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
Menu

EEEP » 2012 » Volume 1 » Number 1 » Regulation and Customer Engagement

Regulation and Customer Engagement

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

The utility regulation framework developed in the UK in the 1980s, and widely adopted internationally, was intended to improve on the restrictive, inefficient and burdensome regulatory approach in the U.S. But the UK regulatory process has itself now become increasingly burdensome. Meanwhile, utilities and customer groups in the U.S. and Canada have developed methods of negotiating and settling regulatory issues that more directly reflect the interests of customers, often embody incentive price caps as in the UK, and avoid unduly burdensome regulatory processes. There is now scope for UK regulators to learn from overseas. This paper summarises these developments. It then examines how three UK utility regulators— of airports, water and energy—are responding to them by developing new forms of customer engagement. The CAA has moved firmly in this direction for airports, while Ofwat and Ofgem have nominally rejected it for water and energy, but seek to secure many of the benefits of the approach via less committed processes. There is scope for governments to encourage a regulatory approach that offers the prospect of better outcomes for customers and a less onerous process for all concerned.

Authors: Stephen Littlechild
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.1.1.6
Keywords: Constructive engagement, Customer engagement, Negotiated settlements, Regulation
🔐 Download PDF

Account

  • Log in

Tags

Air pollution carbon emissions Carbon tax China Climate change Climate change mitigation Climate policy Coal computable general equilibrium Cost of Debt Decentralized energy governance Demand side difference-­in-­differences Electricity generation Electricity market design Electricity markets 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 Oil prices Regional markets Regulation Renewable energy Renewables Resilience Resource adequacy Scenario analysis Scenarios Sustainability sustainable development Techno-bias Transmission benefits willingness-to-pay

Archives

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