IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v37y2009i12p5449-5458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Divorce comes at a price: An ex ante welfare analysis of ownership unbundling of the distribution and commercial companies in the Dutch energy sector

Author

Listed:
  • de Nooij, Michiel
  • Baarsma, Barbara

Abstract

Vertical unbundling in the electricity sector is a hot political topic in the European Union. The European Commission has decided that the ownership unbundling of transmission networks from other stages in the value chain is the most effective way to ensure fair network access and infrastructure investment. While this European unbundling debate has not ended yet and most countries still do not have an independent transmission system operator (TSO), the Dutch government has already taken one step further. In 2008, it decided that distribution companies should be completely separated from commercial activities that are part of the same holding (generation, trade and supply). This governmental decision has been fiercely debated. Although the goal is to improve competition as well as security of supply, these benefits are uncertain. Nevertheless, it is certain that ownership unbundling comes at a cost. In this paper we present an ex ante cost-benefit analysis of the Dutch unbundling act. We conclude that it is unlikely that this act is welfare enhancing: divorce comes at a price.

Suggested Citation

  • de Nooij, Michiel & Baarsma, Barbara, 2009. "Divorce comes at a price: An ex ante welfare analysis of ownership unbundling of the distribution and commercial companies in the Dutch energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5449-5458, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5449-5458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(09)00591-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David M. Newbery, 2005. "Electricity liberalization in Britain: The quest for a satisfactory wholesale market design," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 43-70.
    2. James B. Bushnell & Erin T. Mansur & Celeste Saravia, 2008. "Vertical Arrangements, Market Structure, and Competition: An Analysis of Restructured US Electricity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 237-266, March.
    3. Kunneke, Rolf & Fens, Theo, 2007. "Ownership unbundling in electricity distribution: The case of The Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1920-1930, March.
    4. Paul Nillesen & Michael Pollitt, 2011. "Ownership Unbundling in Electricity Distribution: Empirical Evidence from New Zealand," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(1), pages 61-93, January.
    5. Baarsma, Barbara & de Nooij, Michiel & Koster, Weero & van der Weijden, Cecilia, 2007. "Divide and rule. The economic and legal implications of the proposed ownership unbundling of distribution and supply companies in the Dutch electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1785-1794, March.
    6. Tooraj Jamasb and Michael Pollitt, 2005. "Electricity Market Reform in the European Union: Review of Progress toward Liberalization & Integration," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 11-42.
    7. Giovanni Fraquelli & Massimiliano Piacenza & Davide Vannoni, 2005. "Cost Savings From Generation and Distribution with an Application to Italian Electric Utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 289-308, November.
    8. Michael Pollitt & Stephen Davies* & Catherine Waddams Price* & Justus Haucap & Machiel Mulder** & Victoria Shestalova & Gijsbert Zwart, 2007. "Vertical Unbundling in the EU Electricity Sector," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 42(6), pages 292-310, November.
    9. Newbery, D.M. & Pollitt, M.G., 1996. "The Restructuring and Privatisation of the CEGB: Was It Worth It?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9607, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. de Nooij, Michiel & Koopmans, Carl & Bijvoet, Carlijn, 2007. "The value of supply security: The costs of power interruptions: Economic input for damage reduction and investment in networks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 277-295, March.
    11. Brunekreeft, G., 2008. "Ownership Unbuilding in Electricity Markets - A Social Cost Benefit Analysis of the German TSO'S," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0833, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    12. M. Mulder & V. Shestalova, 2006. "Costs and Benefits of Vertical Separation of the Energy Distribution Industry: The Dutch Case," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 7(2), pages 197-231, June.
    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. Roland Meyer, 2011. "Vertical Economies and the Costs of Separating Electricity Supply-A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Literature," Bremen Energy Working Papers 0006, Bremen Energy Research.
    2. Marius Buchmann, 2019. "How decentralization drives a change of the institutional framework on the distribution grid level in the electricity sector – the case of local congestion markets," Bremen Energy Working Papers 0031, Bremen Energy Research.
    3. Marius Buchmann, 2016. "Information Management in Smart Grids - Who Should Govern Information Management to Balance Between Coordination and Competition on the Distribution Grid Level?," Bremen Energy Working Papers 0022, Bremen Energy Research.
    4. Tanrisever, Fehmi & Derinkuyu, Kursad & Heeren, Michael, 2013. "Forecasting electricity infeed for distribution system networks: An analysis of the Dutch case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 247-257.
    5. Tsatsos, Aristidis, 2012. "Die Liberalisierung des russischen Gassektors: 3 Szenarios? [The liberalisation of the Russian gas sector: 3 scenarios?]," MPRA Paper 44623, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Mulder, M. & Willems, Bert, 2016. "Competition in Retail Electricity Markets : An Assessment of Ten Years Dutch Experience," Discussion Paper 2016-011, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    7. Brunekreeft, Gert, 2015. "Network unbundling and flawed coordination: Experience from the electricity sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 11-18.
    8. Roland Meyer, 2012. "Vertical Economies and the Costs of Separating Electricity Supply--A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Literature," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    9. Tanrisever, Fehmi & Derinkuyu, Kursad & Jongen, Geert, 2015. "Organization and functioning of liberalized electricity markets: An overview of the Dutch market," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1363-1374.
    10. de Nooij, Michiel, 2011. "Social cost-benefit analysis of electricity interconnector investment: A critical appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3096-3105, June.
    11. Filippini, Massimo & Wetzel, Heike, 2014. "The impact of ownership unbundling on cost efficiency: Empirical evidence from the New Zealand electricity distribution sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 412-418.
    12. Milan Vondráček & Tomáš Skuček, 2010. "Unbundling costs in the energy sector: competitive environment for the customers´ benefits or too costly experiment?," Ekonomika a Management, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(3).
    13. Buchmann, Marius, 2017. "Governance of data and information management in smart distribution grids: Increase efficiency by balancing coordination and competition," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 63-72.

    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. 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.
    2. Paul Nillesen and Michael Pollitt, 2021. "Ownership Unbundling of Electricity Distribution Networks," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    3. Pollitt, M. & Dale, L., 2018. "Restructuring the Chinese Electricity Supply Sector - How industrial electricity prices are determined in a liberalized power market: lessons from Great Britain," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1871, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    4. Roland Meyer, 2012. "Vertical Economies and the Costs of Separating Electricity Supply--A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Literature," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    5. Nardi, Paolo, 2012. "Transmission network unbundling and grid investments: Evidence from the UCTE countries," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 50-58.
    6. Simshauser, Paul, 2021. "Vertical integration, peaking plant commitments and the role of credit quality in energy-only markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    7. Luis R. Boscán, 2020. "European Union retail electricity markets in the Green Transition: The quest for adequate design," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), January.
    8. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2010. "Electricity Market Reform: Lessons for developing countries," MPRA Paper 27317, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. John Kwoka & Michael Pollitt & Sanem Sergici, 2010. "Divestiture policy and operating efficiency in U.S. electric power distribution," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 86-109, August.
    10. Gaffney, F. & Deane, J.P. & Gallachóir, B.P.Ó, 2017. "A 100 year review of electricity policy in Ireland (1916–2015)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 67-79.
    11. Brunekreeft, Gert, 2015. "Network unbundling and flawed coordination: Experience from the electricity sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 11-18.
    12. Roland Meyer, 2012. "Economies of scope in electricity supply and the costs of vertical separation for different unbundling scenarios," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 95-114, August.
    13. Ray REES & Sebastian SCHOLZ, 2010. "Electricity Market Design for Germany," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 2010-EN.
    14. David M. Newbery, 2012. "Reforming Competitive Electricity Markets to Meet Environmental Targets," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    15. Michael G. Pollitt and Karim L. Anaya, 2016. "Can current electricity markets cope with high shares of renewables? A comparison of approaches in Germany, the UK and the State of New York," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Bollino-M).
    16. Schober, Dominik, 2013. "Static vs. dynamic impacts of unbundling: Electricity markets in South America," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Meyer, Roland & Gore, Olga, 2015. "Cross-border effects of capacity mechanisms: Do uncoordinated market design changes contradict the goals of the European market integration?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 9-20.
    18. Ochoa, Camila & Dyner, Isaac & Franco, Carlos J., 2013. "Simulating power integration in Latin America to assess challenges, opportunities, and threats," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 267-273.
    19. Pollitt, Michael, 2009. "Evaluating the evidence on electricity reform: Lessons for the South East Europe (SEE) market," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 13-23, March.
    20. Nepal, Rabindra & Jamasb, Tooraj, 2012. "Reforming small electricity systems under political instability: The case of Nepal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 242-251.

    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:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:12:p:5449-5458. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.