IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juipol/v96y2025ics095717872500058x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Impact Assessment in the energy transition era: insights from the UK experience

Author

Listed:
  • Grubb, Michael
  • Hinder, Ben
  • Dye, Laura
  • Nixon, Hannah

Abstract

Independent energy regulators need analytic frameworks to assess and defend their regulatory decisions. This paper critiques the traditional economic recommendation and explains a new approach applied in Great Britain. We find reliance on quantified cost-benefit analysis (CBA) as the dominant metric inadequate, particularly in the context of the clean energy transition. We do so by exploring the theoretical and practical limitations of CBA and the GB energy regulator Ofgem's response to these, drawing on experience of the authors who worked with and for Ofgem. We outline the unavoidable complexities that climate change, in particular, created considering the division of responsibilities between the government and the regulator and describe the major revisions to Ofgem's Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) framework that sought to address the resulting challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Grubb, Michael & Hinder, Ben & Dye, Laura & Nixon, Hannah, 2025. "Regulatory Impact Assessment in the energy transition era: insights from the UK experience," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:96:y:2025:i:c:s095717872500058x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2025.101943
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095717872500058X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jup.2025.101943?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:96:y:2025:i:c:s095717872500058x. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.