IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v30y2006i3p233-260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should merchant transmission investment be subject to a must-offer provision?

Author

Listed:
  • Gert Brunekreeft

    ()

  • David Newbery

    ()

Abstract

Merchant electricity transmission investment is a practically relevant example of an unregulated investment with monopoly properties. However, while leaving the investment decision to the market, the regulator may decide to prohibit capacity withholding with a must-offer provision. This paper examines the welfare effects of a must-offer provision prior to the capacity choice, given three reasons for capacity withholding: uncertainty, demand growth and pre-emptive investment. A must-offer provision will decrease welfare in the first two cases, and can enhance welfare only in the last case. In the presence of importer market power, a regulatory test might be needed.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Gert Brunekreeft & David Newbery, 2006. "Should merchant transmission investment be subject to a must-offer provision?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 233-260, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:30:y:2006:i:3:p:233-260
    DOI: 10.1007/s11149-006-9002-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11149-006-9002-z
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilbert, Richard J., 1989. "Mobility barriers and the value of incumbency," Handbook of Industrial Organization,in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 475-535 Elsevier.
    2. B. Curtis Eaton & Roger Ware, 1987. "A Theory of Market Structure with Sequential Entry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 1-16, Spring.
    3. Paul Joskow & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Merchant Transmission Investment," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 233-264, June.
    4. Joshua Gans & Stephen King, 2003. "Access Holidays for Network Infrastructure Investment," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 163-178.
    5. Gert Brunekreeft & David Newbery, 2006. "Should merchant transmission investment be subject to a must-offer provision?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 233-260, November.
    6. Rosellón Juan, 2003. "Different Approaches Towards Electricity Transmission Expansion," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-32, September.
    7. Joskow, Paul L & Tirole, Jean, 1999. "Transmission Rights and Market Power on Electric Power Networks I: Financial Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 2093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    9. Richard Gilbert & Neuhoff, K. & Newbery, D., 2002. "Allocating Transmission to Mitigate Market Power in Electricity Networks," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0225, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    11. Newbery, D. & Tanga McDaniel, 2002. "Auctions and trading in energy markets -- an economic analysis," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0233, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    12. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-420, June.
    13. Joshua S. Gans & Stephen P. King, 2004. "Access Holidays and the Timing of Infrastructure Investment," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(248), pages 89-100, March.
    14. Hogan, William W., 2003. "Transmission Market Design," Working Paper Series rwp03-040, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Brunekreeft, Gert, 2005. "Regulatory issues in merchant transmission investment," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 175-186, June.
    16. Bushnell, James B & Stoft, Steven E, 1996. "Electric Grid Investment under a Contract Network Regime," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 61-79, July.
    17. Tanga McDaniel & Neuhoff, K., 2002. "Auctions to gas transmission access: The British experience," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0234, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    18. Brunekreeft, Gert, 2004. "Market-based investment in electricity transmission networks: controllable flow," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 269-281, December.
    19. Gert Brunekreeft, 2002. "Regulation and Third-Party Discrimination in the German Electricity Supply Industry," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 203-220, May.
    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. Brunekreeft, Gert & Neuhoff, Karsten & Newbery, David, 2005. "Electricity transmission: An overview of the current debate," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 73-93, June.
    2. Federico Boffa & Viswanath Pingali & Francesca Sala, 2015. "Strategic investment in merchant transmission: the impact of capacity utilization rules," Working Papers 2015/12, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    3. Clemens Gerbaulet & Alexander Weber, 2014. "Is There Still a Case for Merchant Interconnectors?: Insights from an Analysis of Welfare and Distributional Aspects of Options for Network Expansion in the Baltic Sea Region," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1404, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Nepal, R. & Jamasb, T., 2011. "Market Integration, Efficiency, and Interconnectors: The Irish Single Electricity Market," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1144, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Adrien De Hauteclocque & Vincent Rious, 2008. "Regulatory Uncertainty and Inefficiency for the Development of Merchant Lines in Europe," Post-Print hal-00338296, HAL.
    6. Boffa, Federico & Pingali, Viswanath & Sala, Francesca, 2015. "Strategic investment in merchant transmission: The impact of capacity utilization rules," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 455-463.
    7. de Hauteclocque, Adrien & Rious, Vincent, 2011. "Reconsidering the European regulation of merchant transmission investment in light of the third energy package: The role of dominant generators," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7068-7077.
    8. Leuthold, Florian & Jeske, Till & Weigt, Hannes & von Hirschhausen, Christian, 2009. "When the Wind Blows Over Europe: A Simulation Analysis and the Impact of Grid Extensions," MPRA Paper 65655, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. van Koten, Silvester, 2012. "Merchant interconnector projects by generators in the EU: Profitability and allocation of capacity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 748-758.
    10. Gert Brunekreeft & David Newbery, 2006. "Should merchant transmission investment be subject to a must-offer provision?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 233-260, November.
    11. Lynch, Muireann Á. & Tol, Richard S.J. & O'Malley, Mark J., 2012. "Optimal interconnection and renewable targets for north-west Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 605-617.
    12. repec:eee:enepol:v:117:y:2018:i:c:p:228-246 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Kristiansen, T. & Rosellón, J., 2010. "Merchant electricity transmission expansion: A European case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 4107-4115.
    14. Muireann Á. Lynch & Richard Tol & Mark J. O’Malley, 2014. "Minimising costs and variability of electricity generation by means of optimal electricity interconnection utilisation," Working Paper Series 6814, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    15. Rabindra Nepal and John Foster, 2016. "Testing for Market Integration in the Australian National Electricity Market," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    16. Brunekreeft, G., 2004. "‘Regulatory Issues in Merchant Transmission Investment’," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0422, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    17. Bastian Henze & Charles Noussair & Bert Willems, 2012. "Regulation of network infrastructure investments: an experimental evaluation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 1-38, August.
    18. Ojeda, Osvaldo A. & Olsina, Fernando & Garcés, Francisco, 2009. "Simulation of the long-term dynamic of a market-based transmission interconnection," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2889-2899, August.
    19. Nepal, Rabindra & Jamasb, Tooraj, 2012. "Interconnections and market integration in the Irish Single Electricity Market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 425-434.
    20. Adrien de Hauteclocque & Vincent Rious, 2009. "Reconsidering the Regulation of Merchant Transmission Investment in the Light of the Third Energy Package: The Role of Dominant Generators," RSCAS Working Papers 2009/59, European University Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Investment; Must-offer; Capacity withholding; Regulation; Electricity; L51; L94; L4;

    JEL classification:

    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    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:kap:regeco:v:30:y:2006:i:3:p:233-260. 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 (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.