Consistent Regulation of Infrastructure Businesses: Some Economic Issues

This paper examines some important economic aspects associated with the notion that consistency in the regulation of infrastructure businesses is a desirable feature. It makes two important points. First, it is not easy to measure consistency. In particular, one cannot simply point to different regulatory parameters as evidence of inconsistent regulatory policy. Second, even if one does observe consistency emerging from decisions made by different regulators, it does not necessarily mean that this consistency is desirable. It might be the result, at least partially, of career concerns of regulators.

The Hold-Out Problem

Suppose a developer wants to buy n adjacent blocks of land that are currently in the possession of n different owners. The value of the blocks of land to the developer is greater than the sum of the individual values of the blocks for each owner. Under complete information about individual valuations, the developer could make a take-it-or-leave-it simultaneous offer to all owners equal to their valuations. The owners would accept the offers, the outcome would be efficient and the developer would get all the surplus. On the other hand, if the owner were to negotiate with the owners sequentially, the final division of the surplus would depend on who would have make the final offer. This individual would end up with the entire surplus and the efficient allocation would be implemented but at the expense of costly delay. Given the possible advantage that arises from being the last to make an offer, players may strategically delay the start of a negotiation. This is the hold-out problem that we examine in this paper. We develop a model in which players decide on the probability that they will go to the negotiating table with the developer. We characterise the full set of equilibria as they correspond to functions of owners valuations, and the developers valuation of subsets of land. Hold out occurs when the developer's valuation of individual blocks is the same as individual owners valuations, or if the valuation of all of the blocks of land by the developer is sufficiently large.

Testing Regulatory Consistency

We undertake an analysis of regulatory consistency using a database of publicly available regulatory decisions in Australia. We propose a simple exploratory model which allows us to test for regulatory consistency across jurisdictions and industries without detailed knowledge of the regulatory process. We compare two measures using our approach--the weighted average cost of capital and the proportion of firms’ revenue requirement claims disallowed by the regulator. We advocate use of the second measure, but our empirical results may be interpreted as indicating that a range of measures ought to be considered when assessing regulatory consistency.

An Empirical Investigation of the Mergers Decision Process in Australia

In this paper we examine a database assembled from an Australian public register of 553 merger decisions taken between March 2004 and July 2008. Mergers may be accepted without public assessment, accepted in conjunction with publication of a Public Competition Assessment, or rejected. We estimate an ordered probit model, using these three possible outcomes, with the objective of gaining better insight into the regulator’s decision-making process. Our two major findings are: (i) the existence of entry barriers and the existence of undertakings are highly correlated with the regulator’s decision to closely scrutinise a merger proposal; and (ii) if we compare two decisions, one which does not mention entry barriers (or import competition) with a decision that does mention entry barriers (or import competition), then the latter is significantly more likely to be opposed than the former.

Price Regulation and the Cost of Capital

This paper investigates how price regulation under moral hazard can affect a regulated firm’s cost of capital. We consider stylised versions of the two most typical regulatory frameworks that have been applied over the last decades by regulators: Price Cap and Cost of Service. We show that there is a trade-off between lower operational costs and a higher cost of capital under Price Cap regulation and higher operational costs and lower cost of capital under Cost of Service regulation. As a result, when the extent of moral hazard is not significant, Price Cap regulation generates lower welfare than the Cost of Service regulation.

Embedded Incentives in the Funding Arrangements for Residential Aged Care in Australia.

We examine the Australian Government?s role in the market for residential aged care in Australia and consider its impact on the incentives of market participants. We find that, due to the structure of the funding arrangements, providers are likely to have an incentive to discriminate against high-care residents, in favour of low-care residents. Since high-care residents, unlike low-care residents, face few viable alternatives, many are forced into public hospital beds as a result. This has placed pressure on the broader health system. In providing lessons from our analysis for reform, we stress the importance of fostering proper incentives in policy design and infer the implications for health reform more broadly.

Coasian Dynamics in Repeated English Auctions

We extend the Coase conjecture to the case of a seller with a single object, who faces n potential buyers and holds a sequence of English auctions until the object is sold. In an independent-private-values environment in which buyers and sellers share the same discount factor, we show that the (perfect Bayesian) equilibrium path of reserve prices obeys a Coasian logic. Moreover, the equilibrium reserve path lies below that for the model of repeated sealed-bid, second-price auctions studied by McAfee and Vincent (1997). Nevertheless, the open (English) and sealed-bid formats are shown to be revenue equivalent.

Market design for new leaders

In this article we explore some of the theoretical developments over the last 40 years which led to the emergence of the field of market design. This new field has had a substantive impact on policy, especially after the highly successful auctions of the mobile telephony licences in the mid-1990s in the US. The auctions replaced an inefficient allocation system where licences were allocated to applicants via a lottery and subsequently sold for large windfalls. These auctions raised substantial amount of revenue for the US government and were adopted worldwide, including in Australia. First, I provide a brief history of market design in cases where monetary payments can be used as the basis to allocate goods and services. This history starts with the game theoretical foundations of non-cooperative behaviour – as typically the interests of different individuals are in conflict, for example, when buying or selling goods and services – and then moves on to mechanism design and auction theory and practice. Second, I will review a very large experiment in Brazil where markets were created to avoid electricity rationing in 2001. The choice of this example is not inconsequential. It is meant to illustrate that such an approach to public policy can be successful even in developing countries with weaker institutions. I will then provide some concluding comments

Price Regulation and Investment: A Real Options Approach

This paper examines a three-period model of an investment decision in a network industry characterized by demand uncertainty, economies of scale and sunk costs. In the absence of regulation we identify the market conditions under which a monopolist decides to invest early as well as the underlying overall welfare output. In a regulated environment, we first consider a monopolist facing no downstream competition but subject to a price cap on the downstream retail (final good) market. We identify the welfare-maximising regulated prices using the unregulated market output as a benchmark. In particular, we show that the optimal regulation depends on market conditions (that is, the nature of demand) and there are three possible outcomes: (i) price regulation does not improve welfare; (ii) regulated prices include an option to delay value and provide a positive payoff to the firm; and (iii) regulated prices yield a zero payoff to the firm. Second, we consider a vertically integrated network provider that is required to provide access to downstream competitors. We show that when the regulator has only one instrument, namely the access price, an option-to-delay pricing rule generates (weakly) higher welfare than the Efficient Component Pricing Rule (ECPR), except under very specific conditions.

The Role of R&D Technology in Asymmetric Research Joint Ventures

We characterize asymmetric equilibria in two-stage process innovation games and show that they are prevalent in the different models of R&D technology considered in the literature. Indeed, cooperation in R&D may be accompanied by high concentration in the product market. We show that while such an increase may be profitable, it may be socially inefficient.Research and Development, Research Joint Ventures, Process Innovation Games