Why Flexibility

  • Ricardo G. Barcelona


This chapter sets the scene for the application of real options reasoning by first demonstrating the nature of energy market volatilities. Specifically, the chapter examines how supply costs differ for fossil fuel-based technologies and renewables, and how their uncorrelated volatilities hedge portfolio payoffs through variable prices. Managerial flexibility is observed to create portfolio value by not supplying when supply costs exceed energy prices, in order to avoid losses. Volumes are scaled up or down when demand varies. The choice of supplies mix is used to optimise hedges. Mixed portfolios embed a call option on rising payoffs under increasing prices or a put option on future fuel costs liabilities. These values are compared with NPVs, when fixed prices or volumes result from rigid obligations to supply.


  1. Arrow, K. J. (1964). The role of securities in the optimal allocation of risk bearing. Review of Economic Studies, 31(2), 91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Awerbuch, S. (2006). Portfolio based electricity generation planning: Policy implications for renewable and energy security. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 11, 693–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bar-Lev, D., & Katz, S. (1976). A portfolio approach to fossil fuel procurement in the electric utility industry. The Journal of Finance, 31(3), 933–947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barreto, L. (2003). Gaps and needs in technology diffusion models: The perspective of an energy-systems modeller. Paper presented to the Workshop on Clean Technologies Diffusion Modelling, IPTS, Seville, 14 November 2003.Google Scholar
  5. Botterud, A., & Korpås, M. (2007). A stochastic dynamic model for optimal timing of investments in new generation capacity in restructured power systems. Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 29, 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breschi, S., Malerba, F., & Orsenigo, L. (2000). Technological regimes and Schumpeterian patterns of innovation. The Economic Journal, 110(463), 388–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlsson, B., & Stankiewicz, R. (1991). On the nature, function, and composition of technological systems. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1, 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Child, P. D., Ott, S. H., & Triantis, A. J. (1998). Capital budgeting for interrelated projects: A real options approach. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 33(3), 305–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crew, M. A., & Kleindorfer, P. R. (2002). Regulatory economics: Twenty years of progress? Journal of Regulatory Economics, 21(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixit, A. K., & Pindyck, R. S. (1994). Investment under uncertainty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Driouchi, T., & Bennett, D. J. (2012). Real options in management and organisational strategy: A review of decision-making and performance implications. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1), 39–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Edquist, C., & Johnson, B. (1997). Institutions and organisations in systems of innovation. In C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions and organisations. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  13. Eliasson, G., & Taymaz, E. (2002). Institutions, entrepreneurship, economic flexibility and growth—Experiments on an evolutionary micro-to-macro model. In U. Cantner (Ed.), Economic evolution, learning and complexity. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., & Karnøe, P. (2010). Path dependence or path creation? Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 760–774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gedra, T. W., & Varaiya, P. P. (1993). Markets and pricing for interruptible electric power. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Trans Power System, 8(1), 122–128.Google Scholar
  16. Graham, J. R., & Harvey, H. R. (2001). The theory and practice of corporate finance: Evidence from the field. Journal of Financial Economics, 60(2–3), 187–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harris, M., & Raviv, A. (1996). The capital budgeting process: Incentives and information. The Journal of Finance, 51(4), 1139–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hicks, J. R. (1964). Liquidity. Economic Journal, 72(288), 787–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huh, W. T., Roundy, R., & Cakaniyilidirim, M. (2006). A general strategic capacity planning model under demand uncertainty. Naval Research Logistics, 53, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jacobsson, S., & Bergek, A. (2004). Transforming the energy sector: The evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(5), 815–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jaffe, A. B., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2005). A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy. Ecological Economics, 54(2–3), 164–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jaffe, A. B., & Stavins, R.N. (1995). Dynamic incentives of environmental regulations: The effects of alternative policy instruments on technology diffusion. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29, S-43–S-63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jaillet, P., Ronn, E. I., & Tompaidis, S. (2004). Valuation of commodity-based swing options. Management Science, 50(7), 909–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnston, A., Kavali, A., & Neuhoff, K. (2008). Take-or-pay contracts for renewable deployment. Energy Policy, 36(7), 2481–2503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein, B., Crawford, R. G., & Alchian, A. A. (1978). Vertical integration, appropriable rents and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics, 74, 87–98.Google Scholar
  26. Kumbaroğlu, G., Madlener, R., & Demirel, M. (2008). A real options evaluation model for the diffusion prospects of new renewable power generation technologies. Energy Economics, 30, 1882–1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Luiten, E., Lente, H. V., & Blok, K. (2006). Slow technologies and government intervention: Energy efficiency in industrial process technologies. Technovation, 26, 1029–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marino, A. M., & Matsusaka, J. G. (2005). Decision processes, agency problems, and information: An economic analysis of capital budgeting procedures. The Review of Financial Studies, 18(1), 301–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Markowitz, H. M. (1991). Portfolio selection: Efficient diversification of investments (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  30. Masten, S. E., & Crocker, K. J. (1985). Efficient adaptation in long-term contracts: Take-or-pay provisions for natural gas. The American Economic Review, 75(5), 1083–1093.Google Scholar
  31. Newberry, D. (2010). Market design for a large share of wind power. Energy Policy, 38, 3131–3134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rivier, J. A. (2010). Electricity market participation of wind farms: The success story of the Spanish pragmatism. Energy Policy, 38, 3174–3179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roques, F., Hiroux, C., & Saguan, M. (2010). Optimal wind power deployment in Europe—A portfolio approach. Energy Policy, 38, 3245–3256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roy, A. D. (1952). Safety first and the holding of assets. Econometrica, 20(3), 431–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schenk, K. F., Misra, R. B., Vassos, S., & Wen, W. (1984). A new method for the evaluation of expected energy generation and loss of load probability. Power Apparatus and Systems, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Transactions, PAS-103(2), 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sharpe, W. F. (2007). Investors and markets: Portfolio choices, asset prices, and investment advice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Toke, D., Breukers, S., & Wolsink, M. (2008). Wind power deployment outcomes: How can we account for the differences? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(4), 1129–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van de Ven, A., & Garud, R. (1989). A framework for understanding the emergence of new industries. Research on Technological Innovation, Management and Society, 4, 195–225.Google Scholar
  39. Verdolini, E., & Galeotti, M. (2011). At home and abroad: An empirical analysis of innovation and diffusion in energy technologies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61(2), 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vergne, J. P., & Durand, R. (2010). The missing link between the theory and empirics of path dependence: Conceptual clarification, testability issue and methodological implications. Journal of Management Studies, 47(4), 736–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Watanabe, C., Nagamatsu, A., & Griffy-Brown, C. (2003). Behavior of technology in reducing prices of innovative goods—An analysis of the governing factors of variance of PV module prices. Technovation, 23, 423–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wharton. (2016). Retrieved from The briefing was done on 3 March 2016, prior to Odum’s retirement from Shell Oil.
  43. Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction costs economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IESE Business SchoolUniversity of NavarraBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations