Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report characterizes the regulation of energy markets in general and focuses on the electricity and natural gas markets of Québec. Markets are regulated if they are deemed to represent natural monopoly situations or if unregulated firms would not take into account externalities that they might generate. Energy market regulation has been justified with the claim that regulation represents the "second-best" alternative. That is, given a situation in which there is market failure, the outcome derived under regulation may be better than the outcome that would arise if the market were unregulated. Government intervention may be required in order to protect the interests of consumers. Energy markets have been considered natural monopoly situations in large part because of the enormous fixed costs associated with production and distribution. Furthermore, electricity and natural gas are generally considered essential goods, or more accurately, goods with significant positive externalities from reliable supply. A reliable supply is necessary for the proper functioning of any modern economy and a private market might not provide equally for all people in a service area.In recent years, however, certain segments of some energy markets have been liberalized, since these segments might not actually be natural monopoly situations and/or because the market may provide means to ensure that firms internalize externalities. We describe the experiences of a number of jurisdictions that have experimented with energy market liberalization and show that restructuring is feasible and may provide an improvement over the status quo if market power can be limited.We consider the potential for restructuring in Québec's energy markets which are currently mainly regulated by the Régie de l'énergie du Québec. Québec's electricity market does not represent a typical case for the restructuring of the production side since the vast majority of its generating capacity comes from hydro projects. Over 90% of Québec's installed electrical capacity is hydro generated, making Québec the second most hydro-dominated market in the world after Norway. Furthermore, this capacity is highly concentrated on three river systems. The usual model of forced divestiture by hydrologic system is therefore likely to introduce market power in a restructured market, and may lead to greater inefficiencies than those present under regulation. In order for any market restructuring to succeed, (at least) one of two approaches must be undertaken. A system of tradable water rights could be established in parallel with a competitive power pool in order to allow divestiture of individual plants within a river system and/or Québec's markets could be opened to foreign production.The retail segment of Québec's energy markets could potentially benefit from liberalization. The only obvious difference between Québec's energy markets and those in other jurisdictions is Québec's price-equalization policy. Lower prices could prevail if competition were introduced to the markets for electricity and natural gas, but not for all consumers. Québec's insistence on uniform prices throughout the province means that some consumers are currently paying below market price for energy. Prices for these consumers could rise if the market is restructured.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".