输油管道管制中公用事业型费率制定方法的关键性比较

The Bell Journal of Economics Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI:10.2307/3003563

P. Navarro, Bruce C. Petersen, T. Stauffer

{"title":"输油管道管制中公用事业型费率制定方法的关键性比较","authors":"P. Navarro, Bruce C. Petersen, T. Stauffer","doi":"10.2307/3003563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article tests the efficacy of four formulas for specifying regulated utility rates. All exhibit \"intertemporal bias\" in that rates are disproportionately and seriously shifted forward upon current consumers (\"front-end loading\"), although the ICC and Consent Decree formulas yield rates less skewed than the utility and escalated utility rate formulas. \"Formula bias\" arises in all cases, because the ex post","PeriodicalId":177728,"journal":{"name":"The Bell Journal of Economics","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critical Comparison of Utility-Type Ratemaking Methodologies in Oil Pipeline Regulation\",\"authors\":\"P. Navarro, Bruce C. Petersen, T. Stauffer\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/3003563\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article tests the efficacy of four formulas for specifying regulated utility rates. All exhibit \\\"intertemporal bias\\\" in that rates are disproportionately and seriously shifted forward upon current consumers (\\\"front-end loading\\\"), although the ICC and Consent Decree formulas yield rates less skewed than the utility and escalated utility rate formulas. \\\"Formula bias\\\" arises in all cases, because the ex post\",\"PeriodicalId\":177728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Bell Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Bell Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/3003563\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Bell Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3003563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 12

摘要

本文测试了四种规定管制公用事业费率的公式的有效性。所有这些都表现出“跨期偏差”，即费率不成比例地、严重地向当前消费者转移(“前端负荷”)，尽管ICC和同意令公式产生的费率比公用事业和升级公用事业费率公式的倾斜程度要小。“公式偏差”在所有情况下都会出现，因为事后

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A Critical Comparison of Utility-Type Ratemaking Methodologies in Oil Pipeline Regulation

This article tests the efficacy of four formulas for specifying regulated utility rates. All exhibit "intertemporal bias" in that rates are disproportionately and seriously shifted forward upon current consumers ("front-end loading"), although the ICC and Consent Decree formulas yield rates less skewed than the utility and escalated utility rate formulas. "Formula bias" arises in all cases, because the ex post

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

The Bell Journal of Economics

自引率

0.00%

发文量