IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juipol/v40y2016icp88-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which asset valuation and depreciation method should be used for regulated utilities? An analytical and simulation-based comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Küpper, Hans-Ulrich
  • Pedell, Burkhard

Abstract

Capital charges constitute the major share of costs in regulated network industries; in regulatory practice, however, no universally accepted method of depreciation exists. This paper compares the most commonly used asset valuation and depreciation methods according to their provision of adequate investment incentives, their compatibility with market developments, and their consistency with financial accounting principles. Current replacement-cost and annuity depreciation are found to be the most advantageous methods. The structural differences between these two methods are presented in detail. A simulation analysis indicates that the differences among the depreciation methods are less pronounced for sets of multiple assets but remain very large for certain parameter constellations, particularly those with substantial asset price changes and long asset lives.

Suggested Citation

  • Küpper, Hans-Ulrich & Pedell, Burkhard, 2016. "Which asset valuation and depreciation method should be used for regulated utilities? An analytical and simulation-based comparison," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 88-103.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:40:y:2016:i:c:p:88-103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2016.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957178716301151
    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. repec:bla:joares:v:8:y:1970:i:2:p:199-216 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Hans-Ulrich Kupper & Richard Mattessich, 2005. "Twentieth century accounting research in the German language area," Accounting History Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 345-410.
    3. Gary Biglaiser & Michael Riordan, 2000. "Dynamics of Price Regulation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 744-767, Winter.
    4. Burness, H Stuart & Patrick, Robert H, 1992. "Optimal Depreciation, Payments to Capital, and Natural Monopoly Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 35-50, March.
    5. Madhav V. Rajan & Stefan Reichelstein, 2009. "Depreciation Rules and the Relation between Marginal and Historical Cost," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 823-865, June.
    6. Schmalensee, Richard, 1989. "An Expository Note on Depreciation and Profitability under Rate-of-Return Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 293-298, September.
    7. Awerbuch, Shimon, 1992. "Depreciation and Profitability under Rate of Return Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 63-70, March.
    8. Rogerson William P, 2011. "On the Relationship Between Historic Cost, Forward Looking Cost and Long Run Marginal Cost," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-31, June.
    9. Thomas R. Stauffer, 1971. "The Measurement of Corporate Rates of Return: A Generalized Formulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(2), pages 434-469, Autumn.
    10. Alexander Nezlobin & Madhav V. Rajan & Stefan Reichelstein, 2012. "Dynamics of Rate-of-Return Regulation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(5), pages 980-995, May.
    11. Michael J. Brennan & Eduardo S. Schwartz, 1982. "Consistent Regulatory Policy under Uncertainty," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 506-521, Autumn.
    12. William P. Rogerson, 2008. "Intertemporal Cost Allocation and Investment Decisions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 931-950, October.
    13. Crew, Michael A & Kleindorfer, Paul R, 1992. "Economic Depreciation and the Regulated Firm under Competition and Technological Change," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 51-61, March.
    14. Rogerson, William P, 1992. "Optimal Depreciation Schedules for Regulated Utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-33, March.
    15. D. J. Johnstone, 2003. "Replacement Cost Asset Valuation and Regulation of Energy Infrastructure Tariffs," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 39(1), pages 1-41, February.
    16. Goodwin, Thomas H. & Patrick, Robert H., 1992. "Capital recovery for the regulated firm under certainty and regulatory uncertainty," Resources and Energy, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 337-361, December.
    17. Carlo Cambini & Laura Rondi, 2010. "Incentive regulation and investment: evidence from European energy utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-26, August.
    18. Kay, John A, 1976. "Accountants, Too, Could Be Happy in a Golden Age: The Accountant's Rate of Profit and the Internal Rate of Return," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 447-460, November.
    19. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, 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. Jennergren, L. Peter, 2018. "A note on the linear and annuity class of depreciation methods," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 123-134.
    2. Jennergren, L. Peter, 2017. "A Note on the Linear and Annuity Class of Depreciation Methods," SSE Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2017:1, Stockholm School of Economics.

    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:juipol:v:40:y:2016:i:c:p:88-103. 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/inca/30478 .

    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.