FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2621249060> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2621249060 abstract "for the 3 IAEE Asian Conference The Impacts of Electricity Industry Reforms on Electricity Prices Muyi Yang and Deepak Sharma Centre for Energy Policy, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia. Overview Electricity industry reforms have been underway worldwide for nearly three decades now. One of the major motivations for the reform was to correct the price abnormalities that existed in the electricity industry in the pre-reform era, and to reinstall the pricing mechanism based on market competition. The ensuing electricity prices, it was suggested, would be cost-reflective, and hence provide appropriate signal for system expansion. The proponents for reform also argued that the pressures coming from competitive market could further drive down the electricity prices, and hence contribute to economy-wide benefits (Bacon and Besant-Jones 2001). Till now, the majority of developed countries and more than 70 developing countries have undertaken steps to reform their electricity industries (Besant-Jones 2006). While the overall guidance for such reform has come from the ‘standard textbook model’ (namely, introduction of competition through unbundling, privatisation and re-regulation), the actual implementation has varied across these countries. The outcomes of the reforms (especially the promised outcomes associated with the electricity prices) have been markedly mixed across these countries (Nagayama 2007, Wamukonya 2003). In general, it seems that there is a significant disparity between expectations from reform and its actual outcomes. Much of the debate on the reasons behind such a disparity has been carried out from a neo-liberal perspective. This perspective attributes the reasons for the disparity to the lack of depth to which reforms have been implemented, and to governmental interference (see, for example, Pollitt 2004, 2008). This study contends that this perspective is narrowly-focused and unlikely to provide adequate insights into the real reasons for the disparity (Sharma 2003). This is because this perspective mainly focuses on economic factors, and largely ignores the importance of other factors (namely, social, cultural, and political) on shaping the reform process, and on determining electricity prices. Furthermore, these factors are context-specific, varying from country to country. Therefore, an analysis of these contexts and how they impact Abstract for the 3 IAEE Asian Conferencefor the 3 IAEE Asian Conference electricity industry reform (drivers, models, and electricity prices) is a prerequisite for developing a more meaningful understanding of the reasons for the disparity. Against this background, this study intends to develop an institutional perspective on electricity industry reforms, with specific focus on the understanding of how the country-specific contexts define the boundary of reform, and hence influence electricity prices. This perspective, this study argues, could provide a much fuller understanding of the underlying reasons for the disparity. Methods The method of this study is developed based on the transaction cost economics (Williamson 1975, 1985, 1995), the property right analysis (Demsetz 1967, Alchian and Demsetz 1973, Alchian 1977), and the historical and political economic approach (North 1990, 2005, libecap 1989) from the new institutional economics tradition. This method views electricity reform as a process of changing the institutions (the governance structure, the property rights system, for example) that govern the electricity industry, and examines how these institutional changes are shaped by the country-specific contexts. Within these country-specific contexts, different interest groups and political forces pursue their preferred institutions of electricity industry under the constraints of political institutions. Their preferences are further shaped by the non-institutional contextual factors (such as, macroeconomic conditions, local and international experiences with electricity reform) and institutional contextual factors (such as, socio-cultural institutions). Besides, the analysis of this study will focus on 9 countries namely, Australia, Brazil, China, Chile, some countries from European Union (including, United Kingdom, and Germany), and some ASEAN countries (including, Malaysia, Philippines, and Thailand). This selection, this study argues, could provide a sufficient coverage (in terms of, for example, socio-cultural settings, political institutions, motivations for reform, models of reform, and the experience with reform), and a solid foundation for developing a fuller understanding of the influences of country-specific contexts on reform process, and the electricity prices. Expected Results The results of this study are expected to provide deeper insights into the reasons for the disparity between expectations for reform and its actual outcomes (focusing on Abstract for the 3 IAEE Asian Conferencefor the 3 IAEE Asian Conference electricity prices). These insights would be useful for policy makers and policy analysts, and enable them to make more informed decisions on the design of the institutions for the electricity industry. References Alchian, A.A (1977): Economic Forces at Work. Indianapolist: Liberty Press. Alchian, A.A and Demsetz, H (1973): The Property Right Paradigm. The Journal of Economic History, Vol 33, pp 16-27. Bacon,R.W and Besant-Jones,J.E (2001): Global Electric Power Reform, Privatisation and Liberalisation of the Electric Power Industry in Developing Countries. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 26, pp 331-359. Besant-Jones,J.E (2006): Reforming Power Markets in Developing Countries: What Have We Learned? In: Mining and Energy Board Discussion Paper No 19, World Bank. Demsetz, H (1967): Toward a Theory of Property Rights. The American Economic Review, Vol 57, Papers and Proceedings of the Seventy-ninth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, pp 347-359. Libecap,G.D (1989): Contracting for Property Rights. Cambridge University Press. Nagayama,H (2007): Effects of Regulatory Reforms in the Electricity Supply Industry on Electricity Prices in Developing Countries. Energy Policy, Vol 35, pp 3440-3462. North, D.C (1990): Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press. North, D.C (2005): Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton University Press. Pollitt,M (2008): Electricity Reform in Argentina: Lessons for Developing Countries. Energy Economics Vol 30, pp 1536-1567. Abstract for the 3 IAEE Asian Conferencefor the 3 IAEE Asian Conference Pollitt,M (2004): Electricity Reform in Chile: Lessons for Developing Countries. CMI Electricity Project Working Paper No 51, Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge. Sharma,D (2003): The Multidimensionality of Electricity Reform – An Australian Perspective. Energy Policy Vol 31, pp 1093-1102. Wamukonya,N (2003): Power Sector Reform in Developing Countries: Mismatched Agendas. Energy Policy Vol 31, pp 1273-1289. Williamson,O.E (1975): Markets and Hierarchies: Analysts and Antitrust Implications. New York: Free Press. Williamson,O.E (1985): The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: Free Press. Williamson,O.E (1995): The Mechanisms of Governance. New York: Oxford University Press." @default.
• W2621249060 created "2017-06-09" @default.
• W2621249060 creator A5052139969 @default.
• W2621249060 creator A5053483337 @default.
• W2621249060 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W2621249060 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W2621249060 title "The Impacts of Electricity Industry Reforms on Electricity Prices" @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1192974992 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1524259339 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1551642829 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1883019054 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1979110156 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1979836033 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2024216388 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2052992778 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2059050367 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2074061242 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2093814975 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2112088027 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2121969052 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2128053782 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2132292180 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2136231915 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2321396344 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2362217472 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2496739800 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2566856888 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W2782620463 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W3121147769 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W3123276124 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W3126049374 @default.
• W2621249060 cites W1931750677 @default.
• W2621249060 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2621249060 type Work @default.
• W2621249060 sameAs 2621249060 @default.
• W2621249060 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2621249060 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2621249060 hasAuthorship W2621249060A5052139969 @default.
• W2621249060 hasAuthorship W2621249060A5053483337 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C119599485 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C146733006 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C163258240 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C170777988 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C175605778 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C206658404 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C40700 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C423512 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C54750564 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C57101690 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C119599485 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C121332964 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C127413603 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C144133560 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C146733006 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C162324750 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C163258240 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C170777988 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C175605778 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C206658404 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C40700 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C423512 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C54750564 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C57101690 @default.
• W2621249060 hasConceptScore W2621249060C62520636 @default.
• W2621249060 hasLocation W26212490601 @default.
• W2621249060 hasOpenAccess W2621249060 @default.
• W2621249060 hasPrimaryLocation W26212490601 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1493254378 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1591760710 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1593221284 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1651908068 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1734075264 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1807983917 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1867441642 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1966318120 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1972054950 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W1976215703 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2039329193 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2058394027 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2062224251 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2096384012 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2126709884 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2143342711 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2165263634 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W2166546769 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W3155648342 @default.
• W2621249060 hasRelatedWork W656533913 @default.
• W2621249060 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2621249060 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2621249060 magId "2621249060" @default.
• W2621249060 workType "article" @default.