scholarly journals Estimating the marginal cost of quality improvements: The case of the UK electricity distribution companies

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1498-1506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tooraj Jamasb ◽  
Luis Orea ◽  
Michael Pollitt

Energy Policy ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 97 ◽  
pp. 485-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Luisa Corton ◽  
Aneliese Zimmermann ◽  
Michelle Andrea Phillips


Author(s):  
Andrew Smithers

The volume of the capital stock is defined as the original cost at constant prices of all tangible capital that has not been scrapped. Due to the poor data available for the UK my calculations and testing have had to be limited to the US. The volume of labour is defined as civilian employment. Quality improvements for both labour and capital are defined as being part of TFP. TFP is under conditions of full employment and must therefore be measured over long time periods. All growth comes from TFP, changes in labour and NTVs. The change in the volume of capital less the change in the volume of labour equals the change in NTVs and the balance is that from changes in technology (TFP). NTV is exogenous in aggregate. The value of the capital stock, but not its volume, is mean-reverting.



2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
A. J. Beddow ◽  
D. R. Cohen

Market disciplines and incentives were expected to improve efficiency in the UK National Health Service following the introduction of an ‘internal market’ in 1991. An exploratory survey of all Health Authorities and Trusts in the UK was undertaken to investigate whether players in the NHS managed market are behaving as economic theory predicts they should. The focus was on how and to what extent marginal costing has been used in the contracting process and on whether in some instances an inappropriate use of marginal costing may be resulting in inappropriate investment decisions. Twenty of 29 responding Health Authorities (69%) and 16 of 39 Trusts (41%) stated that they had considered purchasing/providing services on a marginal-cost basis and all of these led to contracts. Marginal-cost contracting appears to be fairly commonplace and the process does not appear to be causing insurmountable conflicts between players. Most marginal-cost contracts were specifically to meet waiting-list initiative targets. Overall results suggest that economic principles are not being particularly adhered to, with expansion in output rarely being related to available capacity. As increased responsibility for commissioning passes to primary care teams and local health groups, there are lessons for those involved in this more disaggregated approach to service shaping and service delivery.



2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murat Okumah

<p>Recent efforts to tackle diffuse water pollution from agriculture (DWPA) have focussed on improving farmers’ awareness under the expectation that this would contribute to adoption of best management practices (BMPs) and result in water quality improvements. To date, however, no study has studied the full awareness-behaviour-water quality pathway; with previous studies having mostly addressed the awareness-behaviour link relying on disciplinary approaches. Here, we investigated whether awareness-focussed approaches to mitigating DWPA work, addressing the pathway in full using a multidisciplinary approach. We did this by working with Welsh Water (a utility company in the UK) on their Weed wiper project which encourages farmers to consider ‘smarter’ ways of weed, pest and disease control and promotes the safe storage, use and disposal of pesticides and thus safeguard drinking water sources. One aim of this project was to mitigate pesticide pollution in watercourses, through a free ‘weed wiper’ hire trial. The main goal of the trial was to promote farmers’ awareness and uptake of BMPs to tackle the rising concentrations of the pesticide MCPA (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid) in drinking water sources in three catchments in Wales. Weed wipers are a proven and effective method of managing weeds and have multiple benefits. By wiping an herbicide directly onto weeds, weed wipers dramatically reduce spray drift in comparison to more traditional methods, such as boom or knapsack spraying. Using less chemical can save land managers money and reduce the risk to their health, water and the wider environment. Using factorial analysis of variance, we analysed MCPA concentrations from 2005 to 2019 for all water treatment works (WTWs) in the three catchments where the weed wiper trial had occurred and all the WTWs within three control catchments that had not been part of the trial but were in a similar location and of a similar characteristics. This was followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews with institutional stakeholders and farmers with varying degrees of exposure to the Weed wiper project.  Results show that MCPA concentration for both treatment and control catchments had reduced following the weed wiper trial, however, considerably larger (38.9%) decreases were observed in the treatment catchments than in the control catchments (10%) and these differences were statistically significant (p<0.05, n= 2858). Results from the stakeholder interviews suggest that the weed wiper project had contributed to changes in behaviour and that these are very likely to have resulted in the water quality improvements. Further analysis revealed, however, that other psychosocial, agronomic, catchment and climate factors also influenced farmers’ behaviour. Therefore, while awareness is an important step towards improving water quality, policymakers need to consider the role of these other variables in their interventions and how they interact with awareness. This research is the first one to cover the full awareness-behaviour-water quality pathway, and to combine different scientific disciplinary 'knowledges' with local non-scientific knowledge to explain water quality responses within the context of awareness-focussed interventions. </p>



Author(s):  
Justin R. Papp ◽  
William H. Forbes ◽  
Matthew A. R. Yarmuch

We have all dealt with performance metrics in the pipeline industry. How do we measure operational excellence? Are we prioritizing the right corrective actions? Are our existing metrics fair and driving the right behaviors? Will they recognize success and actually show us and our clients that we are improving? This paper describes how Enbridge Major Projects measures and knows our Quality is improving; how we prioritize, focus, and monitor Quality improvement. Using our roadmap, your organization can transform existing data streams from anecdotal to well established facts that produce actionable results and drive business objectives. To reach this outcome, Enbridge Major Projects quickly matured our Quality Culture by leveraging our strong Safety Culture and habits. On our journey to meaningful overall Quality metrics, Enbridge built a foundation through non-punitive incident reporting using incident resolution tools and a Cost of Quality model. Cost of Quality models can be designed and executed in a variety of ways. This paper will focus on applying a model specifically suited for pipeline construction and operational activities. Key topics to be addressed include: • basic common principles of an overall Cost of Quality model, • various data collection methods to suit the model’s design, and • how a Documented Defects Quality cost model allows Enbridge to identify, prioritize, and monitor Quality improvements focused on preventing recurrence and occurrence of Quality issues. Examples will be provided for common pipeline applications, including valves, pipe, and other commodities and services. This approach has enabled Enbridge Major Projects to prioritize improvement actions and meet business objectives. Applying a Cost of Quality model will enhance your operational excellence and greater adoption would provide the foundation for industry-wide Quality performance metrics that will recognize success and validate that Quality is improving in the pipeline industry.



2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. Beddow ◽  
D. R. Cohen

Market disciplines and incentives were expected to improve efficiency in the UK National Health Service following the introduction of an 'internal market' in 1991. An exploratory survey of all Health Authorities and Trusts in the UK was undertaken to investigate whether players in the NHS managed market are behaving as economic theory predicts they should. The focus was on how and to what extent marginal costing has been used in the contracting process and on whether in some instances an inappropriate use of marginal costing may be resulting in inappropriate investment decisions. Twenty of 29 responding Health Authorities (69%) and 16 of 39 Trusts (41%) stated that they had considered purchasing/providing services on a marginal-cost basis and all of these led to contracts. Marginal-cost contracting appears to be fairly commonplace and the process does not appear to be causing insurmountable conflicts between players. Most marginal-cost contracts were specifically to meet waiting-list initiative targets. Overall results suggest that economic principles are not being particularly adhered to, with expansion in output rarely being related to available capacity. As increased responsibility for commissioning passes to primary care teams and local health groups, there are lessons for those involved in this more disaggregated approach to service shaping and service delivery.





Energy ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 4996-5007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Dashti ◽  
Saeed Afsharnia ◽  
Farid Ghaderi


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document