IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vuw/vuwcsr/18978.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Asset Stranding is Inevitable: Implications for Optimal Regulatory Design

Author

Listed:
  • Evans, Lewis
  • Guthrie, Graeme

Abstract

The irreversibility of much infrastructure investment means that some assets will stop earning revenue before the end of their physical lives; they will be stranded. Under traditional rate of return regulation firms are guaranteed the ability to recover the costs of investment insulating them from the consequences of asset stranding. Under modern incentive regulation firms are allowed to earn revenue just sufficient to cover the costs of a hypothetical efficient firm which provides services at minimum cost exposing them to the risk of asset stranding. By actively encouraging competition regulators increase this risk. We suggest two conditions applicable to both regimes which must be met if regulation is to be "reasonable": the regulated firm must not lose value from investment and it cannot collect more revenue than would the lowest cost alternative provider. This implies that regulated firms should be allowed to earn the riskless rate of return on the historical cost of their assets under rate of return regulation and a different (generally higher) rate of return on the replacement cost of their assets under incentive regulation. The risk premium depends on both the systematic and unsystematic risk of demand shocks. Since customers bear the risk of asset stranding under rate of return regulation and shareholders bear this risk under incentive regulation welfare is higher under incentive regulation as long as customers are more risk-averse than shareholders. We show that when there is a choice between reversible and irreversible technology there is no price specification under rate of return regulation that will induce the firm to choose the efficient bundle of technology while under incentive regulation the firm will choose the efficient mix of technologies. That is incentive regulation allocates the risk of asset stranding efficiently and also gives firms the incentive to reduce this risk to efficient levels. Finally incentive regulation has less demanding information requirements than traditional rate of return regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Evans, Lewis & Guthrie, Graeme, 2003. "Asset Stranding is Inevitable: Implications for Optimal Regulatory Design," Working Paper Series 18978, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    • Handle: RePEc:vuw:vuwcsr:18978
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ir.wgtn.ac.nz/handle/123456789/18978
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hayne E. Leland, 1974. "Regulation of Natural Monopolies and the Fair Rate of Return," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 5(1), pages 3-15, Spring.
    2. Marcus Asplund, 2000. "What Fraction of a Capital Investment is Sunk Costs?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 287-304, September.
    3. Marshall, William J & Yawitz, Jess B & Greenberg, Edward, 1981. "Optimal Regulation under Uncertainty," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 36(4), pages 909-921, September.
    4. Gunn, Calum, 2003. "On Intertemporal Subsidy-Free Prices and Economic Depreciation: Constrained Market Pricing Revisited," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 135-159, September.
    5. Stewart C. Myers, 1972. "The Application of Finance Theory to Public Utility Rate Cases," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 3(1), pages 58-97, Spring.
    6. Colin Mayer & John Vickers, 1996. "Profit-sharing regulation: an economic appraisal," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Kandel, Eugene & Pearson, Neil D., 2002. "Option Value, Uncertainty, and the Investment Decision," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 341-374, September.
    8. Blaine E. Davis & F.T. Sparrow, 1972. "Valuation Models in Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 3(2), pages 544-567, Autumn.
    9. Hausman, Jerry & Myers, Stewart, 2002. "Regulating the United States Railroads: The Effects of Sunk Costs and Asymmetric Risk," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 287-310, November.
    10. Paolo M. Panteghini & Carlo Scarpa, 2003. "Irreversible Investments and Regulatory Risk," CESifo Working Paper Series 934, CESifo.
    11. Michael J. Brennan & Eduardo S. Schwartz, 1982. "Consistent Regulatory Policy under Uncertainty," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(2), pages 506-521, Autumn.
    12. Brennan, Michael J & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 1982. "Regulation and Corporate Investment Policy," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 37(2), pages 289-300, May.
    13. Beard, T. Randolph & Kaserman, David L. & Mayo, John W., 2003. "Regulation, competition, and the optimal recovery of stranded costs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 831-848, June.
    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. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18978 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Evans, Lewis & Guthrie, Graeme, 2003. "Asset Stranding is Inevitable: Implications for Optimal Regulatory Design," Working Paper Series 3881, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    3. Lewis Evans & Graeme Guthrie, 2006. "Incentive Regulation of Prices When Costs are Sunk," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 239-264, May.
    4. Evans, Lewis & Guthrie, Graeme, 2006. "Incentive Regulation of Prices when Costs are Sunk," Working Paper Series 18971, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    5. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18971 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Michele Moretto & Paolo M. Panteghini & Carlo Scarpa, 2008. "Profit sharing and investment by regulated utilities: A welfare analysis," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 315-337, December.
    7. Evans, Lewis T. & Guthrie, Graeme A., 2005. "Risk, price regulation, and irreversible investment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 109-128, February.
    8. Graeme Guthrie, 2006. "Regulating Infrastructure: The Impact on Risk and Investment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 925-972, December.
    9. Johnstone, David & Havyatt, David, 2022. "Sophistry and high electricity prices in Australia," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Simshauser, Paul & Akimov, Alexandr, 2019. "Regulated electricity networks, investment mistakes in retrospect and stranded assets under uncertainty," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 117-133.
    11. Guthrie, Graeme, 2006. "Regulating Infrastructure: The Impact on Risk and Investment," Working Paper Series 18946, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    12. Roger Buckland & Julian Williams & Janice Beecher, 2015. "Risk and regulation in water utilities: a cross-country comparison of evidence from the CAPM," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 117-145, April.
    13. Simshauser, Paul, 2017. "Monopoly regulation, discontinuity & stranded assets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 384-398.
    14. Martzoukos, Spiros H. & Trigeorgis, Lenos, 2002. "Real (investment) options with multiple sources of rare events," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 696-706, February.
    15. David P. Baron & Robert Taggart Jr., 1978. "Regulatory Pricing Policies and Input Choices Under Uncertainty," Discussion Papers 315, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    16. Mirucki, Jean, 1980. "Comportement de l'entreprise réglementée: étude de l'hypothèse Averch-Johnson [Behavior of the Regulated Firm: A Study of the Averch-Johnson Hypothesis]," MPRA Paper 27669, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 1982.
    17. Michele Moretto & Paolo Panteghini & Carlo Scarpa, 2003. "Investment Size and Firm's Value under Profit Sharing Regulation," CESifo Working Paper Series 1040, CESifo.
    18. Evans, Lewis T. & Guthrie, Graeme A., 2005. "Risk, price regulation, and irreversible investment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(1-2), pages 109-128, February.
    19. Wayne Y. Lee & Anjan V. Thakor, 1982. "Optimal Regulatory Pricing Under Asymmetric Cost Information," Discussion Papers 580, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    20. Evans, Lewis & Guthrie, Graeme, 2005. "Risk, Price Regulation, and Irreversible Investment," Working Paper Series 18977, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    21. Paolo Panteghini & Carlo Scarpa, 2008. "Political pressures and the credibility of regulation: can profit sharing mitigate regulatory risk?," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 55(3), pages 253-274, September.
    22. repec:vuw:vuwscr:18946 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Ian Dobbs, 2011. "Modeling welfare loss asymmetries arising from uncertainty in the regulatory cost of finance," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 1-28, February.

    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:vuw:vuwcsr:18978. 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: Library Technology Services (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fcvuwnz.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.