IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Competition in electricity distribution

  • Saplacan, Roxana
Registered author(s):

    The traditional view of electricity distribution is that it is a natural monopoly. Few authors have explored the question as to whether electricity distributors truly are natural monopolies or not, while observation of the current industrial practice tends to suggest that a "market" for distribution activities does actually exist. This is a paradox for a natural monopoly. Our explanation is that monopoly characteristics well characterise the network infrastructure, but not the network operation service.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VFT-4SNHNXH-1/2/2b93374ca087f841c8b759f53e1969a3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Utilities Policy.

    Volume (Year): 16 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 4 (December)
    Pages: 231-237

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:16:y:2008:i:4:p:231-237
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30478

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael, 2003. "International benchmarking and regulation: an application to European electricity distribution utilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1609-1622, December.
    2. Kenneth E. Train, 1991. "Optimal Regulation: The Economic Theory of Natural Monopoly," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200848, June.
    3. Kjell G. Salvanes & Sigve Tjøtta, 1998. "A Test for Natural Monopoly with Application to Norwegian Electricity Distribution," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 669-685, December.
    4. Bajari, Patrick & Tadelis, Steven, 2001. "Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 387-407, Autumn.
    5. Gunn, Calum & Sharp, Basil, 1999. "Electricity distribution as an unsustainable natural monopoly: a potential outcome of New Zealand's regulatory regime," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 385-401, August.
    6. Littlechild Stephen, 2002. "Competitive Bidding for a Long-Term Electricity Distribution Contract," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-38, March.
    7. Patrick Bajari & Robert S. McMillan & Steve Tadelis, 2003. "Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 9757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Robert Wilson, 2002. "Architecture of Power Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1299-1340, July.
    9. Jamasb, T. & Pollitt, M., 2000. "Benchmarking and regulation: international electricity experience," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 107-130, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:16:y:2008:i:4:p:231-237. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.