Türk elektrik dağıtım sektöründe hizmet kalitesine özendirici bir düzenleme uygylaması

Avrupa Birliği ülkelerinde yaygın olarak izlenen Fiyat ya da Gelir Sınırına Göre Düzenleme yaklaşımı altında dağıtım şirketlerinin sermaye yatırımlarını ihmal ederek maliyetlerini düşürmeye yönelmesi, düzenleme sürec ine hizmet kalitesi göstergelerinin dahil edilmesini zorunlu kılmıştır. 2013’e kadar özelleştirilmeleri öngörülen TEDAŞ’a ait dağıtım şirketlerinin fiyat ile gelir sınırı karışımı bir yaklaşımla düzenlenecek olması aday ülke konumundaki Türkiye’nin benzer bir yol izlemesini gerektirmektedir. 01 Temmuz 2006’da endüstriyel ve turistik 13 İlde altı saat süren elektrik kesintisinden hemen sonra 12 Eylül 2006’da ticari hizmet kalitesi eşik değerleri ile ihlal edilmeleri halinde ödenmesi gereken tazminatlar Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanmıştır. Ancak elektrik kesinti sayısı ve süresini arttırarak/düşürerek hizmet kalitesini kötüleştiren/iyileştiren dağıtım şirketlerini cezalandırmaya/ödüllendirmeye yönelik herhangi bir özendirici düzenleme yapılmamıştır. Çalışmamız, ödül/ceza sistemine dayalı böyle bir düzenleme yaklaşımı izlemek suretiyle Enerji Piyasası Düzenleme Kurumu’nun hizmet kalitelerini iyileştirme yönünde dağıtım şirketlerini nasıl özendirebileceğini 2004 bilgilerine Veri Zarflama Analizi uygulayarak göstermektedir. Sonuçlara göre, 21 dağıtım şirketinden kötü hizmet veren 13’ünün cezalandırılması, iyi hizmet veren sekiz şirketin ise ödüllendirilmesi gerekmektedir.

An application of incentive regulation of service quality in the Turkish electricity distribution sector

The possibility of reducing costs at the expense of avoiding the needed capital investments and thus the service quality under the Price or Revenue Cap Regulation Scheme has led many countries to include service quality measures into incentive based regulation of electricity distribution. Among those are the countries of the European Union, which has an ambitious plan of establishing an electricity market by 2015 where all consumers are envisaged to be able to choose their own electricity distributors. By including a reward/penalty component into regulatory scheme the distribution companies are expected to have an incentive to reduce the frequency and duration of electricity interruptions for a reward of keeping more of revenue they earn by improving their performances. Otherwise the distribution companies are penalized for missing the service quality targets. As an accession country negotiating membership conditions with the European Union, Turkey is expected to revise her electricity regulation framework accordingly since the electricity distribution companies are envisaged to be regulated by a mixture of price and revenue cap scheme after privatization. In fact the business service quality thresholds and penalties for violations have been published in the Official Gazette in 12 September 2006 immediately after a power cut left 13 industrial and touristic provinces without electricity for 6 hours in 1 July 2006. However, this directive did not include any provision of penalty/reward for those electricity distribution companies with worsening/improving service quality measures of frequency and duration of power interruptions. This paper illustrates how the Turkish Energy Market Regulatory Authority could include such a reward/penalty scheme into incentive regulation to monitor and improve the service quality performances of electricity distribution companies. The illustration is an application of Data Envelopment Analysis, widely used for this purpose, and based on 2004 data of 20 privatization candidates and one private electricity distribution company. The electricity distribution companies are expected to distribute the electricity demanded by minimizing their costs and related inputs. Thus the input-based version of Data Envelopment Analysis is employed to benchmark the distribution companies in terms of their capability of reducing their total expenditure as well as the frequency and duration of electricity interruptions while distributing electricity to their customers through distribution networks. The 2004 data is particularly used to observe the efficiency of the distribution companies at the time when the famous Electricity Sector Reform and Privatisation Strategy Paper was published in Turkey. The Strategy Paper has shown the commitment of Turkey to the electricity market reform, and has determined the roadmap for privatization envisaged to be completed by 2013. Meanwhile by using this old data it is hoped that the risks of influencing the presently speeding up privatization process is minimized. The results suggest that 13 out of 21 electricity distribution companies should improve their service quality to avoid a penalty. The remaining eight distribution companies may be awarded for being the best performer in meeting the service quality measures. The oldest private distribution company the Kayseri Electricity Distribution Company is among the best performers. The distribution companies with the worst records are serving customers living in the South-eastern Anatolia Region (the Dicle Electricity Distribution Company), the Eastern Anatolia Region (the Aras Electricity Distribution Company and the Vangölü Electricity Distribution Company) and Çukurova Region (the Toros Electricity Distribution Company). Among the recently privatized distribution companies, the Menderes Electricity Distribution Company and the Meram Electricity Distribution Company are among the best service providers. It seems that the Başkent Electricity Distribution Company was suffering from operating at the wrong scale and the Sakarya Electricity Distribution Company was run under incompetent management when the Strategy Paper was announced in 2004.

PDF

___

AJODHIA, V., HAKVOORT, R. (2005), “Economic Regulation of Quality in Electricity Distribution Networks”, Utilities Policy, Vol. 13, pp. 211–221.
ALLAN, R. N., KARIUKI, K. K. (1999), “Reliability Worth Assessments of Electrical Distribution Networks”, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 15, pp. 79–85.
BAGDADIOGLU, N., ODYAKMAZ, N. (2009), “Turkish Electricity Reform”, Utilities Policy, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp, 144–152.
BAGDADIOGLU, N., WADDAMS PRICE, C. and WEYMAN-JONES, T. (1996), “Efficiency and Ownership in Electricity Distribution: A Non-Parametric Model of the Turkish Experience”, Energy Economics, Vol. 18, pp. 1–23.
BAGDADIOGLU, N., WADDAMS PRICE, C. and WEYMAN-JONES, T. (2007), “Measuring Potential Gains from Mergers among Electricity Distribution Companies in Turkey using a Non-Parametric Model”, Energy Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 83–110.
BAĞDADIOĞLU, N. (2005), “The Efficiency Consequences of Resisting Changes in a Changing World: Evidence from the Turkish Electricity Distribution”, International Journal of Business, Management and Economics, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 23–44.
BANKER, R. (1984), “Estimating Most Productive Scale Size Using Data Envelopment Analysis”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 17, pp. 35–44.
BANKER, R., CHARNES, A. and COOPER, W. W. (1984), “Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis”, Management Science, Vol. 30, pp. 1078–1092.
BANKER, R., THRALL, R. (1992), “Estimation of Returns to Scale using Data Envelopment Analysis”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 62, pp. 74–84.
CEER. (2005), “Third Benchmarking Report on Quality of Electricity Supply”, Council of European Energy Regulators (CEER) Electricity Working Group Quality of Supply Task Force, www.ceer-eu.org/portal/page/portal/CEER_HOME/CEER_PUBLICATIONS/CEER_DOCUMENTS/2005/CEER_3RDBR-QOES_2005-12-06.PDF (14.06.2006).
CHARNES, A., COOPER, W. W. and RHODES, E. (1978), “Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 2, pp.429–444.
COELLI, T. (1996) “A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program”, CEPA Working Paper 96/08.
COOPER, W. W., SEIFORD, L. M., TONE, T. and ZHU, J. (2007), “Some Models and Measures for Evaluating Performances with DEA: Past Accomplishments and Future Prospects”, Journal of Productivity Analysis, Vol. 28, pp. 151–163.
EMROUZNEJAD, A., PARKER, B. and TAVARES, G. (2008), “Evaluation of Research in Efficiency and Productivity: A Survey and Analysis of the First 30 Years of Scholarly Literature in DEA”, Journal of Socio-Economics Planning Science, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 151-157.
ENERJİ PİYASASI DÜZENLEME KURUMU. (2003), “Elektrik Piyasası Uygulama Rehberi”, www.epdk.org.tr (10.02.2006).
ESTACHE, A., ROSSI, M. A. and RUZZIER, C. A. (2002), “The Case for International Coordination of Electricity Regulation: Evidence from the Measurement of Efficiency in South America”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 2907, Washington D.C.: World Bank.
EURELECTRIC. (2006a), “Quality of Electricity Distribution Network Services”, Discussion Paper, Ref: 2006-233-0012, www.euroelectric.org (10.10.2008).
EURELECTRIC. (2006b), “Security of Supply – Roles, Responsibilities and Experiences within the EU”, Discussion Paper, Ref: 2006-180-0001, www.euroelectric.org (10.10.2008).
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. (2005), Treaty Establishing the Energy Community, www.ec.europa.eu/energy/electricity/south_east/doc/treaty/treaty.pdf (26.07.2006).
FARRELL, M. J. (1957), “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. 120, pp. 253–281.
FARSI, M., FETZ, A. and FILIPPINI, M. (2007), “Benchmarking and Regulation in the Electricity Distribution Sector”, CEPE Working Paper, No. 54, www.cepe.ethz.ch (28.05.2008).
GIANNAKIS, D., JAMASB, T. and POLLITT, M. (2005), “Benchmarking and Incentive Regulation of Quality of Service: An Application to the UK Electricity Distribution Networks”, Energy Policy, Vol. 33, pp. 2256–2271.
GROWITSCH, C., JAMASB, T. and POLLITT, M. (2008), “Quality of Service, Efficiency and Scale in Network Industries: An Analysis of European Electricity Distribution”, Applied Economics, pp. 1–16.
HOLT, L. (2005), “Utility Service Quality – Telecommunication, Electricity, Water”, Utilities Policy, Vol. 13, pp. 189–200.
JOSKOW, P. L. (2008), “Incentive Regulation and its Application to Electricity Networks”, Review of Network Economics, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 547–560.
KESSIDES, I. N. (2004), Reforming Infrastructure: Privatization, Regulation, and Competition, World Bank and Oxford University Press.
KORHONEN, P., SYRJANEN, M. (2003), “Evaluation of Cost Efficiency in Finnish Electricity Distribution”, Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 121, pp. 105-122.
KUECK, J, D., KIRBY, B. J., OVERHOLT, P. N. and MARKEL, L. C. (2004), Measurement Practices for Reliability and Power Quality: A Toolkit of Reliability Measurement Practices, www.ornl.gov/sci/btc/apps/Restructuring/ORNLTM200491FINAL.pdf (07.06.2006).
NEWBERY, D. M. (1999), Privatization, Restructuring, and Regulation of Network Utilities, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
ÖZELLEŞTİRME İDARESİ BAŞKANLIĞI. (2009), Türkiye Elektrik Dağıtım Sektörü Özelleştirmesi, www.oib.gov.tr (16.07.2009).
RESMİ GAZETE. (2001), Elektrik Piyasası Kanunu No: 4628, 03/03/2001, www.epdk.org.tr (05.02.2006).
RESMİ GAZETE. (2006), Elektrik Piyasasında Dağıtım Sisteminde Sunulan Elektrik Enerjisinin Tedarik Sürekliliği, Ticari ve Teknik Kalitesi Hakkında Yönetmelik, www.epdk.gov.tr (12.09.2009).
SAPPINGTON, D. E. M. (2005), “Regulatory Service Quality: A Survey”, Journal of Regulatory Economics, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 123–154.
SHLEIFER, A. (1985), “A Theory of Yardstick Competition”, Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 319–327.
SEIFORD, L. M., THRALL R. M. (1990), “Recent Developments in DEA: The Mathematical Programming Approach to Frontier Analysis”, Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 46, pp. 7–38.
STRATEJI BELGESİ. (2004), “Elektrik Sektörü Reformu ve Özelleştirme Strateji Belgesi”, Özelleştirme İdaresi Başkanlığı, www.oib.gov.tr (05.02.2006).
TER-MARTIROSYAN, A. (2003), “The Effects of Incentive Regulation on Quality of Service in Electricity Markets”, Working Paper, Department of Economics, George Washington University, March 2003, www.ios.neu.edu/iioc2003/paper/termar.pdf.
ZHOU, P., ANG, B. W. and POH, K. L. (2007), “A Survey of Data Envelopment Analysis in Energy and Environmental Studies”, European Journal of Operational Research, doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.04.042.