Charting the Diffusion of Power Sector Reform in the Developing World Vivien Foster, Samantha Witte, Sudeshna Gosh Banerjee, Alejandro Moreno Green Growth Knowledge Platform Annual Conference 2017 November 27 th, 2017 Energy & Extractives Global Practice Group, Rethinking Power Sector Reform Initiative 0
Why this paper? EEX GP Rethinking Power Sector Reform Initiative Knowledge program aiming to revisit, re-evaluate and refresh the Washington Consensus policy prescriptions for the power sector Comprises background papers (like this one), 15 new in-depth country cases (in progress), and Flagship Report (planned by end 2018) Need for some scene-setting Objective to comprehensively describe the uptake and diffusion of power sector reforms in the developing world Draws from a new database documenting the main power sector reforms enacted by each country in each year since 1990 (still a work in progress) 1
Data Sources RISE 2015: A customized global snapshot of the state of power sector reform in 110 developed AND developing countries PPI Database 1990-2015: Time series data detailing all private sector transactions in the power sector for developing countries only Proprietary Industrial Database: 1990-2015: Global time series data on percentage of generation capacity owned and operated by private & public sectors for all developed AND developing countries Historic Studies: Recovering comparable indicators from historic WB studies by Besant-Jones (2005 data) and Bacon (1999) Desk Research: Targeted web research to fill data gaps on time stamping of restructuring and liberalizing reforms 2
Extent of reform measured by a Power Sector Reform Index Regulation No Regulator = 0 Regulator = 100 Restructuring Competition Private Sector Participation Aggregate Index Vertically integrated = 0 Monopoly = 0 Partial vertical unbundling = 33 IPPs = 25 Single Buyer Model = 50 Full vertical unbundling = 67 Bilateral Contracts = 75 Vertical & horizontal unbundling = 100 Competitive market = 100 0.5*(Percentage of generation capacity with private sector participation) + 0.5*(Percentage of distribution utilities with private sector participation) 0.25*(Regulation score) + 0.25*(Restructuring score) + 0.25*(Competition s)core + 0.25*(PSP score) Taking the unweighted average for each of these four dimensions gives each country an overall reform score between 0 (no reform) and 100 (full adoption). 3
Power Sector Reform Index: Example of Uganda Regulation Restructuring Competition Private Sector Participation Aggregate score Vertically integrated = 0 Monopoly = 0 No Regulator = 0 Partial vertical unbundling = 33 IPPs = 25 Single Buyer Model = 50 0.5*(0.63) + 0.5*(0.75) Full vertical unbundling = 67 Bilateral Contracts = 75 Regulator = 100 0.25*(100) + 0.25*(67) + 0.25*(50) + 0.25*(69) Vertical & horizontal unbundling = 100 Competitive market = 100 0.25*100 + 0.25*67 + 0.25*50 + 0.25*69 = 71.5 4
Preview of key messages Developing country power sector reform is 1. lagging substantially behind OECD, where full reform is far from being universal 2. running out of steam for the last decade 3. often characterized by cherry-picking relatively easy reforms 4. packaged and sequenced in ways unrelated to the original logic 5. often stuck somewhere in the intermediate stages 6..strongly affected by country characteristics 7. characterized by delays or gaps between reform announcement and implementation 8. sometimes reversible, particularly in the case of private sector participation 5
1. Developing country power sector reform lags substantially behind the developed world, where full reform is far from being universal 6
Differences between developed and developing countries in Power Sector Reform Index, by sub-index, 2015 100 Vertically integrated utilities in Japan and South Korea Over 90% of generation, transmission and distribution stateowned in France 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Regulation Privatization Liberalization Restructuring Similar scores in private sector participation reflect breadth of reform, not depth of reform Developing countries OECDs 7
2. Developing country power sector reform has been running out of steam in the last decade 8
Slowing pace of reform does not reflect saturation 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Global Average Power Sector Reform Index, 1995-2015 Regulation Index Restructuring Index Competition Index Private Sector Participation Index 9
Dramatic slow downs in certain types of reforms 10
3. Countries have tended to cherry-pick reforms that were relatively easy to implement 11
Easier reforms started earlier and spread more widely 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Full degree of competition (Retail electricity market) Full degree of restructuring (Vertical and horizontal unbundling) Full degree of private sector participation (PSP in generation and distribution) Establishment of regulator 12
Wide variation in prevalence of different reform measures 13
4. Developing country power sector reform is stuck at an intermediate stage in many cases 14
World Map of Power Sector Reform Index, 2015 Wide geographic variation in uptake of reform 15
Barely a dozen developing countries score above 80 Country Scores for Power Sector Reform Index, 2015 Argentina Turkey Philippines Guatemala Peru India Nicaragua Romania Ukraine Jordan Dominican Republic Nigeria Brazil Poland Ecuador Colombia China Chile Armenia Ghana Uganda Bangladesh Russian Federation Vanuatu Vietnam Malaysia Kazakhstan Angola Côte d'ivoire Cameroon Senegal Kenya Mexico Pakistan Algeria Honduras Venezuela, RB Cambodia Thailand Mozambique Sierra Leone Egypt, Arab Rep. Mongolia Ethiopia Kyrgyz Republic Zimbabwe Zambia South Africa Togo Nepal Bolivia Madagascar Rwanda Tanzania Morocco Mali Burkina Faso Myanmar Sudan Burundi Mauritania Belarus Uzbekistan Niger Malawi Congo, Rep. Central African Republic Benin Lao PDR Iran, Islamic Rep. Somalia Tajikistan Chad Indonesia Haiti Tunisia Sri Lanka Korea, Rep. Afghanistan Lebanon Yemen, Rep. Maldives Congo, Dem. Rep. South Sudan Solomon Islands Liberia Guinea Eritrea 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 Regulation Index Competition Index Restructuring Index Private Sector Participation Index Regulation Index Competition Index Restructuring Index Private Sector Participation Index 16
5. The uptake of reforms is substantially affected by country characteristics and geography 17
Average Power Sector Reform Index, 2015 Country characteristics affect reform scores two to one By income group By system size 100 100 90 90 80 80 70 70 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 Low income Lower middle incomeupper middle income 0 <1GW 1-10 GW >10 GW 18
Regional Power Sector Reform Index, 1995-2015 Each region tells a very different reform story 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 East Asia & Pacific Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean Middle East & North Africa South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa 19
6. Developing countries packaged and sequenced power sector reforms in ways unrelated to the original logic 20
The original logic of power sector reform Establishment of regulatory entity Unbundling of utility Introduction of PSP in distribution Introduction of PSP in generation Establishment of wholesale or retail power market 21
Prominent cases of divergence from original logic 22
7. Announced reforms are not always implemented, and adoption can be significantly delayed 23
Comprehensive but delayed reforms in Pakistan 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Competition Sub-Index PSP Sub-Index Regulation Sub-Index Restructuring Sub-Index Promised Competition Promised PSP Promised Regulation Promised Restructuring 24
Gradual reforms fall short of announcements in Senegal 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Competition Sub-Index PSP Sub-Index Regulation Sub-Index Restructuring Sub-Index Promised Competition Promised PSP Promised Regulation Promised Restructuring 25
Announced and implemented reforms for 15 countries, 2015 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2015 Delivered Reform Score 2015 Promised Reform score 26
8. Power sector reform is reversible, particularly in the case of private sector participation 27
40 private sector transactions in 20 developing countries have been reversed over the past 25 years 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1 to 3 years 4 to 6 years 7 to 9 years 10 to 12 years 13 to 15 years Frequency distribution of contract durations 28
40 private sector transactions in 20 developing countries have been reversed over the past 25 years Cancellation Rate for Private Sector Participation in the Power Sector 1990-2015 29
Conclusions and implications Developing country power sector reform is 1. lagging substantially behind OECD, where full reform is far from being universal 2. running out of steam for the last decade 3. often characterized by cherry-picking relatively easy reforms 4. packaged and sequenced in ways unrelated to the original logic 5. often stuck somewhere in the intermediate stages 6..strongly affected by country characteristics 7. characterized by delays or gaps between reform announcement and implementation 8. sometimes reversible, particularly in the case of private sector participation 30
Further analytics and data Policy Research Working Paper: Charting the diffusion of power sector reforms across the developing world Available at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/576801510076208252/chartin g-the-diffusion-of-power-sector-reforms-across-the-developing-world Power Sector Reform Database Will be made available at https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/ 31
Q&A
Regional share in failures, 1990-2015 0% 21% 21% 0% 9% 50% 33
Reversal rates by region, 1990-2015 20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Sub-Saharan Africa Europe & Central Asia Latin America & Caribbean South Asia East Asia & Pacific Middle East & North Africa 34