IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v17y1997i01p81-105_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Profitability in the Public Utilities, Defence and Pharmaceuticals1

Author

Listed:
  • Martin, Stephen
  • Hartley, Keith

Abstract

The United Kingdom's system of utility regulation – controlling prices rather than profits – is under increasing criticism. At the same time, the government continues to employ rate of return controls when purchasing from the defence and pharmaceutical industries. The existence of alternative regulatory regimes raises three questions. First, has price cap regulation enabled the UK utilities to earn excessive profits? Second, has profit regulation prevented excessive profitability in the defence and pharmaceutical industries? Third, how does profitability compare between price cap (utilities) and rate of return (defence/pharmaceuticals) regulation? Our results suggest that three of the four utilities studied have been able to earn rates of return that are considerably greater than in the corporate sector as a whole. Price caps have been far too lenient. In defence and pharmaceuticals there is less evidence of excessive profitability but these suppliers still earn 25 per cent more than comparable firms elsewhere.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin, Stephen & Hartley, Keith, 1997. "Comparing Profitability in the Public Utilities, Defence and Pharmaceuticals1," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 81-105, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:17:y:1997:i:01:p:81-105_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X00003445/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:17:y:1997:i:01:p:81-105_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.