• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11
  12. 12
    12
  13. 13
    13
  14. 14
    14
  15. 15
    15
  16. 16
    16
  17. 17
    17
  18. 18
    18
  19. 19
    19
  20. 20
    20
  21. 21
    21
  22. 22
    22
  23. 23
    23

Economics of European Integration

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Economics of European Integration Case: Deregulation in the European Electricity Market Point of view of the European companies Aggelos Antonkakis Master of European Studies November 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 1. INTRODUCTION IN THE ELECTRICITY CONSUMING COMPANIES 4 2. EUROPEAN COMPANIES OVERALL WELCOME THE DEREGULATION IN THE ELECTRICITY MARKET 5 2.1. Advantages 5 2.2. Disadvantages 8 3. LESSONS FROM THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY CRISIS AND CRUCIAL ELEMENTS IN THE EUROPEAN DEREGULATION POLICY 10 3.1. Lessons from the California crisis 10 3.2. Crucial elements in the European deregulation policy 11 4. DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN DEREGULATION IN THE EUROPEAN ELECTRICITY SECTOR AND OTHER EUROPEAN SECTORS 13 4.1. Similarities 13 4.2. Differences 15 5. AFTER DEREGULATION, TIME FOR PRIVATISATION? 17 BIBLIOGRAPHY 21 Executive Summary European companies are important electricity consumers. Although they are a diversified group of consumers, they all profit from the liberalisation in the European electricity market thanks to the following positive consequences. First of all, the deregulation policy turns the traditionally monopolistic and vertically integrated electricity industry into separated and competitive entities, what generally results in technical innovations and lower electricity prices. Moreover, the creation of a single European electricity market entitles the companies to freely choose their power supplier. The entry of European competitors in national markets increases the pressure of competitive forces on the incumbent electricity producers: studies show that larger market opening results in sharper price reductions and harmonisation of the electricity prices among the member states. Finally, the deregulation places the electricity consuming companies in a better negotiation position, what enables them to insist on higher service standards and improvements in energy efficiency. But European companies also fear some negative effects of the liberalisation: instability in price and supply, lack of cooperation between the different sectors and the formation of an oligopolistic market structure with only a few multinational energy suppliers. For this reason, European companies are of the opinion that an effective regulatory policy is still necessary to steer the liberalised electricity market in the right direction. ...read more.

Middle

Moreover, they need a reliable network, integrated through Europe, accessible and adequate to the demand in the sense that it can provide enough grid capacity and prevent shortages. 3.1. Lessons from the California crisis During the year 2000, two major elements prevented Californian companies to be competitive or, even worse, to exert correctly their activities: the severe energy shortages and the resulting extreme price inflation (prices were around 200% above the level of the previous year). Consulting the literature, we have to conclude that numerous reasons can be quoted to explain this electricity crisis and that the explanations differ widely according to the position and opinion of the author. In this discussion we do not focus on the changes of external elements (like the weather), but we want to understand why the "deregulated" market failed to respond efficiently to these changes. In fact, one of the main reasons explaining the crisis was that the Californian electricity market was not completely and imperfectly deregulated. Indeed, wholesale prices were deregulated, whereas retail prices were fixed (by the state of California) to an artificially low level. Moreover, regulators were limiting the construction of new plants what consequently resulted in low electricity supply. This situation gave market power to wholesale generators (with the resulting possible manipulations) and enabled them to increase the prices well ahead the cost of production at a moment when retail prices were fixed. As a consequence, demand exceeded supply (both inelastic, thus creation of shortages) and retail companies were obliged to sell electricity at a lower price than their purchase price on the spot market, which inevitably conducted them to bankrupt. The lessons of this dramatic situation conduct us to the crucial elements according to European companies for the establishment of a good European liberalised electricity market. 3.2. Crucial elements in the European deregulation policy 1. Creation of an effective competitive market. Given that the transmission and the distribution in the electricity supply chain represent natural monopolies, the generation and the supply of electricity have to be really opened to competition. ...read more.

Conclusion

and four- fold increase in the profit margins of the distributors; and that the element of supply costs is too small to make meaningful competition possible for small consumers. 14"15 Moreover, this same study, which clearly demonstrates the inefficiency of privatisation, also highlights the undesirable consequences on employment due to privatisation as well as (between many other arguments based on statistics) the performance problems arising after privatisation in major cities like Rio de Janeiro, Auckland and Buenos Aires. Given that the literature is mixed and that even the European commission is neutral about the question, it seems difficult to have a final sharply contrasted point of view. However, taking into account the liberalisation occurring in Europe, privatisation of the monopolistic elements can be considered as desirable. Indeed, as explained in the paper of Bergman et al. (op.cit), "the legacy of monopoly in network industries and the scale of public ownership in Europe's network industries can present problems when competition is introduced". These "problems" actually concern conflicting priorities for public owned companies and the fact that they could suffer from disadvantageous positions, the other companies in the sector beneficiating from state aids that they can not receive for evident reasons of fairness on the competition. In this way, it seems favourable to clearly separate state as owner and state as regulator. However, we are still convinced that the state as regulator has still its important role to play to make privatisations successful in Europe (i.e. respecting the European companies' objectives). Indeed, regulators should not only ensure that the equity is respected when the sector is privatised (with for instance a tax and benefit system), but they should also take the necessary measures in order to ensure the transparency (different systems are possible: sector specific-agency, independent legal entities, ownership unbundling) of the cost and return structure of the grid structure as well as its reliability. The final objective is to benefit from the advantages of privatisation as well as to protect the interests of European consumers. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Economy & Economics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Economy & Economics essays

  1. PEST and competitive analysis facing by confectionery organisations

    Therefore, this is a good area for Master foods to put a product into, such as the Milky Way Crispy Roll. * There is a high level Market Penetration. This means that confectionary has managed to keep a large share of the market.

  2. To what extent is the UK airline industry a contestable market?

    The airlines are interdependent of price and output decisions. Therefore an airline has to compete in different ways other than price, such as promotions and discount fares.

  1. Macroeconomic Objectives and their impact on Business Activity

    There are, however, problems associated with such demand management policies. The first is that they are largely impractical since there is a time lag involved before a tax comes into effect. It is therefore very difficult for the government to be able to quickly implement a tax, for example, to reduce inflation.

  2. Use game theory to analyze an oligopoly competition of two great rivals, Wal-Mart and ...

    Most brands located within an area are known only within that area. For example, in Shenyang milk production the local brand is HuiShan; although MengNiu is nationally famous, it can not compete equally in Shenyang. This happens because local citizens believe that HuiShan is nearer so its products are fresher than MengNiu's.

  1. The Nature of Macroeconomics

    revenue rises, inflation lifts people in to higher tax bracket Inflation causes a redistribution and reallocation of resources away the following groups * Fixed income earners real incomes v as $ lags behind inflation * Weak unions or non-unionised section, money incomes fall behind inflation * Borrower/lenders, borrowers lose if

  2. An Empirical Investigation into the Causes and Effects of Liquidity in Emerging

    bonds and others using high-yield bonds as only a small proportion of their holdings. Insurance companies also invest their own capital in high-yield bonds and participate in the market through separate accounts offered in variable insurance and annuity products. Pension funds may also look to the high-yield market as a

  1. "If real world markets can be made to resemble more closely the model of ...

    Fig 4 show the firm producing at its profit maximisng equilibrium level of output OQ where MC=MR. In this case, because AR is less tan AC, it will make a loss shown by EFGH. However, in the long run, the perfectly competitive will make neither losses nor abnormal profits.

  2. Explain the nature of over-riding interests and discuss what are the disadvantages they pose ...

    However in Thatcher v Douglas 1996 the CA held that an equitable easement was an overriding interest under S.70, (1),(a) because of the effect of r.258 of the Land Registration Rules. This decision was later disregarded by LRA 2002 in it's bid to simplify everything.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work