Empirical Effects of Policy Induced Competition in the Electricity Industry: The Case of District Heat Pricing in Finland 1996-2002
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The household electricity markets in Finland were opened to the competition on the 1st of November 1998. At the same time, the electricity transmission and distribution networks were regulated by special legislation (Act on Electricity Markets) and by special regulator (Electricity Market Authority). The regulation was extended to limit the unreasonable pricing and to separate financially the different business units (production, distribution and sales). However, the district heating industry does not have industry specific regulation. It is regulated through general Competition Laws. The policy induced competition in the electricity industry is expected to affect the district heating industry since both industries compete in the household heating goods markets. In addition, the district heating industry in Finland has had a regional monopoly within its distribution network. The threat of extended regulation is evident in the industry, since most of the network industries are regulated in order to facilitate access to the network and to speed up the development of competition in the market. The hypothesis of regulatory threat is studied through pricing behaviour of firms by using panel data models. The data consists of 76 district heating companies in Finland in years 1996 - 2002. The results indicate that the district heat markets are non-competitive and some evidence which supports regulat01y threat hypothesis can also be found. The electricity market reform caused a slight decrease in district heating price. The results indicate also that the large and market dominant firms have been more responsive to the policy reform than small firms.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".