Productivity differences in multiple output industries: An empirical application to electricity distribution

Given that electricity distribution is undertaken via a network, it is expected that costs of production are affected both by the nature of the network and the volume of physical output distributed via the network. This two-dimensional concept of firm size, that is involving network size (number of customers) and the level of physical output (kWh), also corresponds to the distinction between productivity measures of returns to density and returns to scale.This approach has been used to specify a restricted multioutput cost function and to estimate this function for the Norwegian electricity distribution industry through the use of a flexible functional form (translog). The results indicate that no economies of scale are present in the industry even for small plants when measured correctly, but that economics of density are present.

[1]  D. Huettner,et al.  Electric utilities: scale economies and diseconomies , 1978 .

[2]  Michael W. Tretheway,et al.  Analytical Studies in Transport Economics: Network effects and the measurement of returns to scale and density for U.S. railroads , 1986 .

[3]  James J. Heckman,et al.  A Test for Subadditivity of the Cost Function with an Application to the Bell System , 1986 .

[4]  Richard E. Matland,et al.  Economic Incentives and Public Firm Behavior: An Econometric Analysis of Energy Economizing Behavior of Norwegian Electric Utilities , 1983 .

[5]  R. Spady,et al.  Hedonic Cost Functions for the Regulated Trucking Industry , 1978 .

[6]  John C. Panzar,et al.  Technological determinants of firm and industry structure , 1989 .

[7]  I. Wangensteen,et al.  An investigation of distribution costs by means of regression analysis , 1990 .

[8]  A. Barten.  Maximum likelihood estimation of a complete system of demand equations , 1969 .

[9]  Lars-Hendrik Röller,et al.  Proper Quadratic Cost Functions with an Application to the Bell System , 1990 .

[10]  R. Shephard.  Cost and production functions , 1953 .

[11]  L. R. Christensen,et al.  Economies of Density versus Economies of Scale: Why Trunk and Local Service Airline Costs Differ , 1984 .

[12]  Mark A. Schankerman,et al.  A test of static equilibrium models and rates of return to quasi-fixed factors, with an application to the Bell system , 1986 .

[13]  A. Daughety,et al.  On the estimation of returns to scale using variable cost functions , 1983 .

[14]  R. Nelson.  Returns to scale from variable and total cost functions , 1985 .

[15]  L. G. Neuberg,et al.  Two issues in the municipal ownership of electric power distribution systems. [Statistical/econometric scrutiny] , 1977 .

[16]  Terence J. Wales,et al.  On the flexibility of flexible functional forms : An empirical approach , 1977 .

[17]  U. Ben-Zion,et al.  The Structure of Technology in a Multioutput Branch Banking Firm , 1989 .

[18]  L. R. Christensen,et al.  Global Properties of Flexible Functional Forms , 1980 .

[19]  A. Zellner.  An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias , 1962 .

[20]  Douglas W. Caves,et al.  Productivity Growth, Scale Economies, and Capacity Utilization in U.S. Railroads, 1955-74 , 1981 .

[21]  A. Charnes,et al.  A goal programming/constrained regression review of the Bell system breakup , 1988 .

[22]  Lars-Hendrik Röller,et al.  Modelling cost structure: the Bell System revisited , 1990 .