Incentive regulation of electricity distribution networks : Lessons of experience from Britain

219 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Lessons Learned From Electricity Market Liberalization (2008, background): “…electric distribution systems in England and Wales, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Peru, New Zealand and other countries (Newbery and Pollitt 1997, Domah and Pollitt 2001, Rudnick and Zolezzi 2001, Bacon and Besant-Jones 2001, Estache and Rodriguez-Pardina 1998, Pollitt 2004, Jamasb and Pollitt 2007).”
An international review of the implications of regulatory and electricity market structures on the emergence of grid scale electricity storage (2014, unknown): “6 generation and supply functions are generally classed as competitive while the T&D networks are regarded as natural monopolies and are regulated [34].”
Efficiency analysis of energy networks: An international survey of regulators (2009, background): “An integrated model can better reflect the trade ‐ offs between Opex and Capex from an economic efficiency perspective (Jamasb and Pollitt, 2007).”
Infrastructure transformation as a socio-technical process — Implications for the governance of energy distribution networks in the UK (2015, unknown): “This has had the effect of incentivizing the DNOs to achieve significant cost savings, primarily through reducing the dayto-day costs of running their operations [49], but it has acted as a disincentive to investment in innovative approaches to network management, as DNOs benefit more from reinforci”