiar & Rosa María Regueiro-Ferreira, 2020. "A Territorial Estimate for Household Energy Vulnerability: An Application for Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-21, July.
    20. Radka Jersakova & James Lomax & James Hetherington & Brieuc Lehmann & George Nicholson & Mark Briers & Chris Holmes, 2022. "Bayesian imputation of COVID‐19 positive test counts for nowcasting under reporting lag," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(4), pages 834-860, August.

    More about this item

    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:bla:revpol:v:39:y:2022:i:2:p:170-198. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.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.