IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Uncertainty and regulatory outcome in the Swedish electricity distribution sector

  • Magnus Söderberg


Regulatory agencies are potentially influenced by market characteristics and underlying incentives and use simplifying decision rules. When decision uncertainty increases, it is hypothesised that these influences become more apparent. This study investigates civil cases initiated by dissatisfied customers in the Swedish electricity distribution market. The purpose is to determine (1) how regulatory decision uncertainty manifests itself and (2) whether multi-echelon regulatory structure has a structural impact on regulatory outcome. The results indicate that the regulator's decisions exhibit status quo bias and that large customers are privileged compared to small customers. The court distinguishes itself by favouring large utilities.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

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:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Springer in its journal European Journal of Law and Economics.

Volume (Year): 25 (2008)
Issue (Month): 1 (February)
Pages: 79-94

in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:ejlwec:v:25:y:2008:i:1:p:79-94
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Joskow, P.L., 1989. "Regulatory Failure, Regulatory Reform And Structural Change In The Electric Power Industry," Working papers 516, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  2. Posner, Richard A, 1970. "A Statistical Study of Antitrust Enforcement," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(2), pages 365-419, October.
  3. Jost, Peter-J., 1997. "Regulatory enforcement in the presence of a court system," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 491-508, December.
  4. Inman, J.J. & Zeelenberg, M., 2002. "Regret in repeat purchase versus switching decisions : The attenuating role of decision justifiability," Other publications TiSEM 44060120-bd30-40e0-a97f-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  5. Luce, Mary Frances, 1998. " Choosing to Avoid: Coping with Negatively Emotion-Laden Consumer Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 409-33, March.
  6. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  7. Shavell, Steven, 1999. "The level of litigation: private versus social optimality of suit and of settlement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 99-115, March.
  8. Dean R. Hyslop, 1999. "State Dependence, Serial Correlation and Heterogeneity in Intertemporal Labor Force Participation of Married Women," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(6), pages 1255-1294, November.
  9. Isaac Ehrlich & Richard A. Posner, 1974. "An Economic Analysis of Legal Rulemaking," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 257-286, January.
  10. Inman, J Jeffrey & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2002. " Regret in Repeat Purchase versus Switching Decisions: The Attenuating Role of Decision Justifiability," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(1), pages 116-28, June.
  11. Richard A. Posner, 1974. "Theories of Economic Regulation," NBER Working Papers 0041, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
  13. Spitzer, Matt & Talley, Eric, 2000. "Judicial Auditing," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 649-83, June.
  14. Geoff Edwards & Leonard Waverman, 2006. "The Effects of Public Ownership and Regulatory Independence on Regulatory Outcomes," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 23-67, 01.
  15. Crew, Michael A & Kleindorfer, Paul R, 2002. "Regulatory Economics: Twenty Years of Progress?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 5-22, January.
  16. Spiller, Pablo T, 1996. "Institutions and Commitment," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 421-52.
  17. Meyer, Robert A & Leland, Hayne E, 1980. "The Effectiveness of Price Regulation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 62(4), pages 555-66, November.
  18. Jeremy Firestone, 2002. "Agency governance and enforcement: the influence of mission on environmental decisionmaking," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 409-426.
  19. Becker, Elizabeth & Lindsay, Cotton M, 1994. "Does the Government Free Ride?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 277-96, April.
  20. Levy, Brian & Spiller, Pablo T, 1994. "The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment: A Comparative Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 201-46, October.
  21. Klein, Christopher C. & H. Sweeney, George, 1999. "Regulator preferences and utility prices: evidence from natural gas distribution utilities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 1-15, February.
  22. Johnson, Paul E. & Jamal, Karim & Glen Berryman, R., 1989. "Audit judgment research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 14(1-2), pages 83-99, January.
  23. Shavell, Steven, 1996. "Any Frequency of Plaintiff Victory at Trial Is Possible," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(2), pages 493-501, June.
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:kap:ejlwec:v:25:y:2008:i:1:p:79-94. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.