Download the reforms effects on consumer prices in the electricity sector in

Rodigari Sara matricola n 863018 Corso European Regulatory Economics Corso di laurea Relazioni Internazionali THE REFORMS EFFECTS ON CONSUMER PRICES IN THE ELECTRICITY SECTOR IN SWEDEN 1-­‐ Swedish economy model and quality of life 2-­‐ Electricity sector -­‐Market structure before the liberalization and privatization process -­‐ Steps of liberalization and privatization -­‐Market structure after liberalization and privatization process 3-­‐ Price of electricity -­‐Electricity prices today -­‐ Electricity prices before and after the reforms -­‐ Prices for different agreements and consumers -­‐ Comparison with Finland and Norway 4-­‐ Electricity consumers -­‐Consumers satisfaction -­‐ Consumer switching 5-­‐ Conclusion 1-­‐ Swedish economy model and quality of life Sweden has a mixed competitive economy, an example of the so called Nordic model. It refers to the economic and social models of the Nordic European countries. Although there are significant differences among these countries, they share two common traits: a welfare state aimed at promoting social mobility, gender equality and an egalitarian and extensive benefit levels , as well as stabilizing the economy through free trade. Sweden has achieved a high living standard under this system, thanks to social benefits funded by taxes close to 50% of GDP (as shown in the chart below) and cooperation between the government, trade unions and corporations in the post-­‐World War II, in which Sweden did not take part. Social expenditure and tax income, as a percentage of GDP 60 50 40 30 Social expenditure, percentage of GDP 20 Tax income, percentage of GDP 10 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Source: OECD.org Note: Social expenditure as a percentage of GDP: type of expenditure: cash benefits and benefits in kind; branch: old age, survivors, family, health, incapacity related, housing, unemployment, active labour market programmes, others. Tax income: tax revenue: total. Although this was a well working model, during the 1980’s a rapid increase in lending formed a real estate and financial bubble and the 1990’s restructuring of the tax system, in order to boost inflation and due to an international economic slowdown, caused the bubble’s burst and the worst economic crisis in Sweden since the Wall Street crash in 1929. The welfare system could not be sustained with GDP down by 5%, considerably raised unemployment rate and drastically decreased investment level. The government responded with a cut in spending and new reforms to improve competitiveness. The country emerged from the crisis thanks to a rapid growth in the IT sector , in which Sweden was a leader. It has been seen as the end of the Swedish welfare model, as it showed that the previous spending levels could no longer be sustained in the modern global economy. Previously, the good performances of the Swedish model might be seen as the result of the post WWII special situation, where competitor’s economies were considerably weak compared to the Swedish one. However, thanks to the reforms, an extensive welfare benefits model has been created to suit with the new global open economy and in recent years growth has been strong as it can been seen in the growth of GPD and GDP per capita. GDP and GDP per capita 1993-­‐2013. Index 2005 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 GDP 80.0 GDP per capita 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1990 1995 2000 Source: OECD.org and Statistic Sweden (scb.se) Note: index 2005 (2005=100) 2005 2010 2015 Except for the decrease at the end of the 2000’s, due to the 2007/2008’s financial crisis, both GDP and GDP per capita have a constant growth from the 1990’s. Since the mid-­‐1990’s the boom of the export was the boost for economic growth. The IT industry, and telecommunications have taken over from traditional industries such as steel and paper; this shift in the structure has made Sweden on of the most competitive country in the export sector, as it is less vulnerable to international fluctuations. The takeover also improved the Swedish advanced system recycling as less trash is produced compared to the traditional industries’s. Sweden is the best country in the world in recycling its trash, with a near zero waste and a 99% trash recycled. Consumption of organic foods, recycling drinks cans and bottles and getting energy from renewable sources for most Swedes today is everyday life. The Government allocates million for research on sustainable environment technology. Even garbage from other countries in Europe is transferred there in order to create heat through the “Waste to Energy program”. The quality of living environment has a direct impact on health and outdoor air pollution is one of the main problems that directly affects the quality of peoples’ lives, especially in cities, mainly caused by transport and burning of coal and wood, despite the fact that major pollutant emissions have been decreased. The health impacts of urban air pollution can be measured monitoring the PM10 levels, a tiny particulate that can be inhaled deep into the lungs. In Sweden, PM10 levels are 10.2 micrograms per cubic meter, half of the guideline limit set by the World Health Organization and one of the lowest levels in the world. An healthy environment is a source of satisfaction and according to the OECD Better Life Index, Sweden is among the top countries in a large number of topics. In general, Swedes are more satisfied with their lives than the OECD average. Life satisfaction asses how people evaluate circumstances and conditions important for well-­‐being and ,rating it on a scale from 0 to 10, Swedes gave it a 7.4 grade (higher for women, 7.7, than for men,7.1). Key aspects to consider are also the average household income, which is more than the OECD average (although the gap between the richest and poorest is wide, equal to four time as much), the employment rate, which is around 74% (72% for women, 76% for men) and education, one of the main feature to find a job, which is really high percentage as 87% of adults, between 25 and 64 years old, have at least a high-­‐
school degree. 2-­‐ Electricity sector The electricity market comprises four phases: production (generation), transmission, distribution and retailing (supply). The producers own the production plants that generate electricity and sell the ‘raw power’ (high voltage electricity) to firms that transform the energy for the consumers final use. The transmission owners transform the electricity then transported to the final consumers through distribution and retail companies. Finally, there are the individual consumers. The main difference from other markets is that electric power cannot be stored: once produced it has to be used simultaneously. Therefore the supply and demand must be constantly balanced to avoid disruptions. In Sweden electricity has been generated mostly from hydropower and nuclear power since the oil crisis in 1973. It has been planned the reduction of its dependence on foreign oil by 75% by 2020. In an effort to decrease significantly this dependency, a multi-­‐million programme has been launched to promote renewable energy using an indirect taxation system together with education and public awareness initiatives, also expecting to strengthen the country's role in sustainable development technologies. Today more than 50% of energy supply comes from renewable sources as it is shown in the graphic below, the largest share in any EU country. Share of renewable energy in gross final consumption-­‐ percentage 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Note: Renewable energy :wind power, hydropower solar energy, biomass, biofuel, geothermal energy. Source: Swedish Energy Agency and Eurostat Sweden wind power production has grown up to 7% in the last years and two large wind farms project, that will be the largest wind farm in Europe, are under development, which would sharply increase wind power production in the country. Hydroelectric power supplies more than half of whole energy production. More than 1900 power stations operate all over the country and almost all of the medium/large plants are located in the north. Commercial service from national nuclear reactors began in the 1970s and today Sweden has three operational nuclear power plants, Ringhals, Forsmark and Oskarshamn, with ten operational nuclear reactors, which produce about 30% of the country's electricity. Although Sweden had a nuclear phase-­‐out policy, consequently to a referendum aiming to end nuclear power generation, in 2009 an agreement allowed the replacement of existing reactors, cancelling the referendum result consequently. Nuclear and hydroelectric power are the main sources for the electricity production in Sweden: today together they provide more than 85% of the whole Swedish electricity production. Electricity production by type of power, in TWh 180.0 160.0 140.0 Gas turbines 120.0 Condensing power 100.0 Combined heat and power Industrial back-­‐pressure 80.0 Nuclear power 60.0 Wind power (beginning in 1997) 40.0 Hydro-­‐electric power and wind power 0.0 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 20.0 Note: hydroelectric power and wind power are reported together up until 1996, wind power is subsequently reported on its own. Source: Swedish Energy Agency Market structure before the liberalization and privatization process The development of the electricity infrastructure took off in the late nineteenth century when governmental bodies were in charge of the national connections, while local parties (municipal and private bodies) were responsible for the regional systems applications and the contacts between them were under no public control. A single company could not handle developing a nation-­‐wide technological infrastructures due to its complexity and costs. So Vattenfallsverket, state-­‐owned company, in order to make the electricity system profitable, bought technology from ASEA, that had the competence to develop it working in a long-­‐term perspective. The ownership of electricity production and distribution got more and more centralized and the market was regulated by “self-­‐governance” through the so-­‐called “clubs”. These clubs were voluntary associations of companies engaged in the production and distribution of electricity, co-­‐operating for the promotion of collective utilities. The two biggest clubs were Stamnätsklubben, responsible for the overall transmission, and Samkörningsklubben, responsible for the distribution, who also guaranteed that all suppliers met some efficiency benchmarks. Hence, from the mid-­‐
1950s, the number of parties involved decreased by 93%, so the three largest producers, Vattenfall, Sydkraft and Fortum, held nearly 90% of the production, whose 50% owned by the state-­‐company Vattenfallsverket . Steps of liberalization and privatization Overall privatization in Sweden began in the early 1990s, with the Parliament authorization to the Government to sell the state shares of 35 out of more than 70 state-­‐owned companies. Moreover some of government administration bodies were converted into companies, wholly or partially state-­‐owned, such as Vattenfall AB, the hydroelectric, nuclear and oil electricity supplier. The process continued between 1998 and 1999 with the privatization of several operators involved in the energy, gas and water distribution. The electricity sector was vertically integrated before the liberalization in 1996, when it was split up into three segments: generation/production, transmission and direct retail trade. Even if officially unbundled, transmission remained a regulated monopoly market and the reason why was that its national, regional and local levels formed a “natural” monopoly. Electricity sector regulation 7 6 5 Average 4 Entry 3 Public ownership 2 Verkcal integrakon 1 Market structure 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 -­‐1 Note: scale from 0 (regulated third party access/complete privatization/unbundled) to 6 (no third party access/complete public ownership/integrated) Source:OECD.Stats The number of actors in the overall electricity market increased considerably after 1996 by 42%. The aim is therefore to sustain competition and extend the parts of the market exposed to competition to include the Nordic region, Germany, Poland and Russia. Nord Pool Spot is the Nordic electricity common market in the Nordic European countries. It is owned by different companies from different European countries. It uses contracts for trading power and for physical delivery of electricity through both day-­‐ahead (Elspot) and intraday (Elbas) markets to set the price. Almost 90% of all the electricity produced in Sweden, is sold on Nord Pool Spot. Nord Pool Spot owners Svenska Kraftnät (Sweden)(28.2 %) Statnett SF (Norway)(28.2 %) Fingrid Oyj (Finland)(18.8 %) Energinet.dk (Denmark)(18.8 %) Elering (Estonia)(2 %) Litgrid (Lithuania)(2 %) AST (Latvia)(2 %) Source: Nord Spot Pool Several agencies and public bodies collaborate in the supervision of the electricity market with the aim of creating a well-­‐functioning electricity market and preventing the exercising of market power. Ei is responsible for the electricity market regulation and the implementation of the Electricity Act. It analyses the development of the electricity markets to improve the market operation in order to promote effective competition. The Swedish Competition Authority (Konkurrensverket, KKV) ensures the respect of the prohibitions against anti-­‐competitive behaviours contained in the Competition Act and the EU treaty. Market structure after liberalization and privatization process From 1996 onwards, even if there’s a complete opening to third party access, as the biggest companies bought up small and medium-­‐sized ones, ownership has become more and more “concentrated” . The self-­‐ governance role of the clubs has been replaced by governmental regulatory authorities. From 2003 Vattenfall, Fortum and Sydkraft together generates about 85% of all electricity produced in Sweden, a stronger concentration than before the liberalization, which, however, guarantees the presence of foreign stockholders. The transmission net owners are all affiliated to the governmental company Svenska Kraftnät (Swedish Power Mains) and they are under the authority of the governmental body Energimyndigheten (the Energy Authority). This segment of the market is still highly monopolized regionally: three main companies Vattenfall, Fortum and Sydkraft, the same competitors as in the production of electricity, own regional monopoly instead of competing with each other. Large-­‐scale traders and markets for trade sell electricity, either through the Nord Pool or through bilateral agreements. The concentration of traders has not decreased even if the foreign ownership has increased. Svenska Kraftnät is responsible for the. After the deregulation, law and decrees have made it more strictly and EU laws and decrees have been integrated into the national legislation. The Swedish government sends annual regulating letters to Energimyndigheten, the new regulating governmental authority, through which regulate competition and security, and support research and alternative power sources diffusion. Some control authorities are delegated to another body within Energimyndigheten: Svenska Kraftnät, which is responsible for the transmission and the economic and physical balance between demand and supply, and Energy Markets Inspectorate, which controls competition-­‐exposed markets. The regulation is still national, but the aim is to create a common market for electricity to facilitate the integration of Nordic countries, a process going on since the liberalization of internal markets in the 1990s. The reforms were strongly influenced by the neo-­‐
liberal doctrine and took off during the biggest economic crisis in post-­‐war as liberalization and privatization were seen as the best solution of the problem. 3-­‐ Price of electricity Electricity prices today The price of electricity depends on the type and market price of the primary source, government subsidies and regulation. The Swedish Energy Agency supervises the network tariffs so they have been stable since the deregulation. The price is regulated in order to cover the producers’ costs, but not maximize their profits. For a new company it is difficult to deviate to any large extent from the prices set by the dominant producers, the three large companies, as they not engage in price competition. Consumer prices have three components: electric energy, network service, and taxes and charges. The price of electric power depends mainly on the price at Nord Pool, the joint Nordic power exchange market, which is affected also by the supply of water in hydropower plants. Taxes and charges have been raised considerably in recent years with the introduction of the Swedish “green electricity certificates”. It came into force in 2003 and its intent is to make the production more efficient and increase the renewable electricity production. The main objective of the green electricity certificate is to increase the production of renewable electricity with 25 TWh by 2020. The system so replaces earlier public subsidies. Since 2012, Sweden and Norway have a common electricity certificate market and they share the aim to increase the electricity production from renewable energy sources. Producers are issued with these certificates, related to power plants production and approved by the Swedish Energy Agency. Qualified plants receive one certificate per megawatt-­‐hour of electricity generated. Electricity suppliers are forced to buy the certificates corresponding to the proportion of their electricity sales. Electricity certificate cost for industries is based only on the proportion of the electricity not used in the manufacturing process. Power consumption and proportions of electricity, for which certificates have to be purchased every year, establish the certificates demand and their prices are determined by supply and demand in the common market, which in turn depend on investment in eligible electricity production. Electricity certificates have to be bought every year by participants in the electricity market in order to satisfy laws obligations. Although, the system is financed by electricity end-­‐users, the final consumers, as the certificates costs weigh on electricity bills. This way, electricity consumers are the ones who pay for the increase in renewable electricity production. Despite the fact that Sweden and Norway finance in equal parts their common aim for renewable energies, the cost of electricity per kilowatt-­‐hour (kWh) differs in the two countries, as the different proportions of the electricity sales and the common electricity certificate price make the cost per kilowatt-­‐hour differs. As shown in the chart below, prices have the same trend in both countries, even after 2012, year in which the common electricity certificate market entered into force : they increase till 2011 in which there is a drop by 0,5 point and start to rise again in 2012. Although prices in Sweden are always higher than Norway by nearly half a point difference each year. Electricity prices from 2007 to 2013 in Sweden and Norway – (index Norway 2007) 2.5 2 1.5 Sweden 1 Norway 0.5 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Note: price index: Norway electricity price in 2007=1 Source: International Energy Agency Electricity prices before and after the reforms Electricity rates vary for residential, commercial, and industrial consumers. The actual electricity price depend on customer charges, particularly for small customers .The varying costs involved in producing electricity leads to great variance in average electricity rates. On average electricity prices have been increasing constantly from the end of the 1970’s (although there are missing data between 1998 and 2007) to 2011, as in 2012 rates decrease, perhaps due to the introduction of the green electricity certificates, but the year after they started to increase slightly again. Electricity in ore/kWh (excluding taxes) 120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 -­‐ 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Note: missing data from 1998 to 2007 Source: International Energy Agency Looking at the modifications that the electricity sector has been through from 1996, considering the changes in the entry regulation, unbundling, public ownership and market structure, they had no impact on reducing the average prices. As shown it the graphic below, the prices rose, even if the vertical integration and entry regulation decreased but public ownership remained at the same level, and it increase sharply from 2007 to 2011. Prices and regulation from 1975 to 2013 7 12.00 6 10.00 5 8.00 4 3 6.00 2 4.00 1 0 1970 -­‐1 2.00 1980 1990 2000 Note: regulation data on a scale from 0 to 6 Source: International Energy Agency and OECD.org 2010 2020 0.00 Entry Public ownership Verkcal integrakon Market structure Prices in ore/kWh (excluding taxes) Prices and reforms from 1979 to 2013 7 12.00 6 10.00 5 8.00 4 6.00 3 Prices in ore/kWh (excluding taxes) 4.00 2 2.00 1 0 1975 Reforms, average 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 0.00 2015 Note: reforms average is made by vertical integration, entry, public ownership and market structure Source: International Energy Agency and OECD.org The chart above shows that prices continued to grow through the years as reforms were privatizing and liberalizing the market, opening it to the competition. In 1996, year of the beginning of the changes in electricity market, they were at the highest level since 1979 and they decrease by 15% in the next year. Although in the late 2000’s prices rose considerably and had a slight flection in 2012 and grown again. Overall, prices and reforms trends go in opposite directions: the more the market was liberalized the more prices rose. Prices for different agreements and consumers Prices vary for different kinds of consumers and agreements. Consumers can be divided in categories, as shown in the table below, depending on their annual electricity consumption. Type of costumer Dwelling, flat One-­‐ or two dwelling house without electric heating One-­‐ or two dwelling house with electric heating Annual consumption 2 000 kWh 5 000 kWh 20 000 kWh Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) In Sweden there are also different types of agreement, related to the duration of the contract between the supplier company and the final user. The chart below displays the percentage of each kind of agreement. Although agreements for one year onward are slightly increased, flexible and standards agreement changed the most: standard price agreements percentage decreased constantly from 2004 to be replaced with flexible price agreements. Since 2008 also other forms of agreement developed. This is due to the fact that Swedes change electricity supplier or renegotiate their agreement frequently, as they perceive that they have advantages in switching . Number of agreement by different kind of agreement – Percent Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) Even though households have different consumptions, price trends are similar in every kind of agreement considered for each of them, with flats always paying more than houses with or without electric heating. Considering the standard price agreement, it can be seen that prices have an upward trend for each kind of consumer, although there are slightly prices decrees in 2001, 2006 and from 2012 onwards. They are also the highest price rates compared to the other agreements. Flexible price agreement had a very fluctuating trend: the price reaches a peak and then it sharply decrease almost every two years; the highest difference is between 2003 and 2005. Even though there is a big reduction in prices between 2010 and 2012, today it is increasing again. Two and three year agreement show the same price trends: they reach a peak in 2007, when green certificates have been introduced, and then in 2011 and since then they have a downward trend. One year agreement is similar to the previous two but with more fluctuation through the years and with a sharply descending trend since 2011. Overall, except for flexible price agreement, prices have a downward trend for each kind of user and agreement. Only charges for grid service are increasing, especially from 2007. Charge for grid service -­‐ Average price per Standard price agreement -­‐ Average price per CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) Note: Prices on electric energy includes green certificates from 2007. Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) Flexible price agreement -­‐ Average price per CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) Note: Prices on electric energy includes green certificates from 2007 Source: Sweden statistics (scb.se) One-­‐year agreement -­‐ Average price per CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) Note: Prices on electric energy includes green certificates from 2007 Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) Two-­‐year agreement -­‐ Average price per CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) Three-­‐year agreement -­‐ Average price per CSEK/kWh (excluding taxes) Note: Prices on electric energy includes green certificates Note: Prices on electric energy includes green certificates from 2007 from 2007 Source: S
weden s
tatistics (
scb.se) Source: Sweden Statistics (scb.se) Comparison with Finland and Norway The electricity sector in Finland relies mostly on nuclear power, wood consumption and electricity import while Norway on hydroelectricity. They are both part of the Nordic Spot Pool, the largest market for electricity in Europe, with Sweden, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania and UK. In Norway, with the new energy law in 1991, the state-­‐owned Electric Generation and Transmission Agency was split up into two corporations in charge of generation and transmission and full retail competition was achieved by 1997. In Finland, electricity lines and retail competition were partially opened in 1995 and fully by 1998. The graphic below shows the same price trend for the three countries until the market liberalization in 1997/1998 when it started to decrease. After 2000, although they were more fluctuating in Norway, prices had an upward trend, reaching a peak in 2011 and decreasing afterwards, more sharply in Norway. After 2007 Sweden has the highest prices among the three Nordic countries. Electricity prices – index 1979 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1970 Finland Sweden Norway 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 Note: index Norway electricity price in 1979=1 Source: International Energy Agency 4-­‐ Electricity consumers Consumers satisfaction In order to measure the consumer perception of the electricity service in Sweden, Eurobarometer has considered data from questions submitted to a representative sample in 2000 and 2002 and structured into seven different approaches: -­‐the access to services of general interest: it measures, in percentage, the difficulty in accessing the electricity supply service which is very low, 1% in 2000 and 3% in 2002; -­‐the price of the services: it considers the sum of the "price is unfair" and "price is excessive" answers for electricity supply service, 36% in 2000 and 38% in 2002, close to the European average percentage; -­‐the quality of the services: it sums the "quality is fairly bad" and "quality is very bad" answers which are 3% in 2000 and 4% in 2002, a very low rate that shows that the service is perceived as a good one; -­‐the clarity of the information: Sweden has the highest dissatisfaction percentage (“information is not clear”) 48% against the 45% “information is clear” answers in 2002; -­‐how fair the terms and conditions of the contracts applicable to the services are: in 2002 70% of Swedes rated terms and conditions of contracts fair and 21% unfair; -­‐ customer service offered by electricity supply providers : it sums the "service is fairly bad" and "service is very bad" answers, resulting only a 9% of the sample. Overall the Swedes are 66% satisfied and 24% unsatisfied with their electricity supply service. Consumers dissatisfaction, in percentage, in 2000 and 2002 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2000 2002 Source: Eurobarometer data Consumer switching Customer activity in changing supplier has increased in recent years. In 2004, half of households had been active on the electricity market by changing supplier or renegotiating their agreements. Because of it is perceived that there are weak incentives to change, due to small price differences, it is more common to renegotiate contracts with the current electricity supplier than to change supplier. Consumers that expect benefits from an active behavior are more likely to change, while those with smaller utility are less likely to switch to an alternative electricity supplier. The costs impact and knowledge about these are key aspects in the decision, as who perceives relatively high search and information costs is less likely to change supplier or renegotiate their contracts. A more effective competition on the Swedish electricity market is growing and it should be enabled to compete with the other European power companies. Today one in ten consumers of more than 5 million households switched to a new supplier in the last year. Household customers' switches of electricity suppliers in relation to certain price differences, 1st quarter 2005–4th quarter 2014 Note: the existing price difference is shown between the highest and lowest price with electricity suppliers for a 1-­‐year contract for a customer in a detached house with electric heating. Source: Statistics Sweden (scb.se) Conclusions The reforms had changed the Swedish electricity sector since 1996: the market is now unbundled and there are not any barriers to entry, although the state owned company still have the natural monopoly of the electricity generation. Prices have been rising since the end of the 1970’s and especially in 2007 with the introduction of the green electricity certificates to improve the electricity production from renewable sources, which increases the producers costs and so the consumers bills. Even after the market liberalization prices kept on increasing, meaning that it didn’t work as a cutting price financial measure. It is not possible to determine whether the reforms had an impact in increasing prices or it is due to production costs, grid service charges, government taxes and duties. Even though, reforms avoided investments by the government for 11 billion kronor over the first eight years since the market liberalization. Sweden is characterized by a massive supply switching by consumers: almost half of the households has changed supplier or renegotiated their contracts with their current supplier and has switched from a standard price agreement to a flexible price agreement, even if it is the only one that has increasing prices between the ones considered. Bibliography -­‐ Andersson M., Thörnqvist C., “Liberalisation, privatisation and regulation in the Swedish electricity sector”, Department of Work Science, Göteborg University, European Commission’s 6th Framework programme, November 2006 -­‐Eurobarometer, European opinion research group (EORG), “Eurobarometer 58-­‐ Special edition consumers’ opinions about services of general interest report”, for the European Commission “Health and Consumer Protection” Directorate-­‐General, December 2002 -­‐Eurostat news, “Consumer Protection Statistics”,30th CEIES seminar, June 2006 -­‐ Fölster S, “Twenty five years of Swedish reforms”, Stockholm reform Institute and Royal Institute of Technology, Kreicbergs Utredning & Opinion, March 2014 -­‐ Kuusisto M. and various authors, “Service Innovation Policy -­‐ A Benchmarking Review”, ESIC European Service Innovation Centre discussion paper, European Service Innovation Scoreboard, January 2015 -­‐ NordicEnergy Regulators (NordREG), “Supplier switching in the Nordic countries-­‐ current prices and recommendations for future development” -­‐OECD, “Sweden: inventory of estimated budgetary support and tax expenditures for fossil-­‐fuels” -­‐ Swedish Agency for Public Management, “Six deregulations: Liberalisation of the markets for electricity, postal services, telecommunications, domestic air traffic, rail and taxi services in Sweden”, 2004 -­‐ Sweden Energy Agency, “Energy in Sweden– Facts and Figures”, 2012 -­‐ Swedish Energy Markets Inspectorate (EI), “The Swedish electricity and natural gas markets 2012” Sitography -­‐ Eurobarometer, ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/ -­‐Eurostat, ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/science-­‐technology-­‐innovation/data/database -­‐ International Energy Agency, iea.org -­‐Nord Pool Spot, nordpoolspot.com -­‐privatizationbarometer.net/ -­‐ Statistics Sweden, scb.se/en -­‐Swedish energy agency, swedishenergyagency.se/