Skip to content
EEEP
Menu
  • 2012
    • Volume 1
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
  • 2013
    • Volume 2
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2014
    • Volume 3
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2015
    • Volume 4
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2016
    • Volume 5
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2017
    • Volume 6
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2018
    • Volume 7
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2019
    • Volume 8
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2020
    • Volume 9
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2021
    • Volume 10
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
    • Volume 9
      • Number 2
  • 2022
    • Volume 10
      • Number 2
    • Volume 11
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2023
    • Volume 11
      • Number 2
    • Volume 12
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2024
    • Volume 13
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2025
    • Volume 14
      • Number 1
  • 2026
    • Volume 15
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
Menu

EEEP » 2017 » Volume 6 » Number 1 » Performance Incentives in Capacity Mechanisms: Conceptual Considerations and Empirical Evidence

Performance Incentives in Capacity Mechanisms: Conceptual Considerations and Empirical Evidence

Posted on February 4, 2026February 9, 2026 by admin

Performance incentives are elements of capacity mechanism design aimed at prompting committed agents to manage their resources in such a way that they eventually meet their obligations when the system is tight. These incentives can be introduced in practice by means of two different (but non-conflicting) approaches in capacity mechanisms. First, performance incentives can be linked to constraints on tradable quantities (the so-called firm capacity or firm energy), which limit the amount of “reliability” that a given resource may sell in the mechanism, and which may be recalculated penalising potential unfulfilments. Second, they can be implemented as financial penalties for failure to comply with the commitments foreseen in the capacity contract. The first approach has been applied since the outset of capacity markets. The second did not receive much attention in the early stages of the implementation of adequacy mechanisms, but there is a growing trend on implementing it in modern designs.
In this paper, after framing the problem conceptually, empirical evidence (particularly from Colombia, ISO New England, PJM, United Kingdom, and France) is compiled to reveal current trends in enhancing short-term performance in capacity mechanisms.

Authors: Paolo Mastropietro, Pablo Rodilla and Carlos Batlle
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.6.1.pmas
Keywords: Capacity Mechanisms, explicit penalty, performance incentives, reliability product, system adequacy
🔐 Download PDF🔐 Executive Summary PDF

Account

  • Log in

Tags

Air pollution carbon emissions Carbon tax China Climate change climate change policy Climate policy Coal computable general equilibrium Cost of Debt Decentralized energy governance difference-­in-­differences Electricity generation Electricity market design Electricity markets Electric Utilities Energy Energy efficiency Energy Policy Energy R&D Energy security Energy transition environmental regulation Europe evaluation Geopolitics Introduction Investment Long-term contracts Middle East Natural gas Network cost allocation Network expansion planning nuclear power generation Oil prices Regulation Renewable energy Renewables Resilience Resource adequacy Scenarios Sub-Saharan Africa Sustainability sustainable development willingness-to-pay

Archives

  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
© 2026 EEEP | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme