Editorial: Utilities deregulation and bio-econ rationality

Backus, G. , & Amlin, J. (2005). Using gaming simulation to understand deregulation dynamics. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 45-57.

Bos, N. D. , & Gordon, M. D. (2005). A simulated consulting project with a deregulating utility company. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 91-113.

Hoge, N. , & Coyle, E. (2003, April 1). The myth of deregulation. The utilities project (Vol. 3). Retrieved from http://www.utilitiesproject.com/documents.asp?d_ID=1728

Kuit, M. , Mayer, I. S. , & de Jong, M. (2005). The INFRASTRATEGO game: An evaluation of strategic behavior and regulatory regimes in a liberalizing electricity market. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 58-74.

Meadows, D. H. , Randers, J. , & Meadows, D. L. (2004). The limits to growth: The 30-year update. London: James & James/Earthscan.

Thorngate, W. , & Tavakoli, M. (2005). In the long run: Biological versus economic rationality. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 9-26.

Tsuchiya, S. (2005). Utility deregulation and business ethics: More openness through gaming/simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 114-133.

von Weizsacker, E. , Young, O. , Finger, M. , & Levett, R. (2005). Limits to privitisation: When a solution becomes a problem. London: James & James/Earthscan.

Wenzler, I. (2005). Development of an asset management strategy for a network utility company: Lessons from a dynamic business simulation approach. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 75-90.

Wenzler, I. , Kleinlugtenbelt, W. J. , & Mayer, I. (2005). Deregulation of utility industries and roles of simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 36(1), pp. 30-44.