Revenue-cap regulation

Last updated

Revenue-cap regulation allows the operator to change its prices within baskets of services so long as the change in revenue does not exceed the revenue cap index. This index typically reflects the overall rate of inflation in the economy, the inflation in the operator's input prices relative to the average firm in the economy and the ability of the operator to gain efficiencies relative to the average firm in the economy. Price-cap regulation attempts to do the same thing but for prices, rather than revenue. [1]

Inflation increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time

In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services; consequently, inflation reflects a reduction in the purchasing power per unit of money – a loss of real value in the medium of exchange and unit of account within the economy. The measure of inflation is the inflation rate, the annualized percentage change in a general price index, usually the consumer price index, over time. The opposite of inflation is deflation.

Price-cap regulation is a form of regulation. Designed in the 1980s by UK Treasury economist Stephen Littlechild, it has been applied to all privatized British network utilities. It is contrasted with both rate-of-return regulation, with utilities being permitted a set rate of return on capital, and with revenue-cap regulation, with total revenue being the regulated variable.

The system is intended to provide incentives for efficiency savings, as any savings above the productivity factor (this predicted rate of efficiency is commonly called the X-factor) can be passed on to shareholders, at least until the revenue caps are next reviewed (usually every five years). A key part of the system is that the X-factor is based not only a firm's past performance, but on the performance of other firms in the industry: X is intended to be a proxy for a competitive market, in industries which are natural monopolies.

Now consider how a utility operator might be different from the average firm in the economy. First, assume that the operator is just like the average firm, except that the operator's input prices change at a rate that is different from the rate of change for the average firm. If the operator's input prices increase faster than (conversely, slower than) the rate of inflation, then the operator's revenue will need to increase faster than (conversely, slower than) the rate of inflation for the operator to be able to have earnings that are at least as great as the operator's cost of capital. Now assume that the operator is just like the average firm, except with respect to the operator's ability to improve efficiency. If the operator increases its productivity faster than (conversely, slower than) the average firm, then the operator's revenue will need to decrease (conversely, increase) relative to the rate of inflation.

Combining these two possible differences between the operator and the average firm in the economy, the operator's revenue should change at the rate of inflation, minus (conversely, plus) the extent to which its input prices inflate less than (conversely, greater than) the rate of inflation, and minus (conversely, plus) the extent to which the operator's productivity is expected to improve at a rate that is greater than (conversely, less than) the average firm in the economy.

The above analysis identifies two things. First, the inflation rate, I, used in the revenue cap index represents the general rate of inflation for the economy. Second, the X-factor is intended to capture the difference between the operator and the average firm in the economy with respect to inflation in input prices and changes in productivity. That is to say, the choice of inflation index and of the X-factor go hand in hand. Some regulators choose a general measure of inflation, such as a gross national product price index. In this case, the X-factor reflects the difference between the operator and the average firm in the economy with respect to the operator's ability to improve its productivity and the effect of inflation on the operator's input costs. Other regulators choose a retail (or producer) price index. In these cases, the X-factor represents the difference between the operator and the average retail (or wholesale) firm. Lastly, some regulators construct price indices of operator inputs. In these cases, the X-factor reflects productivity changes of the operator. [2]

Revenue cap regulation is more appropriate than price cap regulation when costs do not vary appreciably with units of sales. [1]


Related Research Articles

In economics, specifically general equilibrium theory, a perfect market is defined by several idealizing conditions, collectively called perfect competition. In theoretical models where conditions of perfect competition hold, it has been theoretically demonstrated that a market will reach an equilibrium in which the quantity supplied for every product or service, including labor, equals the quantity demanded at the current price. This equilibrium would be a Pareto optimum.

Purchasing power parity (PPP) is a way of measuring economic variables in different countries so that irrelevant exchange rate variations do not distort comparisons. Purchasing power exchange rates are such that it would cost exactly the same number of, for example, US dollars to buy euros and then buy a basket of goods in the market as it would cost to purchase the same goods directly with dollars. The purchasing power exchange rate used in this conversion equals the ratio of the currencies' respective purchasing powers.

Capital intensity is the amount of fixed or real capital present in relation to other factors of production, especially labor. At the level of either a production process or the aggregate economy, it may be estimated by the capital to labor ratio, such as from the points along a capital/labor isoquant.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to industrial organization:

Marginal cost factor in economics

In economics, marginal cost is the change in the total cost that arises when the quantity produced is incremented by one unit; that is, it is the cost of producing one more unit of a good. Intuitively, marginal cost at each level of production includes the cost of any additional inputs required to produce the next unit. At each level of production and time period being considered, marginal costs include all costs that vary with the level of production, whereas other costs that do not vary with production are fixed and thus have no marginal cost. For example, the marginal cost of producing an automobile will generally include the costs of labor and parts needed for the additional automobile but not the fixed costs of the factory that have already been incurred. In practice, marginal analysis is segregated into short and long-run cases, so that, over the long run, all costs become marginal. Where there are economies of scale, prices set at marginal cost will fail to cover total costs, thus requiring a subsidy. Marginal cost pricing is not a matter of merely lowering the general level of prices with the aid of a subsidy; with or without subsidy it calls for a drastic restructuring of pricing practices, with opportunities for very substantial improvements in efficiency at critical points.

An incentive is a contingent motivator. Traditional incentives are extrinsic motivators which reward actions to yield a desired outcome. The effectiveness of traditional incentives has changed as the needs of Western society have evolved. While the traditional incentive model is effective when there is a defined procedure and goal for a task, Western society started to require a higher volume of critical thinkers, so the traditional model became less effective. Institutions are now following a trend in implementing strategies that rely on intrinsic motivations rather than the extrinsic motivations that the traditional incentives foster.

Production function physical output of a production process to physical inputs or factors of production

In economics, a production function gives the technological relation between quantities of physical inputs and quantities of output of goods. The production function is one of the key concepts of mainstream neoclassical theories, used to define marginal product and to distinguish allocative efficiency, a key focus of economics. One important purpose of the production function is to address allocative efficiency in the use of factor inputs in production and the resulting distribution of income to those factors, while abstracting away from the technological problems of achieving technical efficiency, as an engineer or professional manager might understand it.

Productivity describes various measures of the efficiency of production. A productivity measure is expressed as the ratio of output to inputs used in a production process, i.e. output per unit of input. Productivity is a crucial factor in production performance of firms and nations. Increasing national productivity can raise living standards because more real income improves people's ability to purchase goods and services, enjoy leisure, improve housing and education and contribute to social and environmental programs. Productivity growth can also help businesses to be more profitable. There are many different definitions of productivity and the choice among them depends on the purpose of the productivity measurement and/or data availability.

Marginal product

In economics and in particular neoclassical economics, the marginal product or marginal physical productivity of an input is the change in output resulting from employing one more unit of a particular input, assuming that the quantities of other inputs are kept constant.

In economics, returns to scale and economies of scale are related but different concepts that describe what happens as the scale of production increases in the long run, when all input levels including physical capital usage are variable. The concept of returns to scale arises in the context of a firm's production function. It explains the behavior of the rate of increase in output (production) relative to the associated increase in the inputs in the long run. In the long run all factors of production are variable and subject to change due to a given increase in size (scale). While economies of scale show the effect of an increased output level on unit costs, returns to scale focus only on the relation between input and output quantities.

In economics, total-factor productivity (TFP), also called multi-factor productivity, is the portion of output not explained by traditionally measured inputs of labour and capital used in production. TFP is calculated by dividing output by the weighted average of labour and capital input, with the standard weighting of 0.7 for labour and 0.3 for capital. Total factor productivity is a measure of economic efficiency and accounts for part of the differences in cross-country per-capita income. The rate of TFP growth is calculated by subtracting growth rates of labor and capital inputs from the growth rate of output.

Rate-of-return regulation is a system for setting the prices charged by government-regulated monopolies. The main premise is that monopolies must charge the same price that would ideally prevail in a perfectly-competitive market, equal to the efficient costs of production, plus a market-determined rate of return on capital.

In economics, a factor market is a market where factors of production are bought and sold, such as the labor market, the physical capital market, the market for raw materials, and the market for management or entrepreneurial resources.

In economics, factor payments are the income people receive for supplying the factors of production: land, labor, capital or entrepreneurship.

The building block model is a form of public utility regulation that is common in Australia. Variants of the building block model are currently used in Australia in the regulation of electricity transmission and distribution, gas transmission and distribution, railways, postal services, urban water and sewerage services, irrigation infrastructure, and port access. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has stated that it intends to use a version of the building block model to determine indicative access prices for fixed-line telecommunications services. The building block model is so-called because the allowed revenue of the regulated firm is equal to the sum of underlying components or building blocks consisting of the return on capital, the return of capital, the operating expenditure, and various other components such as taxes and incentive mechanisms.

In macroeconomics, rigidities are real prices and wages that fail to adjust to the level indicated by equilibrium or if something holds one price or wage fixed to a relative value of another. Real rigidities can be distinguished from nominal rigidities, rigidities that do not adjust because prices can be sticky and fail to change value even as the underlying factors that determine prices fluctuate. Real rigidities, along with nominal, are a key part of new Keynesian economics. Economic models with real rigidities lead to nominal shocks having a large impact on the economy.

Utility ratemaking is the formal regulatory process in the United States by which public utilities set the prices they will charge consumers. Ratemaking, typically carried out through "rate cases" before a public utilities commission, serves as one of the primary instruments of government regulation of public utilities.

Performance-based regulation ("PBR") is an approach to utility regulation designed to strengthen utility performance incentives. Thus defined, the term PBR is synonymous with incentive regulation. The two most common forms of PBR are award-penalty mechanisms (“APMs”) and multiyear rate plans (“MRPs”). Both involve mathematical formulas that can lower regulatory cost at the same time that they encourage better performance. This constitutes a remarkable potential advance in the “technology” of regulation. Economic theorists whose work has supported the development of PBR include Nobel prize-winning economist Jean Tirole.

References

  1. 1 2 Jamison, Mark A (2007). Barney Capehart, ed. "Regulation: Price Cap and Revenue Cap". Encyclopedia of Energy Engineering and Technology. 3: 1245–51. Retrieved 28 August 2018.
  2. "Features of Price Cap and Revenue Cap Regulation". regulationbodyofknowledge.org. Retrieved August 28, 2018.