The authors used the INFRASTRATEGO simulation game to examine strategic behavior in a liberalizing electricity market and the effectiveness of different regulatory regimes in dealing with this strategic behavior. The game simulates the Dutch electricity market in the years 2002 to 2006. The game was played eight times with about 400 players, both professionals and students. Two regulatory regimes defined by (a) the policy-making model and (b) the regulation by negotiation model were evaluated. The authors found several patterns of strategic behavior, such as regulatory capture, sometimes with rather disturbing effects with regard to the settlement of rates and long-term capacity planning.
Berg, S. (2000). Sustainable regulatory systems: Laws, resources and values. Utilities Policy, 9, 159-170.
2.
Brunekreeft, G., & Keller, K. (2000). The electricity supply industry in Germany; market power or power of the market?Utilities Policy, 9, 15-29.
3.
Burns, R., Costello, K., Rosenberg, E., & Darr, F. (1999). Market analysis of public utilities: The now and future role of state commissions. Columbus: National Regulatory Research Institute, Ohio State University.
4.
Dixit, A., & Nalebuff, B. (1991). Thinking strategically; the competitive edge in business, politics and every day life. New York: Norton.
5.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. (2003). Final report on price manipulation in Western markets. Fact finding investigation of potential manipulation of electric and natural gas prices. Washington, DC: Author.
6.
Hall, C., Scott, C., & Hood, C. (2000). Telecommunications regulation. Culture, chaos and interdependence inside the regulatory process. London: Routledge.
7.
Halseth, A. (1998). Market power in the Nordic electricity market. Utilities Policy, 7, 259-268.
8.
Heuvelhof, E. tenJong, M. de., Kuit, M., & Stout, H. (2003). Infrastratego. Strategisch gedrag in infrastructuurgebonden sectoren (Infrastratego. Strategic behavior in network industries). Utrecht, the Netherlands: Lemma.
9.
Heuvelhof, E. ten., Twist, M. van., Kort, M., Kuit, M., & Stout, H. (2000, May). The regulator’s turn. Disruption of competition in utility sectors as a strategic game with technology at stake. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference Competitive Challenge in Network Industries, New York.
10.
Horwitz, R. (1989). The irony of regulatory reform. The deregulation of American telecommunications. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
Hunt, S., & Shuttleworth, G. (1996). Competition and choice in electricity. New York: John Wiley.
12.
Jong, M. de & Stout, H. (2003). Strategic behavior and the law; how legal authorities deal with factual strategic behavior of former monopolists. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 3, 38-55.
13.
Kuit, M. (2002). Strategic behavior and regulatory styles in the Netherlands energy industry. Delft, the Netherlands: Eburon.
14.
Kuit, M., & Mayer, I. (2002). Infrastratego: Evaluating strategic behavior in a liberalized electricity industry. In I. Mayer & W. Veeneman (Eds.), Games in a world of infrastructures. Simulation-games for research, learning and intervention (pp. 225-242). Delft, the Netherlands: Eburon.
15.
Künneke, R. (1999). Electricity networks: How natural is the monopoly?Utilities Policy, 8, 99-108.
16.
Mayer, I., & Veeneman, W. (Eds.). (2002). Games in a world of infrastructures. Simulation-games for research, learning and intervention. Delft, the Netherlands: Eburon.
17.
Shepherd, W. (1998). Problems in creating effective competition. In D. Gabel & D. F. Weiman (Eds.), Opening networks to competition. The regulation and pricing of access (pp. 49-71). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
18.
Sioshansi, F. (2001). US electricity restructuring experience: Hits and misses. Utilities Policy, 10, 1-6.
19.
Verbruggen, A., & Vanderstappen, E. (1999). Electricity sector restructuring in Belgium during the 90s. Utilities Policy, 8, 159-171.
20.
Vlaam, H. de., & Jong, M. de. (2002). Infrastructure co-opetition and the creation of value; an Anglo-Dutch comparison of regulatory regimes for the provision of rail and telephone services. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 2, 125-143.
21.
Wenzler, I., Willems, R., & Noordeinde, A van ‘t. (1995). A policy exercise for the Dutch power industry. In D. Crookall & K. Arai (Eds.), Simulation and gaming across disciplines and cultures (pp. 143-149). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Wirick, D. (1998). Organizational transformation: Ensuring the relevance of public utility commissions. Columbus: National Regulatory Research Institute, Ohio State University.
23.
Wirick, D. (1999). New models of regulatory commission performance: The diversity imperative. Columbus: National Regulatory Research Institute, Ohio State University.
