Peter Forsyth, Monash University Twelfth ACCC Regulatory Conference - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

peter forsyth monash university twelfth accc regulatory
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Peter Forsyth, Monash University Twelfth ACCC Regulatory Conference - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Regulation by Negotiation: Stephen Littlechilds Contribution Peter Forsyth, Monash University Twelfth ACCC Regulatory Conference July 28-29, Brisbane, 2011 www.monash.edu.au 1 Issues What is the importance of benchmarking in a light


slide-1
SLIDE 1

www.monash.edu.au

1

Regulation by Negotiation: Stephen Littlechild’s Contribution

Peter Forsyth, Monash University Twelfth ACCC Regulatory Conference July 28-29, Brisbane, 2011

slide-2
SLIDE 2

www.monash.edu.au

2

Issues

What is the importance of benchmarking in a light handed system of regulation? Options for Light Handed regulation How well will Light Handed Regulation work when airports are subject to demand greater than capacity?

slide-3
SLIDE 3

www.monash.edu.au

3

1 Benchmarking- Do we need it?

  • Littlechild sceptical?
  • The issue-benchmarking performance in terms of prices,

profits, costs and productivity

  • The need for benchmarking is controversial in Australia
  • This issue is highlighted with the Productivity

Commission Review

  • Airports are difficult to benchmark
  • But not that difficult
  • Overseas- several studies academic, consultant
  • But not for Australia
slide-4
SLIDE 4

www.monash.edu.au

4

Benchmarking the System

  • How well does the Australia system work as a whole?
  • I think OK-
  • But I don’t really know
  • But it is possible to find out
  • How has productivity changed over the last ten years?
  • How did productivity change when airports were price

capped (1997-2001)?

  • The PC has a lot of experience in benchmarking
  • Can it make a credible assessment of the performance of

the system if it does not consider all the evidence?

slide-5
SLIDE 5

www.monash.edu.au

5

Benchmarking Performance

  • Has the performance of the individual Australian airports

been good or bad?

  • A task for the PC review, taking into account government

Aeronautical Pricing Principles of 2007

  • Are individual airports producing efficiently?
  • Are they allowing costs to rise?
  • Are the prices of Sydney Airport consistent with

productive efficiency?

  • Has Adelaide Airport invested excessively and thus put

up its prices?

slide-6
SLIDE 6

www.monash.edu.au

6

2 Options for Light Handed Regulation

  • There are several aspects to light handed regulation
  • Not all need be present
slide-7
SLIDE 7

www.monash.edu.au

7

What is Light Handed Regulation?

  • Not the same as deregulation
  • No ex-ante price path set
  • Criteria for poor performance- and sanctions?
  • Dispute resolution mechanism? And criteria?
  • An efficiency test- if it is efficient, then it is OK? (PC,2002;

Costello, 2007)

  • Emphasis in negotiation between parties (eg airlines and

airport)

  • More flexibility for the seller over prices
slide-8
SLIDE 8

www.monash.edu.au

8

Two Models of LH Regulation

1 Principles and Review An independent body reviews performance according to set principles and if performance is not satisfactory, a sanction is impose (eg, regulation) 2 Negotiate and arbitrate Parties negotiate and if necessary and independent arbitrator is called in (preferred by Littlechild) Substitutes- which is better?

slide-9
SLIDE 9

www.monash.edu.au

9

Principles Approach

  • The current Australian approach (with a little bit of help

from IIIA)

  • Principles need to be clear (are they)?
  • What sanctions for poor performance- are they credible

and sufficient?

  • Assessing performance is essential- i.e., benchmarking is

essential

  • Dispute resolution not needed
slide-10
SLIDE 10

www.monash.edu.au

10

Negotiate/ Arbitrate

  • Independent dispute resolution essential (Littlechild)
  • Less need for benchmarking
  • Approach favoured by ACCC, airlines
  • Need to specify criteria for the arbitrator carefully
  • To avoid too active an involvement by the arbitrator
  • But not pricing principles
slide-11
SLIDE 11

www.monash.edu.au

11

The Choice?

  • Both can have dangers
  • Such as degenerating into cost plus regulation
  • If present system is continued, needs to be more

attention paid to principles and sanctions

slide-12
SLIDE 12

www.monash.edu.au

12

3 Light Handed Regulation and Excess Demand

  • Sydney will be the first (later Brisbane)
  • No other airport has been subjected to LH regulation and

excess demand

  • Some airports have excess demand, and are subjected to

price caps and R of R regulation

  • Such as London, Paris
  • LH regulation means that several issues will develop at

Sydney (and Brisbane)

  • What implications for the various versions of LH

regulation?

  • Will negotiation work efficiently?
slide-13
SLIDE 13

www.monash.edu.au

13

The Long Run Problem

  • Short Run problems can be handled OK
  • Will the airport face incentives to invest efficiently over

the long run?

  • Leave aside planning, political and site selection

problems

slide-14
SLIDE 14

www.monash.edu.au

14

Investment

  • Fig 1 shows the case of additional investment
  • With D1, investment is worthwhile
  • Even though LRMC rises from LRMC1 to LRMC2
  • In SR price is P1 (landing charges or slots)
  • Efficient to increase capacity from K1 to K2
  • New price = LRMC2
slide-15
SLIDE 15

www.monash.edu.au

15

Output $ D K2 K1 P1 C P3 P2 LRMC2 LRMC1 P4

slide-16
SLIDE 16

www.monash.edu.au

16

Under LH Regulation

  • At P1, (airport gets the rents) airlines would favour

investment

  • Would like to have prices at P2
  • As do passengers
  • But airport would prefer to have a price of P1 (subject to

elasticities)

  • Investment does not go ahead
slide-17
SLIDE 17

www.monash.edu.au

17

If Airlines have Some Power...

  • Airport can offer a price of P3 to the airlines
  • Then the airlines gain slot rents
  • Which are NOT passed on to their passengers
  • Airport gains profits
  • Airlines gain profits
  • So both airlines and airport prefer K1 to K2
  • But passengers are worse off compared to K2
  • Because of the slot system, the customer - the airlines-

gains scarcity rents

slide-18
SLIDE 18

www.monash.edu.au

18

  • No incentive for airlines and airport to negotiate an

efficient solution

  • In this case, airline and passenger interests are not

aligned

  • Is the buyer of airports services the airline or its

passengers (normally it does not matter)?

  • Both the airport and the airline will argue “expansion is

not needed”

  • Under LH regulation, efficiency does not come about
  • (Did this happen with BAA’s London Heathrow airport?)

Are Airline and Passenger Interests Aligned?

slide-19
SLIDE 19

www.monash.edu.au

19

Achieving Efficient Investment

  • Need some mechanism to ensure investment
  • Periodic (simple) cost benefit analyses to determine

whether airport’s performance is acceptable?

  • Let’s face it, there will be CBAs done to determine if

major capacity investments are needed

slide-20
SLIDE 20

www.monash.edu.au

20

Thank You! peter.forsyth@monash.edu

http://users.monash.edu.au/~pforsyth/index.html