IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v43y2013i2p147-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Price effects of independent transmission system operators in the United States electricity market

Author

Listed:
  • Theodore Kury

Abstract

In 1996, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) sought to “remove impediments to competition in the wholesale bulk power marketplace and to bring more efficient, lower cost power to the Nation’s electricity consumers” through a series of market rules. A product of these rules was the establishment of regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and independent system operators (ISOs) charged with facilitating equal access to the transmission grid for electricity suppliers. Whether these changes in market structure have succeeded in achieving FERC’s goal to provide “lower cost power to the Nation’s electricity consumers” remains an open question. This paper utilizes a panel data set of the 48 contiguous United States and a treatment effects model in first differences to determine whether there have been changes in delivered electric prices as a result of the establishment of ISOs and RTOs. To avoid the confounding effects of electric restructuring, the model is estimated with the full panel data set, and then again without the states that have restructured their electric markets. This estimation shows that electricity prices fall approximately 4.8 % in the first 2 years of an ISO’s operation and that this result is statistically significant. However, this result is dependent on the presence of states that restructured their electricity markets. When these restructured states are removed from the data set the price effects of RTOs become indistinguishable from zero. The paper concludes that rate agreements are the principal source of the observed decrease in prices and that RTOs have not had the desired effect on electricity prices. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Theodore Kury, 2013. "Price effects of independent transmission system operators in the United States electricity market," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 147-167, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:43:y:2013:i:2:p:147-167
    DOI: 10.1007/s11149-012-9204-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11149-012-9204-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11149-012-9204-5?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Kwoka & Michael Pollitt & Sanem Sergici, 2010. "Divestiture policy and operating efficiency in U.S. electric power distribution," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 86-109, August.
    2. Paul L. Joskow, 2006. "Markets for Power in the United States: An Interim Assessment," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(1), pages 1-36, January.
    3. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
    4. Andrews,Donald W. K. & Stock,James H. (ed.), 2005. "Identification and Inference for Econometric Models," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521844413, October.
    5. Mohammadi, Hassan, 2009. "Electricity prices and fuel costs: Long-run relations and short-run dynamics," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 503-509, May.
    6. Kira R. Fabrizio & Nancy L. Rose & Catherine D. Wolfram, 2007. "Do Markets Reduce Costs? Assessing the Impact of Regulatory Restructuring on US Electric Generation Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1250-1277, September.
    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. Tin Cheuk Leung & Kwok Ping Ping & Kevin K. Tsui, 2019. "What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-32, August.
    2. Kaller, Alexander & Bielen, Samantha & Marneffe, Wim, 2018. "The impact of regulatory quality and corruption on residential electricity prices in the context of electricity market reforms," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 514-524.
    3. Thomas M. Fullerton & Ileana M. Resendez & Adam G. Walke, 2015. "Upward Sloping Demand for a Normal Good? Residential Electricity in Arkansas," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 5(4), pages 1065-1072.
    4. Ibarra-Yunez, Alejandro, 2015. "Energy reform in Mexico: Imperfect unbundling in the electricity sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 19-27.
    5. Kury, Theodore J., 2015. "The impact of coordination on wholesale market participation: The case of the U.S. electricity industry," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 38-44.
    6. David P. Brown & David E. M. Sappington, 2022. "Vertical integration and capacity investment in the electricity sector," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 193-226, February.
    7. Kenneth Rose & Brittany Tarufelli & Gregory B. Upton Jr., 2024. "Retail Electricity Market Restructuring and Retail Rates," The Energy Journal, , vol. 45(1), pages 1-49, January.

    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. Wang, Chang & Guo, Yue & Yang, Yu & Chen, Shiyi, 2022. "The environmental benefits of electricity industry restructuring in China: Ownership mixing vs. vertical unbundling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Gultom, Yohanna M.L., 2019. "Governance structures and efficiency in the U.S. electricity sector after the market restructuring and deregulation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1008-1019.
    3. Tin Cheuk Leung & Kwok Ping Ping & Kevin K. Tsui, 2019. "What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-32, August.
    4. Liza Jabbour, 2013. "Market thickness, sunk costs, productivity, and the outsourcing decision: an empirical analysis of manufacturing firms in France," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(1), pages 103-134, February.
    5. Umit Ozmel & Deniz Yavuz & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2017. "Network Prominence, Bargaining Power, and the Allocation of Value Capturing Rights in High-Tech Alliance Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 947-964, October.
    6. Jiao, Yawen, 2010. "Stakeholder welfare and firm value," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 2549-2561, October.
    7. Michael Pollitt, 2021. "Measuring the Impact of Electricity Market Reform in a Chinese Context," Working Papers EPRG2111, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    8. Kury, Theodore J., 2015. "The impact of coordination on wholesale market participation: The case of the U.S. electricity industry," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 38-44.
    9. Ohler, Adrienne & Mohammadi, Hassan & Loomis, David G., 2020. "Electricity restructuring and the relationship between fuel costs and electricity prices for industrial and residential customers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    10. Kim, Jihwan & Kim, Yeonbae & Flacher, David, 2012. "R&D investment of electricity-generating firms following industry restructuring," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 103-117.
    11. Alexander Hill, 2023. "Price freezes and gas pass-through: an estimation of the price impact of electricity market restructuring," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 87-116, April.
    12. Agustin J. Ros, 2017. "An Econometric Assessment of Electricity Demand in the United States Using Utility-specific Panel Data and the Impact of Retail Competition on Prices," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    13. Pollitt, Michael G., 2012. "The role of policy in energy transitions: Lessons from the energy liberalisation era," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 128-137.
    14. Kuosmanen, Timo & Nguyen, Tuan, 2020. "Capital bias in the Nordic revenue cap regulation: Averch-Johnson critique revisited," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    15. Wang, Yongjin & Wang, Yanling & Li, Kunwang, 2014. "Judicial quality, contract intensity and exports: Firm-level evidence," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 32-42.
    16. Fabio Pieri & Enrico Zaninotto, 2013. "Vertical integration and efficiency: an application to the Italian machine tool industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 397-416, February.
    17. Johnson, William C. & Karpoff, Jonathan M. & Yi, Sangho, 2015. "The bonding hypothesis of takeover defenses: Evidence from IPO firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 307-332.
    18. Giacomo Calzolari & Leonardo Felli & Johannes Koenen & Giancarlo Spagnolo & Konrad O. Stahl, 2015. "Trust, Competition and Innovation: Theory and Evidence from German Car Manufacturers," CESifo Working Paper Series 5229, CESifo.
    19. Benjamin, Richard, 2010. "A further inquiry into FTR properties," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3547-3556, July.
    20. John Kwoka, 2008. "Restructuring the U.S. Electric Power Sector: A Review of Recent Studies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 32(3), pages 165-196, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity market structure; Regional transmission organizations; Electricity market reform; L22; L51; L94;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities

    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:kap:regeco:v:43:y:2013:i:2:p:147-167. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.