IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2009-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Academic Opinion of Economic Scholars on Champsaur Commission’s Paper

Author

Listed:
  • François Lévêque

Abstract

This paper is the joint position taken by nine academics on the French debate introduced by the “Rapport de la commission présidée par Paul Champsaur sur l’organisation du marché de l’électricité” on April 2009. In order to reform the French reform, the Champsaur commission has made three main recommendations: (i) withdrawing the current retail administered tariff for business (ii) maintaining retail administered tariffs for households (iii) introducing a wholesale administered tariff on electricity from nuclear power generation. This rapport invites discussions on the French market design. Our academic joint position challenges these propositions. The authors welcome to the fact the commission proposes to abandon the tariff for business as very complex to implement (and hence costly) and freezes competition. However, authors have reservations about the other two recommendations. They are mainly based on the classical two-prong economic test to support a new regulation: (i) assessing its costs and benefits to ensure the latter offsets the former; (ii) comparing the recommended regulation with alternative instruments to verify that it is the best choice.

Suggested Citation

  • François Lévêque, 2009. "Academic Opinion of Economic Scholars on Champsaur Commission’s Paper," RSCAS Working Papers 2009/38, European University Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2009/38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/dspace/bitstream/1814/12100/3/RSCAS_2009_38.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Champsaur commission; French Electricity market reform; Nuclear industry reform; Market design; redistribution of scarcity rents;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rsc:rsceui:2009/38. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    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.