IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirbur/2005rb-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Energy Regulation in Quebec

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Clark
  • Andrew Leach

Abstract

This report characterizes the regulation of energy markets in general and focuses on the electricity and natural gas markets of Québec. Markets are regulated if they are deemed to represent natural monopoly situations or if unregulated firms would not take into account externalities that they might generate. Energy market regulation has been justified with the claim that regulation represents the second-best alternative. That is, given a situation in which there is market failure, the outcome derived under regulation may be better than the outcome that would arise if the market were unregulated. Government intervention may be required in order to protect the interests of consumers. Energy markets have been considered natural monopoly situations in large part because of the enormous fixed costs associated with production and distribution. Furthermore, electricity and natural gas are generally considered essential goods, or more accurately, goods with significant positive externalities from reliable supply. A reliable supply is necessary for the proper functioning of any modern economy and a private market might not provide equally for all people in a service area. In recent years, however, certain segments of some energy markets have been liberalized, since these segments might not actually be natural monopoly situations and/or because the market may provide means to ensure that firms internalize externalities. We describe the experiences of a number of jurisdictions that have experimented with energy market liberalization and show that restructuring is feasible and may provide an improvement over the status quo if market power can be limited. We consider the potential for restructuring in Québec's energy markets which are currently mainly regulated by the Régie de l'énergie du Québec. Québec's electricity market does not represent a typical case for the restructuring of the production side since the vast majority of its generating capacity comes from hydro projects. Over 90% of Québec's installed electrical capacity is hydro generated, making Québec the second most hydro-dominated market in the world after Norway. Furthermore, this capacity is highly concentrated on three river systems. The usual model of forced divestiture by hydrologic system is therefore likely to introduce market power in a restructured market, and may lead to greater inefficiencies than those present under regulation. In order for any market restructuring to succeed, (at least) one of two approaches must be undertaken. A system of tradable water rights could be established in parallel with a competitive power pool in order to allow divestiture of individual plants within a river system and/or Québec's markets could be opened to foreign production. The retail segment of Québec's energy markets could potentially benefit from liberalization. The only obvious difference between Québec's energy markets and those in other jurisdictions is Québec's price-equalization policy. Lower prices could prevail if competition were introduced to the markets for electricity and natural gas, but not for all consumers. Québec's insistence on uniform prices throughout the province means that some consumers are currently paying below market price for energy. Prices for these consumers could rise if the market is restructured.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Clark & Andrew Leach, 2005. "Energy Regulation in Quebec," CIRANO Burgundy Reports 2005rb-03, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirbur:2005rb-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2005RB-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Joskow, 2003. "Electricity Sector Restructuring and Competition: Lessons Learned," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 40(121), pages 548-558.
    2. Paul L. Joskow, 1997. "Restructuring, Competition and Regulatory Reform in the U.S. Electricity Sector," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 119-138, Summer.
    3. Paul L. Joskow, 2001. "California's Electricity Crisis," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 17(3), pages 365-388.
    4. Stefan Ambec & Joseph Doucet, 2003. "Decentralizing hydro power production," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(3), pages 587-607, August.
    5. Ferdinand E. Banks, 2003. "An introduction to the economics of natural gas," OPEC Energy Review, Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, vol. 27(1), pages 25-63, March.
    6. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Ambec, Stefan & Sprumont, Yves, 2002. "Sharing a River," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 453-462, December.
    8. Braeutigam, Ronald R., 1989. "Optimal policies for natural monopolies," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1289-1346, Elsevier.
    9. Borenstein, Severin & Bushnell, James, 2000. "Electricity Restructuring: Deregulation or Reregulation?," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt22d2q3fn, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    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. Robert Clark & Andrew Leach, 2005. "La réglementation de l'énergie au Québec," CIRANO Burgundy Reports 2005rb-04, CIRANO.
    2. Severin Borenstein & James Bushnell, 2015. "The US Electricity Industry After 20 Years of Restructuring," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 437-463, August.
    3. Armstrong, Mark & Sappington, David E.M., 2007. "Recent Developments in the Theory of Regulation," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1557-1700, Elsevier.
    4. Çetin, Tamer & Yasin Eryigit, Kadir, 2013. "The economic effects of government regulation: Evidence from the New York taxicab market," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 169-177.
    5. Künneke, Rolf & Groenewegen, John & Ménard, Claude, 2010. "Aligning modes of organization with technology: Critical transactions in the reform of infrastructures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 494-505, September.
    6. Jean-Claude Berthélemy & Arnaud Millien, 2018. "Impact of Decentralized Electrification Projects on Sustainable Development: A Meta-Analysis," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01922517, HAL.
    7. Hulya Dagdeviren, 2009. "Limits To Competition And Regulation In Privatized Electricity Markets," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(4), pages 641-664, December.
    8. Streeter, Jialu Liu, 2016. "Adoption of SO2 emission control technologies - An application of survival analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 16-23.
    9. Ahmed, Tauqir & Bhatti, Arshad Ali, 2019. "Do power sector reforms affect electricity prices in selected Asian countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1253-1260.
    10. Newbery, D., 2002. "Regulatory Challenges to European Electricity Liberalisation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0230, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    11. Paul L. Joskow, 2003. "The Difficult Transition to Competitive Electricity Markets in the U.S," Working Papers 0308, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
    12. Menz, Fredric C., 2005. "Green electricity policies in the United States: case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(18), pages 2398-2410, December.
    13. Andersson, Tommy, 2004. "Essays on Nonlinear Pricing and Welfare," MPRA Paper 59446, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Donald N. Dewees, 2006. "Electricity Restructuring and Regulation in the Provinces: Ontario and Beyond," Working Papers tecipa-205, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    15. Zhen Lei & Chen-Hao Tsai & Andrew N. Kleit, 2017. "Deregulation and Investment in Generation Capacity: Evidence from Nuclear Power Uprates in the United States," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    16. Cao, Jing & Ho, Mun S. & Ma, Rong & Zhang, Yu, 2024. "Transition from plan to market: Imperfect regulations in the electricity sector of China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 509-533.
    17. Tooraj Jamasb & Rabindra Nepal & Govinda R. Timilsina, 2017. "A Quarter Century Effort Yet to Come of Age: A Survey of Electricity Sector Reform in Developing Countries," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    18. William Yu & Michael G. Pollitt, 2009. "Does Liberalisation cause more electricity blackouts? Evidence from a global study of newspaper reports," Working Papers EPRG 0902, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    19. Lee, Nathan R., 2020. "When competition plays clean: How electricity market liberalization facilitated state-level climate policies in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    20. Marcel Canoy, 1994. "Natural monopoly and differential pricing," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 287-309, October.

    More about this item

    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:cir:cirbur:2005rb-03. 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: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.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.