IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ownership Unbuilding in Electricity Markets - A Social Cost Benefit Analysis of the German TSO'S


  • Brunekreeft, G.


This paper presents a social cost benefit analysis of ownership unbundling (as compared to legal und functional unbundling) of the electricity transmission system operators in Germany. The study relies on the Residual Supply Index for its competitive concept. The analysis models some 15 effects, grouped in three categories: the competition effect, the interconnector effect and the cost effect. Facing a looming capacity shortage, we find that the total available generation capacity and the effect of unbundling on capacity are of crucial importance. Overall, for the base-case, the net weighted discounted social-cost-benefit effect (weighted-?SCB) is likely to be positive, but small.

Suggested Citation

  • Brunekreeft, G., 2008. "Ownership Unbuilding in Electricity Markets - A Social Cost Benefit Analysis of the German TSO'S," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0833, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  • Handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:0833

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Working Paper Version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Myeong-Hyeon Cho & Mark A. Cohen, 1997. "The economic causes and consequences of corporate divestiture," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(5), pages 367-374.
    2. Nemoto, Jiro & Goto, Mika, 2004. "Technological externalities and economies of vertical integration in the electric utility industry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 67-81, January.
    3. James B. Bushnell & Erin T. Mansur & Celeste Saravia, 2008. "Vertical Arrangements, Market Structure, and Competition: An Analysis of Restructured US Electricity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 237-266, March.
    4. Chen, Andrew H & Merville, Larry J, 1986. " An Analysis of Divestiture Effects Resulting from Deregulation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 41(5), pages 997-1010, December.
    5. Delmas, Magali & Tokat, Yesim, 2003. "Deregulation Process, Governance Structures and Efficiency: The U.S. Electric Utility Sector," Research Papers 1790, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Carrington, Roger & Coelli, Tim & Groom, Eric, 2002. "International Benchmarking for Monopoly Price Regulation: The Case of Australian Gas Distribution," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 191-216, March.
    7. Kaserman, David L & Mayo, John W, 1991. "The Measurement of Vertical Economies and the Efficient Structure of the Electric Utility Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 483-502, September.
    8. Toru Hattori & Tooraj Jamasb & Michael Pollitt, 2005. "Electricity Distribution in the UK and Japan: A Comparative Efficiency Analysis 1985-1998," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 23-48.
    9. Machiel Mulder & Victoria Shestalova & Mark Lijesen, 2005. "Vertical separation of the energy-distribution industry; an assessment of several options for unbundling," CPB Document 84, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Giovanni Fraquelli & Massimiliano Piacenza & Davide Vannoni, 2005. "Cost Savings From Generation and Distribution with an Application to Italian Electric Utilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 289-308, November.
    11. Mansur, Erin T, 2007. "Upstream Competition and Vertical Integration in Electricity Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 125-156, February.
    12. Kwoka, John E., 2002. "Vertical economies in electric power: evidence on integration and its alternatives," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 653-671, May.
    13. Lee, Byung-Joo, 1995. "Separability Test for the Electricity Supply Industry," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(1), pages 49-60, Jan.-Marc.
    14. Newbery, D.M. & Pollitt, M.G., 1996. "The Restructuring and Privatisation of the CEGB: Was It Worth It?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9607, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    15. Jamasb, T. & Pollitt, M., 2000. "Benchmarking and regulation: international electricity experience," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 107-130, September.
    16. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael, 2003. "International benchmarking and regulation: an application to European electricity distribution utilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1609-1622, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Bataille, Marc & Steinmetz, Alexander & Thorwarth, Susanne, 2014. "Screening instruments for monitoring market power in wholesale electricity markets: Lessons from applications in Germany," DICE Discussion Papers 150, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).

    More about this item


    unbundling; electricity; networks; regulation; competition;

    JEL classification:

    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L50 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - General
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:cam:camdae:0833. 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: (Jake Dyer). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.