IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juipol/v70y2021ics095717872100045x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Designing an electricity distribution reward-penalty scheme based on spatial reliability statistics

Author

Listed:
  • Janjic, Aleksandar
  • Velimirovic, Lazar Z.
  • Vranic, Petar

Abstract

The Reward-Penalty Scheme (RPS), a financial strategy developed by the regulator to avoid service reliability deterioration, is often used to guarantee the reliability level. This paper provides the new methodology for RPS design based on the spatial distribution of reliability performances. The analytical form of the spatial performance distribution is obtained using a method of moments. Using this distribution, the Dead Band Zone and reward and penalty points for each utility are obtained. This analysis offers a more transparent set of reward and penalty thresholds. The proposed methodology is tested on actual data from a Serbian distribution utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Janjic, Aleksandar & Velimirovic, Lazar Z. & Vranic, Petar, 2021. "Designing an electricity distribution reward-penalty scheme based on spatial reliability statistics," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:70:y:2021:i:c:s095717872100045x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2021.101211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095717872100045X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jup.2021.101211?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Ajodhia, Virendra & Lo Schiavo, Luca & Malaman, Roberto, 2006. "Quality regulation of electricity distribution in Italy: an evaluation study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1478-1486, September.
    2. Haney, Aoife Brophy & Pollitt, Michael G., 2009. "Efficiency analysis of energy networks: An international survey of regulators," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5814-5830, December.
    3. Kuosmanen, Timo & Saastamoinen, Antti & Sipiläinen, Timo, 2013. "What is the best practice for benchmark regulation of electricity distribution? Comparison of DEA, SFA and StoNED methods," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 740-750.
    4. Božič, Dušan & Pantoš, Miloš, 2013. "Assessment of investment efficiency in a power system under performance-based regulation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 330-338.
    5. Ghasemi, Mostafa & Dashti, Reza, 2018. "Designing a decision model to assess the reward and penalty scheme of electric distribution companies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 329-336.
    6. Shuttleworth, Graham, 2005. "Benchmarking of electricity networks: Practical problems with its use for regulation," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 310-317, December.
    7. Banker, Rajiv D. & Gadh, Vandana M. & Gorr, Wilpen L., 1993. "A Monte Carlo comparison of two production frontier estimation methods: Corrected ordinary least squares and data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 332-343, June.
    8. Ghasemi, Mostafa & Dashti, Reza, 2017. "A risk-based model for performance-based regulation of electric distribution companies," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 36-44.
    9. Peter Bogetoft & Lars Otto, 2011. "Benchmarking with DEA, SFA, and R," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7961-2, April.
    10. Sreenithya Sumesh & Vidyasagar Potdar & Aneesh Krishna, 2019. "Cubic reward penalty structure for power distribution companies," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 10(3), pages 350-368, 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. Yang Zhang & Yuehong Lu & Changlong Wang & Zhijia Huang & Tao Lv, 2021. "Reward–Penalty Mechanism Based on Daily Energy Consumption for Net-Zero Energy Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    2. de Mendonça, Mário Jorge Cardoso & Pereira, Amaro Olimpio & Bellido, Marlon Max H. & Medrano, Luis Alberto & Pessanha, José Francisco Moreira, 2023. "Service quality performance indicators for electricity distribution in Brazil," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    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. Julia Schaefer & Marcel Clermont, 2018. "Stochastic non-smooth envelopment of data for multi-dimensional output," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 139-154, December.
    2. Andor, Mark A. & Parmeter, Christopher & Sommer, Stephan, 2019. "Combining uncertainty with uncertainty to get certainty? Efficiency analysis for regulation purposes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 240-252.
    3. Agrell, Per J. & Brea-Solís, Humberto, 2017. "Capturing heterogeneity in electricity distribution operations: A critical review of latent class modelling," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 361-372.
    4. Llorca, Manuel & Orea, Luis & Pollitt, Michael G., 2014. "Using the latent class approach to cluster firms in benchmarking: An application to the US electricity transmission industry," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 6-17.
    5. Neumann, Anne & Nieswand, Maria & Schubert, Torben, 2016. "Estimating Alternative Technology Sets in Nonparametric Efficiency Analysis: Restriction Tests for Panel and Clustered Data," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 45(1), pages 35-51.
    6. Saastamoinen, Antti & Kuosmanen, Timo, 2016. "Quality frontier of electricity distribution: Supply security, best practices, and underground cabling in Finland," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 281-292.
    7. Mark Andor & Christopher F. Parmeter & Stephan Sommer, 2018. "Combining Uncertainty with Uncertainty to Get Certainty? Efficiency Analysis for Regulation Purposes," Working Papers 2018-02, University of Miami, Department of Economics.
    8. Janda, Karel & Krska, Stepan, 2014. "Benchmarking Methods in the Regulation of Electricity Distribution System Operators," MPRA Paper 59442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Saastamoinen, Antti & Bjørndal, Endre & Bjørndal, Mette, 2017. "Specification of merger gains in the Norwegian electricity distribution industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 96-107.
    10. Saastamoinen, Antti & Bjørndal, Endre & Bjørndal, Mette, 2016. "Specification of merger gains in the Norwegian electricity distribution industry," Discussion Papers 2016/7, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    11. Costa, Marcelo Azevedo & Lopes, Ana Lúcia Miranda & de Pinho Matos, Giordano Bruno Braz, 2015. "Statistical evaluation of Data Envelopment Analysis versus COLS Cobb–Douglas benchmarking models for the 2011 Brazilian tariff revision," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 47-60.
    12. Mark Andor & Frederik Hesse, "undated". "A Monte Carlo Simulation comparing DEA, SFA and two simple approaches to combine efficiency estimates," Working Papers 201177, Institute of Spatial and Housing Economics, Munster Universitary.
    13. Ahn, Heinz & Clermont, Marcel & Langner, Julia, 2023. "Comparative performance analysis of frontier-based efficiency measurement methods – A Monte Carlo simulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(1), pages 294-312.
    14. Mark Andor & Frederik Hesse, "undated". "The StoNED age: The Departure Into a New Era of Efficiency Analysis? An MC study Comparing StoNED and the "Oldies" (SFA and DEA)," Working Papers 201285, Institute of Spatial and Housing Economics, Munster Universitary.
    15. Mark Andor & Frederik Hesse, 2014. "The StoNED age: the departure into a new era of efficiency analysis? A monte carlo comparison of StoNED and the “oldies” (SFA and DEA)," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-109, February.
    16. Seifert, Stefan & Cullmann, Astrid & von Hirschhausen, Christian, 2016. "Technical efficiency and CO2 reduction potentials — An analysis of the German electricity and heat generating sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 9-19.
    17. Per J. Agrell & Mehdi Farsi & Massimo Filippini & Martin Koller, 2013. "Unobserved heterogeneous effects in the cost efficiency analysis of electricity distribution systems," Working Papers 0038, Swiss Economics.
    18. Bogetoft, Peter & Ramírez-Ayerbe, Jasone & Romero Morales, Dolores, 2024. "Counterfactual analysis and target setting in benchmarking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(3), pages 1083-1095.
    19. Mountain, Bruce & Littlechild, Stephen, 2010. "Comparing electricity distribution network revenues and costs in New South Wales, Great Britain and Victoria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5770-5782, October.
    20. Waidelich, Paul & Haug, Tomas & Wieshammer, Lorenz, 2022. "German efficiency gone wrong: Unintended incentives arising from the gas TSOs’ benchmarking," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).

    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:70:y:2021:i:c:s095717872100045x. 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: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/utilities-policy .

    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.