IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

An experimental test of automatic mitigation of wholesale electricity prices


  • Shawhan, Daniel L.
  • Messer, Kent D.
  • Schulze, William D.
  • Schuler, Richard E.


In several major deregulated electricity generation markets, the market operator uses an "automatic mitigation procedure" (AMP) to attempt to suppress the exercise of market power. A leading type of AMP compares the offer price from each generation unit with a recent historical average of accepted offer prices from that same unit during periods when there was no transmission-system congestion to impede competition. If one or more units' offer prices exceed the recent historical average by more than a specified margin, and if these offer prices raise the market-clearing price by more than a specified margin, the market operator replaces the offending offer prices with lower ones. In an experiment, we test an AMP of this type. We find that it keeps market prices close to marginal cost if generation owners have low market power in uncongested periods. However, with high market power in uncongested periods, a condition that may apply in many parts of the world, the generation owners are able to gradually raise the market price well above short-run marginal cost in spite of the AMP. We also test the effect of the AMP on the frequency with which high-variable-cost units are used, inefficiently, in place of low-variable-cost units.

Suggested Citation

  • Shawhan, Daniel L. & Messer, Kent D. & Schulze, William D. & Schuler, Richard E., 2011. "An experimental test of automatic mitigation of wholesale electricity prices," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 46-53, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:29:y:2011:i:1:p:46-53

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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

    1. John Bernard & William Schulze & Timothy Mount, 2005. "Bidding behaviour in the multi-unit Vickrey and uniform price auctions," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(10), pages 589-595.
    2. Carine Staropoli & Céline Jullien, 2006. "Using Laboratory Experiments To Design Efficient Market Institutions: The Case Of Wholesale Electricity Markets," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(4), pages 555-577, December.
    3. Helman, Udi, 2006. "Market power monitoring and mitigation in the US wholesale power markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 877-904.
    4. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, July.
    5. Lynne Kiesling & Bart Wilson, 2007. "An experimental analysis of the effects of automated mitigation procedures on investment and prices in wholesale electricity markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 313-334, June.
    6. Isemonger, Alan G., 2007. "Conduct and Impact versus Direct Mitigation," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 53-62.
    7. García José A. & Reitzes James D., 2007. "International Perspectives on Electricity Market Monitoring and Market Power Mitigation," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-28, September.
    8. Hans-Theo Normann & Roberto Ricciuti, 2009. "Laboratory Experiments For Economic Policy Making," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 407-432, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Sebastian Schwenen, 2015. "Strategic bidding in multi-unit auctions with capacity constrained bidders: the New York capacity market," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 730-750, October.
    2. Messer, Kent D. & Duke, Joshua M. & Lynch, Lori & Li, Tongzhe, 2017. "When Does Public Information Undermine the Efficiency of Reverse Auctions for the Purchase of Ecosystem Services?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 212-226.


    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:indorg:v:29:y:2011:i:1:p:46-53. 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: .

    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.