IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v74y2014icp224-234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding China’s electricity market reform from the perspective of the coal-fired power disparity

Author

Listed:
  • Mou, Dunguo

Abstract

In China, electricity consumption has grown quickly, supply is highly dependent on coal-fired power, and the prices of electricity are determined by the government, which increases the need for reform to enhance efficiency. In response to disputes about China’s electricity market reform, this paper analyses the efficiency of China’s coal-fired power plants using the Data Envelopment Analysis—Slack Based Measure (DEA-SBM) method on three levels: groups, provinces, and plants. The results indicate that there are both coal-electricity efficiency disparities and generation-hour arrangement unfairness across groups; the disparity across provinces is obvious and long-lasting, as indicated by capacity surpluses and coal-electricity efficiencies; and the disparities are displayed in detail by the estimation at the plant level. The disparities are primarily caused by the generator combination and generation hour arrangement. Competition may be able to solve the disparities, but a further comparison indicates that competition at the national level will enhance the efficiency to a greater degree than competition at the regional level. These results demonstrate that both competition and a united electricity market are necessary for further electricity market reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Mou, Dunguo, 2014. "Understanding China’s electricity market reform from the perspective of the coal-fired power disparity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 224-234.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:74:y:2014:i:c:p:224-234
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514004935
    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. Paul L. Joskow, 1997. "Restructuring, Competition and Regulatory Reform in the U.S. Electricity Sector," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 119-138, Summer.
    2. Paul L. Joskow, 2008. "Lessons Learned from Electricity Market Liberalization," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 9-42.
    3. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, March.
    4. Catherine D. Wolfram, 1998. "Strategic Bidding in a Multiunit Auction: An Empirical Analysis of Bids to Supply Electricity in England and Wales," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 703-725, Winter.
    5. Fabra, Natalia & Toro, Juan, 2005. "Price wars and collusion in the Spanish electricity market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(3-4), pages 155-181, April.
    6. Bunn, Derek W. & Martoccia, Maria, 2005. "Unilateral and collusive market power in the electricity pool of England and Wales," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 305-315, March.
    7. Mou, Dunguo & Li, Zhi, 2012. "A spatial analysis of China's coal flow," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 358-368.
    8. Yang, Hongliang & Pollitt, Michael, 2009. "Incorporating both undesirable outputs and uncontrollable variables into DEA: The performance of Chinese coal-fired power plants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1095-1105, September.
    9. Green, Richard J & Newbery, David M, 1992. "Competition in the British Electricity Spot Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 929-953, October.
    10. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
    11. Newbery, David M & Pollitt, Michael G, 1997. "The Restructuring and Privatization of Britain's CEGB--Was It Worth It?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 269-303, September.
    12. Gore, Olga & Viljainen, Satu & Makkonen, Mari & Kuleshov, Dmitry, 2012. "Russian electricity market reform: Deregulation or re-regulation?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 676-685.
    13. Aitor Ciarreta & María Espinosa, 2010. "Market power in the Spanish electricity auction," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 42-69, February.
    14. Andrew Sweeting, 2007. "Market Power In The England And Wales Wholesale Electricity Market 1995-2000," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(520), pages 654-685, April.
    15. Borenstein, Severin & Bushnell, James, 1999. "An Empirical Analysis of the Potential for Market Power in California's Electricity Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 285-323, September.
    16. Ng, Charles K & Seabright, Paul, 2001. "Competition, Privatisation and Productive Efficiency: Evidence from the Airline Industry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(473), pages 591-619, July.
    17. J. Dean Craig and Scott J. Savage, 2013. "Market Restructuring, Competition and the Efficiency of Electricity Generation: Plant-level Evidence from the United States 1996 to 2006," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    18. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    19. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    20. Kira R. Fabrizio & Nancy L. Rose & Catherine D. Wolfram, 2007. "Do Markets Reduce Costs? Assessing the Impact of Regulatory Restructuring on US Electric Generation Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1250-1277, September.
    21. Lam, Pun-Lee & Shiu, Alice, 2001. "A data envelopment analysis of the efficiency of China's thermal power generation," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 75-83, June.
    22. L. Dean Hiebert, 2002. "The Determinants of the Cost Efficiency of Electric Generating Plants: A Stochastic Frontier Approach," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 68(4), pages 935-946, April.
    23. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    24. Aitor Ciarreta & María Espinosa, 2010. "Market power in the Spanish electricity auction," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 42-69, February.
    25. Lin, Bo-qiang & Liu, Jiang-hua, 2010. "Estimating coal production peak and trends of coal imports in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 512-519, January.
    26. Steven L. Puller, 2007. "Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 75-87, February.
    27. Christopher R. Knittel, 2002. "Alternative Regulatory Methods And Firm Efficiency: Stochastic Frontier Evidence From The U.S. Electricity Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 530-540, August.
    28. Lave, Lester B. & Apt, Jay & Blumsack, Seth, 2004. "Rethinking Electricity Deregulation," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(8), pages 11-26, October.
    29. Andrew N. Kleit & Dek Terrell, 2001. "Measuring Potential Efficiency Gains From Deregulation Of Electricity Generation: A Bayesian Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(3), pages 523-530, August.
    30. Primeaux, Walter J, Jr, 1977. "An Assessment of X-Efficiency Gained through Competition," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(1), pages 105-108, February.
    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. Liu, HuiHui & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Chen, ZhanMing & Dou, DeSheng, 2018. "The Impact of China’s Electricity Deregulation on Coal and Power Industries: Two-stage Game Modeling Approach," ET: Economic Theory 273367, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Yuan, Yan & Goto, Mika, 2017. "A literature study for DEA applied to energy and environment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 104-124.
    3. Zeng, Ming & Yang, Yongqi & Wang, Lihua & Sun, Jinghui, 2016. "The power industry reform in China 2015: Policies, evaluations and solutions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 94-110.
    4. repec:eee:energy:v:164:y:2018:i:c:p:822-836 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2016. "Undesirable congestion under natural disposability and desirable congestion under managerial disposability in U.S. electric power industry measured by DEA environmental assessment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 173-188.
    6. Ke Wang & Jieming Zhang & Yi-Ming Wei, 2017. "Operational and environmental performance in China¡¯s thermal power industry: Taking an effectiveness measure as complement to an efficiency measure," CEEP-BIT Working Papers 100, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research (CEEP), Beijing Institute of Technology.
    7. repec:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:6:p:1142-:d:216732 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Bai-Chen Xie & Jie Gao & Shuang Zhang & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2017. "What Factors Affect the Competiveness of Power Generation Sector in China? An Analysis Based on Game Cross-efficiency," Working Papers 2017.12, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Meng, Ming & Mander, Sarah & Zhao, Xiaoli & Niu, Dongxiao, 2016. "Have market-oriented reforms improved the electricity generation efficiency of China's thermal power industry? An empirical analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 734-741.
    10. Dai, Xiaoyong & Cheng, Liwei, 2016. "Market distortions and aggregate productivity: Evidence from Chinese energy enterprises," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 304-313.
    11. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Japanese fuel mix strategy after disaster of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant: Lessons from international comparison among industrial nations measured by DEA environmental assessment in time hori," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 87-103.
    12. repec:eee:rensus:v:79:y:2017:i:c:p:533-543 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:11:p:2152-:d:237382 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. repec:eee:energy:v:165:y:2018:i:pb:p:1191-1199 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Niu, Shuwen & Liu, Yiyue & Ding, Yongxia & Qu, Wei, 2016. "China׳s energy systems transformation and emissions peak," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 782-795.
    16. Huiru Zhao & Yuwei Wang & Sen Guo & Mingrui Zhao & Chao Zhang, 2016. "Application of a Gradient Descent Continuous Actor-Critic Algorithm for Double-Side Day-Ahead Electricity Market Modeling," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, September.
    17. repec:eee:eneeco:v:67:y:2017:i:c:p:554-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:eee:energy:v:152:y:2018:i:c:p:549-561 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. repec:eee:eneeco:v:66:y:2017:i:c:p:154-166 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:eee:enepol:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:148-154 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Sueyoshi, Toshiyuki & Goto, Mika, 2015. "Environmental assessment on coal-fired power plants in U.S. north-east region by DEA non-radial measurement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 125-139.

    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:74:y:2014:i:c:p:224-234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.