Regulating local Public Utilities by Profit-Sharing

This paper concerns "profit-sharing" within an incomplete regulatory contract where a municipality delegates a risk-neutral firm to manage a local utility. Together with a price cap regulation (PCR) mechanism, the contract envisages the possibility of the municipality revoking the contract if the firm's profits are percieved "excessively" high. We show that when this threat is credible and the cost of exercising it is not too high, a long-term efficient equilibrium arises which guarantees the firm with an appropriate level of profits. The consequent regulation timing consists of an endogenous regulatory lag where the regulation has a PCR nature, followed by a period of ROR in which the firm is motivated to adjust its price downward to avoid contract recall. We also show that excessive revocation costs make the firm an unregulated monopolist with an infinite regulatory lag where ROR looks like a pure PCR.

Opting-out in profit-sharing regulation

To avoid the extremely high profit levels found in recent experiences with price cap regulation, some regulators have proposed a profit-sharing mechanism that revises prices to the benefit of consumers. This paper investigates the conditions under which a regulator can implement such a profit-sharing scheme, having the option to revoke the contract if the firm's profits are excessive. When this option is included in the regulator's objective function and the cost of exercising it is not too high, a long-term equilibrium arises with a state-contingent sharing rule that guarantees and appropriate level of profits. The model determines both the level of profits that triggers the profit- sharing mechanism and the consequent price adjustment endogenously. There is an endogenous regulatory lag initially characterized by a price cap regulation, followed by a period of profit-sharing regime where the firm is motivated to cut prices to avoid revocation.Public utilities, Price cap regulation, profit-sharing, stochastic games

Opting-out in profit-sharing regulation

To avoid the extremely high profit levels found in recent experiences with price cap regulation, some regulators have proposed a profit- sharing mechanism that revises prices to the benefit of consumers. This paper investigates the conditions under which a regulator can implement such a profit-sharing scheme, having the option to revoke the contract if the firm's profits are excessive. When this option is included in the regulator's objective function and the cost of exercising it is not too high, a long-term equilibrium arises with a state-contingent sharing rule that guarantees and appropriate level of profits. The model determines both the level of profits that triggers the profit-sharing mechanism and the consequent price adjustment endogenously. There is an endogenous regulatory lag initially characterized by a price cap regulation, followed by a period of profit-sharing regime where the firm is motivated to cut prices to avoid revocation.public utilities, price cap regulation, profit-sharing, stochastic games

Firm Regulation and Profit-Sharing: A Real Option Approach

To avoid the extremely high profit levels found in recent experience of public utilities’ regulation, some regulators have introduced a profit-sharing (PS) rule that revises prices to the benefit of consumers. However, in order to be successful, a PS rule should satisfy appropriate incentive conditions. In this paper, we study the incentive properties of a second best PS mechanism designed by the regulator to induce a regulated monopolist to divert its "excessive" profits to the customers. In a real option model where a regulated monopolist manages a long-term franchise contract and the regulator has the option to revoke the contract if there is serious welfare loss, we first endogenously derive the welfare maximising PS rule under the verifiability of profits. We then explore the dynamic efficiency of this PS rule under non-verifiability of profits and study the firm’s incentive to comply with it in an infinite-horizon game. Finally, we derive the price adjustment path which follows the adoption of a PS rule in a price cap regulation. We show that the riskiness of the distribution of the firm’s future profits and the regulator’s cost in revoking the franchise contract are key factors in determining the equilibrium properties of a dynamic PS rule.

Mixed Oligopoly: Old and New

Many industries and “sectors” of a modern economy display the interaction of private and public agents which forms the topic of this seminar. A first approximation classification identifies three broad types of situations, which beyond the prima facie similarity, are however radically different in origin and nature.

The Design of the University System

This paper compares the organisation of the university sector under private provision with the structure which would be chosen by a welfare maximising government. It studies a general equilibrium model where universities carry out research and teach students. To attend university and earn higher incomes in the labour market, students pay a tuition fee. Each university chooses its tuition fee to maximise the amount of resources it can devote to research. Research bestows an externality on society because it increases labour market earnings. Government intervention needs to balance labour market efficiency considerations — which would tend to equalise the number of students attending each university — with considerations of efficiency on the production side, which suggest that the most productive universities should teach more students and carry out more research. We find that government concentrates research more that the private market would, but less than it would like to do if it had perfect information about the productivity of universities. It also allows fewer universities than would operate in a private system.Higher education; The organisation of the university sector.

Optimal penalty for investment delay in public procurement contracts

Our aim in this paper is to provide a general framework in which to determine the optimal penalty fee inducing the contractor to respect the contracted delivery date in public procurement contracts (PPCs). We do this by developing a real option model that enables us to investigate the contractor's value of investment timing flexibility which the penalty rule - de facto - introduces. We then apply this setting in order to evaluate the range of penalty fees in the Italian legislation on PPCs: according to our calibration analysis, there is no evidence that the substantial delays recorded in the execution times of Italian investments are to be due to incorrectly set penalty fees. This result opens the way for other explanations of delays in PPCs: we thus extend our model to include the probability that the penalty is ineffectively enforced and study how calibration results are accordingly affected. We finally show how our model can be used to investigate both the case of a penalty/premium rule and the one of an optimal penalty fee in a concession contract.public procurement contracts, penalty fee, investment timing flexibility, investment irreversibility, contract incompleteness, enforceability of rules.

Distributional effects of price reforms in the Italian utility markets

In this paper we analyse some distributional effects of the reforms of water and energy services in Italy. We first document the new regulation setting in these services, illustrating the dynamics of utility prices and of household expenditure in the period 1998-2005. We then propose a way to measure the affordability of public utilities, in order to investigate how many households would incur a potentially excessive burden, if they consumed a minimum quantity of utility services. Finally, we calculate this index on data from the ‘Survey on Family Budgets’. Our results show how the affordability of utility bills varies from region to region depending on climate, income, family endowment and size. The analysis – also based on a counterfactual exercise – finds that so far, utility reforms do not seem to have produced any negative effects on weaker households.Affordability, Public Utilities, Regulation, Gas, Electricity, Water

Restructuring Italian Utility Markets: Household Distributional Effects

Competition in public utility sectors has been encouraged in recent years throughout Europe. In this paper we try and analyse the welfare effects of these reforms in Italy, with particular attention to water and energy goods. The first step is to introduce a sensible measure of affordability of public utilities and to see how many households fall below a critical threshold. This issue is analysed stressing how climatic conditions dramatically affect households’ expenditure and how the affordability of utility bills varies a lot from region to region. So far, utilities’ reforms do not seem to have produced negative effects on the weaker group of households.Consumer behaviour, Public utilities, Regulation, Gas, Electricity, Water

"It Is Never too late": Optimal Penalty for Investment Delay in Public Procurement Contracts

We provide a general framework in which to determine the optimal penalty fee inducing the contractor to respect the contracted delivery date in public procurement contracts (PPCs). We do this by developing a real option model that enables us to investigate the contractor’s value of investment timing flexibility which the penalty rule - de facto - introduces. We then apply this setting in order to evaluate the range of penalty fees in the Italian legislation on PPCs. According to our calibration analysis, there is no evidence that the substantial delays recorded in the execution times of Italian PPCs are due to incorrectly set penalty fees. This result opens the way for other explanations of delays in Italian PPCs: specifically, we extend our model to investigate the probability of enforcing a penalty which we assume negatively affected by the "quality" of the judicial system and the discretionality of the court in voiding the rule. Our simulations show that the penalty fee is highly sensitive to the "quality" of the judicial system. Specifically referring to the Italian case, we show that the optimal penalty should be higher than those set according to the present Italian law.Public Procurement Contracts, Penalty Fee, Investment Timing Flexibility, Contract Incompleteness, Enforceability of Rules