IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v30y2009i4p1-48.html

Willingness-to-Pay for Quality of Service: An Application to Efficiency Analysis of the UK Electricity Distribution Utilities

Author

Listed:
  • William Yu
  • Tooraj Jamasb
  • Michael Pollitt

Abstract

Efficiency analysis of electricity distribution networks is often limited to technical or cost efficiency measures. However, some important non-tradable aspects of their service such as quality of service and network energy losses are often not part of the analysis. Moreover, technical or cost efficiency should not be achieved at the expense of allocative and economic efficiency. Valuation of service quality for regulatory models is particularly difficult. This paper presents an empirical approach to measure and incorporate service quality and energy losses into the analysis of technical and allocative efficiency of the utilities. We apply our method to the case of the distribution networks in the UK between 1990/91 and 2003/04 using the data envelopment analysis technique. We find that the efficiency of the utilities improved during the first and second five-year distribution price control reviews but exhibited a slight decline during the third review period. We find relatively low allocative efficiency - i.e. a mismatch in allocating resources among expenditures, service quality, and network energy losses. The results suggest that currently the utilities may not be correctly incentivised to achieve socially optimal trade-offs between these.

Suggested Citation

  • William Yu & Tooraj Jamasb & Michael Pollitt, 2009. "Willingness-to-Pay for Quality of Service: An Application to Efficiency Analysis of the UK Electricity Distribution Utilities," The Energy Journal, , vol. 30(4), pages 1-48, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:30:y:2009:i:4:p:1-48
    DOI: 10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No4-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No4-1
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/ISSN0195-6574-EJ-Vol30-No4-1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Growitsch & Tooraj Jamasb & Michael Pollitt, 2009. "Quality of service, efficiency and scale in network industries: an analysis of European electricity distribution," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(20), pages 2555-2570.
    2. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    3. Caves, Douglas W & Herriges, Joseph A & Windle, Robert J, 1990. "Customer Demand for Service Reliability in the Electric Power Industry: A Synthesis of the Outage Cost Literature," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 79-119, April.
    4. Timothy J. Coelli & D.S. Prasada Rao & Christopher J. O’Donnell & George E. Battese, 2005. "An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-0-387-25895-9, March.
    5. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    6. repec:aen:journl:2007v28-01-a04 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Pollitt, Michael, 2005. "The role of efficiency estimates in regulatory price reviews: Ofgem's approach to benchmarking electricity networks," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 279-288, December.
    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. Darryl Biggar, 2025. "The role of cost benchmarking in public utility regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 231-263, December.
    2. Raul Jimenez Mori, 2025. "Valuation of household preferences for improved electricity services," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 69(3), pages 1153-1185, September.

    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. William Yu & Tooraj Jamasb & Michael Pollitt, 2007. "Incorporating the Price of Quality in Efficiency Analysis: the Case of Electricity Distribution Regulation in the UK," Working Papers EPRG 0713, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    2. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    3. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2021. "On Adding-Up as a Validity Criterion for Stated-Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(3), pages 587-601, November.
    4. Ajayi, Victor & Anaya, Karim & Pollitt, Michael, 2022. "Incentive regulation, productivity growth and environmental effects: the case of electricity networks in Great Britain," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Angel Arcos-Vargas & Fernando Núñez & Juan Antonio Ballesteros, 2017. "Quality, remuneration and regulatory framework: some evidence on the European electricity distribution," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 98-118, February.
    6. Mark A. Andor & Manuel Frondel & Colin Vance, 2017. "Mitigating Hypothetical Bias: Evidence on the Effects of Correctives from a Large Field Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 777-796, November.
    7. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    8. Carina Cavalcanti & Andreas Leibbrandt, 2017. "A glance into the willingness to reduce overfishing: Field evidence from a fishnet exchange program," Monash Economics Working Papers 09-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    9. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael, 2007. "Incentive regulation of electricity distribution networks: Lessons of experience from Britain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6163-6187, December.
    10. Champ, Patricia A. & Moore, Rebecca & Bishop, Richard C., 2004. "Hypothetical Bias: The Mitigating Effects Of Certainty Questions And Cheap Talk," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19951, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Lopez-Becerra, E.I. & Alcon, F., 2021. "Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    12. Murphy, James J. & Stevens, Thomas H., 2004. "Contingent Valuation, Hypothetical Bias, and Experimental Economics," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 182-192, October.
    13. Astrid Cullmann & Hélène Crespo & Marie-Anne Plagnet, 2008. "International Benchmarking in Electricity Distribution: A Comparison of French and German Utilities," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 830, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Karen Blumenschein & GlennC. Blomquist & Magnus Johannesson & Nancy Horn & Patricia Freeman, 2008. "Eliciting Willingness to Pay Without Bias: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 114-137, January.
    15. Xie, Bai-Chen & Zhang, Zhen-Jiang & Anaya, Karim L., 2021. "Has the unbundling reform improved the service efficiency of China's power grid firms?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    16. Kanya, Lucy & Sanghera, Sabina & Lewin, Alex & Fox-Rushby, Julia, 2019. "The criterion validity of willingness to pay methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 238-261.
    17. Coelli, Tim J. & Gautier, Axel & Perelman, Sergio & Saplacan-Pop, Roxana, 2013. "Estimating the cost of improving quality in electricity distribution: A parametric distance function approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 287-297.
    18. 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.
    19. Pepermans, Guido, 2011. "The value of continuous power supply for Flemish households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7853-7864.
    20. Carlsson, Fredrik & Daruvala, Dinky & Jaldell, Henrik, 2008. "Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?," Working Papers in Economics 309, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    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:sae:enejou:v:30:y:2009:i:4:p:1-48. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.