The Diversity of Design of TSOs
It is puzzling today to explain diversity and imperfection of actual transmission monopoly designs in competitive electricity markets. We argue that transmission monopoly in competitive electricity markets has to be analysed within a Wilson (2002) modular framework. Applied to the management of electricity flows, at least three modules make the core of transmission design: 1° the short run management of network externalities; 2° the long run management of network investment; and 3° the coordination of neighboring Transmission System Operators for cross border trade. In order to tackle this diversity of designs of TSOs, we show that for each of these modules, three different basic ways of managing them are possible. Among the identified twenty seven options of organisation, we define an Ideal TSO. Second, we demonstrate that 1°monopoly design differs from this Ideal TSO and cannot handle these three modules irrespective of the “institutional” definition and allocation of property rights on transmission; while 2°definition and allocation of property rights on transmission cannot ignore the existing electrical industry and transmission network structure: they have to complement each other to be efficient. Some conclusions for regulatory issues of transmission systems operators are derived from this analysis of network monopoly organisation.
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.:
- Robert Wilson, 2002. "Architecture of Power Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1299-1340, July.
- Bushnell, James B. & Stoft, Steven E., 1997.
"Improving private incentives for electric grid investment,"
Resource and Energy Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 85-108, March.
- Bushnell, James & Stoft, Steven, 1997. "Improving Private Incentives for Electric Grid Investment," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31549, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Jean Michel Glachant & Marcelo Saguan, 2007. "An Institutional Frame to Compare Alternative Market Designs in e U Electricity Balancing," Working Papers 0701, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
- Glachant, J.M. & Saguan, M., 2007. "An Institutional Frame to Compare Alternative Market Designs in EU Electricity Balancing," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0724, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Ehrenmann, Andreas & Smeers, Yves, 2005. "Inefficiencies in European congestion management proposals," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 135-152, June.
- Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier.
- Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "A Primer on Foreclosure," IDEI Working Papers 203, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised Nov 2005.
- Armstrong, Mark & Doyle, Chris & Vickers, John, 1996. "The Access Pricing Problem: A Synthesis," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 131-150, June.
- Armstrong, M. & Doyle, C. & Vickers, J., 1995. "The access pricing problem: a synthesis," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 9532, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
- Masahiko Aoki, 2001. "Toward a Comparative Institutional Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011875, January.
- Richard Green, 2007. "Nodal pricing of electricity: how much does it cost to get it wrong?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 125-149, April.
- Armstrong, Mark & Vickers, John, 1998. "The Access Pricing Problem with Deregulation: A Note," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 115-121, March.
- Paul L. Joskow, 2014. "Incentive Regulation in Theory and Practice: Electricity Distribution and Transmission Networks," NBER Chapters,in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 291-344 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Paul L Joskow, 2005. "Incentive Regulation In Theory And Practice - Electricity Distribution And Transmission Networks," Working Papers 0514, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
- Joskow, P.L., 2006. "Incentive Regulation in Theory and Practice: Electricity Distribution and Transmission Networks," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0607, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- 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.
- Brunekreeft, G. & Neuhoff, K. & Newbery, D., 2004. "Electricity transmission: an overview of the current debate," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0463, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Glachant, Jean-Michel & Pignon, Virginie, 2005. "Nordic congestion's arrangement as a model for Europe? Physical constraints vs. economic incentives," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 153-162, June.
- Costello, Kenneth W., 2001. "Interregional Coordination versus RTO Mergers: A Cost-Benefit Perspective," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 13-24, March.
- Perez-Arriaga, Ignacio J. & Olmos, Luis, 2005. "A plausible congestion management scheme for the internal electricity market of the European Union," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 117-134, June.
- Hogan, William W, 1992. "Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 211-242, September.
- Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2008. "Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and the boundaries of firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 155-195, February. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)