IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecoprv/ecop_0249-4744_2008_num_182_1_7752.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Demande active sur les marchés électriques : une analyse expérimentale de l'efficacité du mécanisme de retrait de capacités demandées

Author

Listed:
  • Abel Winn
  • Stephen Rassenti
  • Céline Jullien

Abstract

[eng] This paper presents an experimental investigation of the effects of a demand-response mechanism on the efficiency of competitive wholesale electric-power markets. Under most electricity deregulation , attention has initially and exclusively been placed on the supply side of the industry. Demand has been assumed to be largely inelastic and therefore not calling for specific incentive mechanisms. As a consequence, many power markets turned out to be organized using one-sided auctions – with diverse and sometimes embarrassing market performances a decade after the first deregulation. This suggests that the foundations of power-market designs should be re-examined. Many regulators are now integrating the demand side of the industry into their power markets , searching for efficient demand-response mechanisms. Earlier experimental studies have shown the significance of demand-side bidding in electric-power markets. Our article presents a series of experiments designed to test a simple demand-response mechanism in the form of demand withdrawals, as proposed by the Australian authorities. The results show that although the mechanism leads to significant reductions in market prices in peak-demand periods, it fosters gaming strategies that suggest it might perform poorly in the field. [fre] Cet article traite de l’effet des mécanismes de réponse de la demande sur l’efficacité des marchés de gros d’électricité. Dans le cadre des réformes de libéralisation des marchés de l’énergie, l’attention a initialement porté sur le seul coté offre du marché, supposant implicitement que l’inélasticité de la demande d’électricité n’appelait pas à la formulation de mécanisme incitatif. En conséquence, ce sont des mécanismes d’enchère d’offre de vente qui ont vu le jour, conduisant plus de dix ans après les premières dérégulations à des performances de marché parfois très médiocres. Les (re-) réformes actuelles comptent en partie sur la réactivité de la demande du marché pour améliorer l’efficacité. Des travaux récents en économie expérimentale ont montré l’effet essentiel de la participation de la demande. Dans cet article nous présentons une série d’expériences visant à tester un mécanisme simple de réponse de la demande, sous forme de retrait de capacités, tel qu’il est proposé par les autorités australiennes. Les résultats montrent que si un tel mécanisme conduit à une réduction significative des prix de marché en période de forte demande, il génère pour autant des comportements stratégiques qui suggèrent de faibles performances du mécanisme une fois transposé dans la réalité.

Suggested Citation

  • Abel Winn & Stephen Rassenti & Céline Jullien, 2008. "Demande active sur les marchés électriques : une analyse expérimentale de l'efficacité du mécanisme de retrait de capacités demandées," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 182(1), pages 61-76.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2008_num_182_1_7752
    DOI: 10.3406/ecop.2008.7752
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.2008.7752
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecop.2008.7752
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_2008_num_182_1_7752
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecop.2008.7752?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cto:journl:v:21:y:2002:i:3:p:515-544 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Paul Klemperer (ed.), 2000. "The Economic Theory of Auctions," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 1669.
    3. Davis, Douglas D. & Holt, Charles A., 2008. "The Exercise of Market Power in Laboratory Experiments," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 17, pages 138-145, Elsevier.
    4. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721, September.
    5. Alvin E. Roth, 2002. "The Economist as Engineer: Game Theory, Experimentation, and Computation as Tools for Design Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1341-1378, July.
    6. Green, Richard J & Newbery, David M, 1992. "Competition in the British Electricity Spot Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 929-953, October.
    7. Abbink, Klaus & Brandts, Jordi & McDaniel, Tanga, 2003. "Asymmetric Demand Information in Uniform and Discriminatory Call Auctions: An Experimental Analysis Motivated by Electricity Markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 125-144, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Satoru Fujishige & Zaifu Yang, 2020. "A Universal Dynamic Auction for Unimodular Demand Types: An Efficient Auction Design for Various Kinds of Indivisible Commodities," Discussion Papers 20/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    2. Carine Staropoli & Céline Jullien, 2006. "Using Laboratory Experiments To Design Efficient Market Institutions: The Case Of Wholesale Electricity Markets," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(4), pages 555-577, December.
    3. Carine Staropoli & Celine Jullien, 2006. "Using Laboratory Experiments to Design Efficient Market Institutions: The case of wholesale electricity markets," Post-Print hal-00569121, HAL.
    4. Carine Staropoli & Celine Jullien, 2006. "Using Laboratory Experiments to Design Efficient Market Institutions: The case of wholesale electricity markets," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00569121, HAL.
    5. Paul Milgrom, 2006. "Package Auctions and Package Exchanges: the 2004 Fisher-Schultz Lecture," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000131, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    7. Nicolas C. Bedard & Jacob K. Goeree & Philippos Louis & Jingjing Zhang, 2020. "The Favored but Flawed Simultaneous Multiple-Round Auction," Working Paper Series 2020/03, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    8. Roth, Alvin E. & Sonmez, Tayfun & Utku Unver, M., 2005. "Pairwise kidney exchange," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 151-188, December.
    9. van Koten, Silvester & Ortmann, Andreas, 2013. "Structural versus behavioral remedies in the deregulation of electricity markets: An experimental investigation motivated by policy concerns," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 256-265.
    10. Muriel Niederle & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Market Culture: How Rules Governing Exploding Offers Affect Market Performance," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 199-219, August.
    11. Llobet, Gerard & Fabra, Natalia, 2019. "Auctions with Unknown Capacities: Understanding Competition among Renewables," CEPR Discussion Papers 14060, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Dzikri Firmansyah Hakam, 2018. "Market Power Modelling in Electricity Market: A Critical Review," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(5), pages 347-356.
    13. Paul Klemperer, 2007. "Bidding Markets," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 1-47.
    14. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. James Nicolaisen & Valentin Petrov & Leigh Tesfatsion, 2000. "Market Power and Efficiency in a Computational Electricity Market with Discriminatory Double-Auction Pricing," Computational Economics 0004005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Alvin E Roth & Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2005. "Efficient Kidney Exchange: Coincidence of Wants in a Structured Market," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000126, UCLA Department of Economics.
    17. Alvin Roth, 2008. "Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 537-569, March.
    18. C. Duke & L. Gangadharan, 2005. "Salinity in Water Markets : An ExperimentalInvestigation of the Sunraysia Salinity Levy, Victoria," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 950, The University of Melbourne.
    19. Eric Budish & Estelle Cantillon, 2012. "The Multi-unit Assignment Problem: Theory and Evidence from Course Allocation at Harvard," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2237-2271, August.
    20. Bunn, Derek W. & Oliveira, Fernando S., 2007. "Agent-based analysis of technological diversification and specialization in electricity markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1265-1278, September.

    More about this item

    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:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2008_num_182_1_7752. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecop .

    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.