Market Failure in Public Utility Industries: An Institutionalist Critique of Deregulation



There is a general consensus that public utility services are an integral part of the infrastructure of modern society. Typically, these services are provided by capital intensive networks that link centralized supply with a wide range of diverse customer classes—ranging from residential to large industrial customers in both urban and rural settings. These networks constitute the platforms that support all sectors of the economy and contribute to the productivity gains and income growth of those using the networks. In addition, when successful these network platforms facilitate the expansion of markets, thereby further increasing productivity, wealth, and the attainment of social goals.


Market Failure Wall Street Journal Public Utility Market Clearing Price Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, Henry Carter. 1887. “Relation of the state to industrial action,” Publications of the American Economic Association, Vol. I, No. 6 (Jan.): 465–549. Reprinted and edited with introductory essay by Joseph Dorfman. New York: Columbia University Press, 1954. Alabama Public Service Commission. 2001. Generic Proceeding to Establish Price for Interconnection Services and Unbundled Network Element. Docket No. 17821.Google Scholar
  2. Barboza, D. 2002. “Energy trades echoed in broadband market.” New York Times, May 17.Google Scholar
  3. Benson, M. and Lee, B. 2002. “FERC widens its investigation into California’s energy Market.” Wall Street Journal, May 8.Google Scholar
  4. Benson, M. and Thurm, S. 2002. “Perot Systems faces heat in California.” Wall Street Journal, June 6.Google Scholar
  5. Blumenstein, R. and Thurm, Scott. 2001. “Telecom sector’s bust reverberates loudly across the economy.” Wall Street Journal, July 25.Google Scholar
  6. Bonbright, J.C. 1961. Principles of Public Utility Rates. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bryan-Low, C. 2002. “Foreman was last to be persuaded.” Wall Street Journal, June 17.Google Scholar
  8. Buckman, R. 2002. “Microsoft miscues turned TV foray into costly lesson.” Wall Street Journal, June 14.Google Scholar
  9. Clemens, E. W. 1950. Economics and Public Utilities. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  10. Commons, John R. 1924. Legal Foundations of Capitalism. New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  11. Faulhaber, Gerald R. 2002. “Access ≠Access1 + Access2.” Quello Center, Third Annual Conference, Washington, DC, March 26.Google Scholar
  12. Gabel, D. 2002. “Why is There So Little Competition in the Provision of Local Telecommunications Services?” Quello Center, Third Annual Conference,Washington, DC, March 26.Google Scholar
  13. Glaeser, Martin G. 1957. Public Utilities in American Capitalism. NewYork: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Glaeser, Martin G. 1939. “Those TVA Joint Costs.” Public Utilities Fortnightly 24: Aug 31, 259; Nov.9,606; Dec.7, 733.Google Scholar
  15. Hadley, A.T. 1892. Railroad Transportation: Its History and Its Laws. New York and London: B.P. Putnam’s Sons.Google Scholar
  16. Hamburger, T., G. Hill, and M. Schroeder. 2002. “World Com scandal spurs congress.” June 27.Google Scholar
  17. Kahn, J. 2002a. “Enron’s many strands: the energy market; Californians call Enron documents the smoking gun.” New York Times, May 8.Google Scholar
  18. Kahn, J. 2002b. “Will it be California Redux?” Wall Street Journal, May 12.Google Scholar
  19. Kranhold, K., Wartzman, R., and Wilke, J.R. 2002. “As Enron inquiry intensifies, mid level players face spotlight”, April 30.Google Scholar
  20. Kranhold, K., Wartzman, R., and Wilke, J.R. 2002b. “Will it be California redux?” Wall Street Journal, May 12.Google Scholar
  21. Kranhold, K. and Pacelle, M. 2002. “Enron paid top managers $681 million, even as stock slid.” Wall Street JournaL, June 17.Google Scholar
  22. Meyer, B.H. 1903. Railway Legislation in the United States. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Mill, John S. [1848] 1961. Principles of Political Economy. Book V, Ch.XI, Sec. 7. Ashley Edition. New York: Kelly.Google Scholar
  24. Miller, E.S. 2001. “The impact of technological change on market power and market failure in Telecommunications.” Journal of Economic Issues 2: 385–391.Google Scholar
  25. Nelson, R.B. 2001. “Quality of Service and Open Access - A Complex Interrelationship,” Institute of Public Utilities, 33 rd Annual Regulatory Policy Conference, October 28–31, Williamsburg, Virginia.Google Scholar
  26. North American Electric Reliability Council. 1998. Reliability Assessment 1998–2007: The Reliability of Bulk Electric Systems in North America, September.Google Scholar
  27. Oppel, R. 2002. “Energy companies told to disclose offsetting trades.” New York Times, May 22.Google Scholar
  28. Penn, David W. 2001. “Convergence, Competition, and the Role of Publicly Owned Utilities,” Fifth International Conference on Technology Policy and Innovation: “Critical Infrastructures.” The Hague, The Netherlands. June 27.Google Scholar
  29. Pulliam, S. and Blumenstein, R. 2002. “SEC Broadens Investigation into RevenueBoostingTricks.” Wall Street Journal, May 16.Google Scholar
  30. Romero, S. 2001. “Shining future of fiber optics loses glimmer.” New York Times, June 18.Google Scholar
  31. Samuels, W.J. and E.S. Miller, eds. 2002. The Institutionalist Approach to Public Utilities. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Sandberg, J., Solomon, D., and Blumenstein, R. 2002. “Inside World Corn’s unearthing of a vast accounting scandal.” Wall Street Journal, June 27.Google Scholar
  33. Sender, H. 2002. “Is Level 3 looking to acquire Global Crossing?” Wall Street Journal, April 9.Google Scholar
  34. Shepherd, G.B., H.S. Shepherd, and W.G. Shepherd, 2000. “Sharper focus: market shares in merger guidelines.” Antitrust Bulletin 45 (Winter): 835–885.Google Scholar
  35. Solomon, D. 2002a. “Bad connection.” Wall Street Journal, April 2.Google Scholar
  36. Solomon, D. 2002a. 2002b. “States probe Qwest’s secret deals to expand long-distance service.” Wall Street Journal, April 19.Google Scholar
  37. Trebing, H.M. 1994. “Public Utility Regulation, Institutionalist Contribution to.” In Elgar Companion to Institutional and Evolutionary Economics,edited by G.M. Hodgson, W.J. Samuels, and M.R. Tool. Elgar: Aldershot England.Google Scholar
  38. UK Office of Gas and Electricity Markets. 2000. Introduction of the Market Abuse Condition into the Licenses of Certain Generator. June.Google Scholar
  39. Young, S. 2001. “AT&T’s long, troubled trip back to its past.” Wall Street Journal,December 21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations