<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ecr</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Strategic decisions and risk management</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2618-947X</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2618-9984</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Real Economy Publishing House</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17747/2078-8886-2018-2-16-20</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">ecr-767</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Статьи</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>The cross subsidization in the electric power industry.  What is the limit of growth?</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике. Каков предел роста?</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Долматов</surname><given-names>И. А.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Dolmatov</surname><given-names>I. A.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Кандидат экон. наук, директор Института проблем ценообразования и регулирования естественных монополий Национального исследовательского университета «Высшая школа экономики». Область научных интересов: тарифообразование и инвестиционная деятельность в отраслях естественных монополий и инфраструктуры, процессы либерализации естественных монополий в России и за рубежом.</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Candidate of Economic Sciences of the Institute of Pricing and Regulation of Natural Monopolies of the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”. Area of expertise: rate setting and investment activity in natural monopolies and infrastructures, processes of natural monopoly liberalization in Russia and abroad</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">idolmatov@hse.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Золотова</surname><given-names>И. Ю.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Zolotova</surname><given-names>I, Yu.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Заместитель директора Института проблем ценообразования и регулирования естественных монополий Национального исследовательского университета «Высшая школа экономики». Область научных интересов: система государственного регулирования естественных монополий, ценообразование, модели прогнозирования цен в электроэнергетике и инфраструктурных отраслях.</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Deputy Director of the Institute of Pricing and Regulation of Natural Monopolies of the National Research University “Higher School of Economics”. Area of expertise: systems of natural monopoly state regulation, pricing, models of pricing forecast in electrical energy industry and infrastructure branches.</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">izolotova@hse.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>National Research University “Higher School of Economics”</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2018</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>12</day><month>07</month><year>2018</year></pub-date><volume>0</volume><issue>2</issue><fpage>16</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Dolmatov I.A., Zolotova I.Y., 2018</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2018</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Долматов И.А., Золотова И.Ю.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Dolmatov I.A., Zolotova I.Y.</copyright-holder><license license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/view/767">https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/view/767</self-uri><abstract><p>One of the key pressing challenge the Russian electric power industry faces today in its development and performance is the problem of the cross subsidization between consumer groups. The volume of the cross subsidization in Russia has increased 4 times for 15 years. The conditionally acceptable level of the cross subsidization is estimated based on the additional tariff burden on industrial consumers associated with the implementation of the cross subsidization mechanism. In order to reduce the cross subsidization, it is recommended to increase electricity tariffs for the house-holders by 6% annually. At the transition stage to the target model should be based on the marginal tariff burden on industrial consumers; retail electricity prices for similar consumers in Europe can serve as a “standard” for such a limit (a possible increase in electricity tariffs for industrial consumers on average in Russia is 1.4 times the level of 2016). Options for reducing the cross subsidization and recommendations on how to determine the appropriate volumes are proposed, that is important in the current conditions of the absence of a single adopted methodology for assessing both the value of cross-subsidization and economically justified tariffs.The mechanism of the cross subsidization in the target model of electric energy pricing should be completely excluded, for which the indicator “growth of regulated (final) tariffs for the population” should be included in the forecast of social and economic development of Russia (return to the existing practice until 2017), providing for faster growth rates compared to other consumers.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Одной из ключевых проблем российской энергетики является проблема перекрестного субсидирования разными группами потребителей. За 15 лет объем перекрестного субсидирования в России вырос в 4 раза. Оценен условно допустимый уровень перекрестного субсидирования исходя из дополнительной тарифной нагрузки на промышленных потребителей, связанной с реализацией механизма перекрестного субсидирования. В целях сокращения перекрестного субсидирования рекомендуется ежегодно увеличивать тарифы на электроэнергию для населения на 6%. На переходном этапе к целевой модели следует исходить из предельной тарифной нагрузки на промышленных потребителей; в качестве «эталона» такого предела могут выступать розничные цены на электроэнергию для аналогичных потребителей Европы (возможное увеличение тарифов на электроэнергию для промышленных потребителей в среднем по России составляет 1,4 раза от уровня 2016 года). Предложены варианты сокращения перекрестного субсидирования и рекомендации, как определять соответствующие объемы, что важно в текущих условиях отсутствия единой принятой методологии оценки как самой величины перекрестного субсидирования, так и экономически обоснованных тарифов.В целевой модели ценообразования на электрическую энергию механизм перекрестного субсидирования должен быть полностью исключен, для чего в прогноз социально-экономического развития России необходимо включить показатель «рост регулируемых (конечных) тарифов для населения» (вернуть существовавшую до 2017 года практику), предусмотрев опережающие темпы роста по сравнению с прочими потребителями.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>электроэнергетика</kwd><kwd>перекрестное субсидирование</kwd><kwd>тарифы на электроэнергию для населения</kwd><kwd>цены на электрическую энергию для промышленности</kwd><kwd>прогноз</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>electric power industry</kwd><kwd>cross subsidization</kwd><kwd>electricity tariffs for the population</kwd><kwd>electricity prices for industry</kwd><kwd>forecast</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec><title>ANALYSIS OF CURRENT TRENDS</title><p>Today, the average weightedprices for electricity for other consumers in Russia are on average 30% higher than for the population, which contradicts economic principles of formation of corresponding prices [Zolotova I.Yu., 2017; Linder N.V., Trachuk A.V, 2017]. Other consumers (mainly large industrial enterprises) bear an additional tariff burden, paying a part of cost of electricity supplied to the population (the mechanism of cross- section subsidizing ") [Trachuk A.V., Linder N. V., Zubakin VAetal., 2017].</p><p>Since 2004, the volume of cross-section subsidizing between consumer groups has quadrupled (from 69 billion RUR to 283 billion RUR without VAT), there have been periods of slowing/decreasing growth rates of cross- section subsidizing and a significant increase in the corresponding volumes (figure 1):</p><p> </p><fig id="fig-1"><caption><p>Fig. 1. The dynamics of retail electricity prices and cross-section subsidizing volumes (according to JSC RJSC "UPN of Russia", CJSC "AFEEB", FTS of Russia)</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g001.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/MD0s7YfA1on5aU3AVxICCkV6LAbdXnOCxDiZ8UVe.png</uri></graphic></fig><p>To reduce the amount of cross-section subsidizing, it is necessary that retail (final!) prices for electricity for the population grew at a faster pace compared to prices for other consumers.</p><p>Starting in 2017, the forecast for socio-economic development, prepared by the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia for three years, includes parameters that reflect the prospective growth of tariffs for electricity for the population and for other consumers, rates of changes in utilities fees for citizens. Indicators of forecast changes in final prices for electricity for the population are excluded from the forecast.</p><p>The forecast provides for the anticipated growth rate (by 2 p.) of network tariffs for electricity for the population in comparison to network tariffs for other consumers starting from 2017. Thus, the target vector aimed at eliminating (reducing) cross- section subsidizing has been set set [Forecast of socio-economic development].</p><p>Taking into account the peculiarities of pricing for the population1 [Forecast, [n/y]], the indicated forecast parameters can not be achieved. An additional obstacle is the restriction on the rate of growth of citizens' utilities fees (no more than 4%), which is an indicator for the limitative indexation of the final tariff for the population. The increase in prices in the wholesale electricity (capacity) market exceeds the inflation rate (in connection with implementation of capacity contracts), which means that the increase of the network tariff for the population in fact may be lower than not only the parameters indicated in the forecast, but below a benchmark of 4%. In 2016, with the same parameters of increase in the network tariff for the population and other consumers (in accordance with the forecast of 7.5%), growth rates of retail electricity prices for other consumers were higher than those ones for the population [Association, [n/y]].</p><p>In order to ensure transparency in solving problems of reducing cross-section subsidizing (taking into account the pricing of electricity for the population), it is necessary to include the indicator "growth of regulated (final) tariffs for the population" into the forecast (as was until 2017), providing for anticipating growth rates in comparison to other consumers [Dolmatov LA., Zolotova I. Yu., Maskaev I. V., 2017].</p><p>In addition to differentiating rates of tariff changes for the considered groups of consumers, the dynamics of cross-section subsidizing volumes is also affected by the difference in growth rates of electricity consumption for the population and other consumer groups. According to estimates of the Ministry of Energy of Russia and a number of experts (see, for example: [Trachuk A. V., 2010; Sellyakhova O., 2012; Volodm Yu. V., Linder N. V., 2017; Trachuk A. V., Linder N. V., 2017]), the trends of recent years characterized by exceeding the growth rates of electricity consumption by the population in comparison with other consumers (Figure 2), will remain in the coming years, which, other things being equal, will lead to an increase in cross- section subsidizing in perspective (fig. 3 shows the invariability of tariffs for electricity for the population, the annual increase in electricity consumption is 1.5%).</p><p> </p><fig id="fig-2"><caption><p>Fig. 2. Dynamics of power consumption, an increase compared to the previous year [Association, [n/y]]</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g002.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/9NdJaxlabiuTXHFtlqWCLOLx7NQcAQ79MnFhSBOs.png</uri></graphic></fig><p> </p><fig id="fig-3"><caption><p>Fig. 3. The volume of cross-section subsidizing (forecast without VAT), billion RUR.</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g003.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/lJ5bIRaQporx8EnuG97esHaFcbrMlkaNtzpMl2kT.png</uri></graphic></fig></sec><sec><title>ASSESSMENT OF THE PERMISSIBLE LEVEL OF CROSS-SECTION SUBSIDIZING</title><p>Considering the problem of cross-section subsidizing, it is necessary to take into account the current level of retail electricity prices for industrial enterprises (which bear the burden of cross- section subsidizing today), the maximum permissible level of price increases for these consumers (especially for large energyintensive consumers, for which the price of electricity is an essential factor, affecting the competitiveness of products). Retail electricity prices for similar consumers in Europe can act as a standard of such a limit (Figure 4).</p><p> </p><fig id="fig-4"><caption><p>Fig. 4. The level of prices for electricity for domestic and industrial consumers in the Russian Federation and in Europe (excluding taxes) in 2015, eurocent/kW/h [Eurostat, [n/y]]</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g004.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/aY8HLfI4x9FdmfdbSQsORhdD5Yc1wz4k92HLeMB7.png</uri></graphic></fig><p>As the analysis of electricity prices for the industrial sector showed in countries with a similar structure of household and industrial electricity consumption (Belgium, Germany, Finland, Romania), it is possible to increase electricity prices for industry in Russia by no more than 1.4 times from the level of 2016, or up to 4.2 RUR/KW/h (at the same time, the growth potential of tariffs for the population is significant, the actual tariff for electricity for the population in 2016 was 2.4 RUR/kWh without VAT, for other consumers -3.1 RUR/kWh) [Eurostat, [n/y]].</p><p>So, the current level of cross-section subsidizing in Russia as a whole is conditionally permissible from the point of view of the tariff burden of industrial consumers. In a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the current tariffs for electricity for industrial consumers are close to or exceed the limit level of 4.2 RUR/kW/h (for example, the Republic of Altai, Kostroma Region, Arkhangelsk Region), and further increase of price for this group of consumers (including the one in connection with the burden of cross-section subsidizing) can lead to the fact that large consumers will switch to alternative sources of power supply or reduce production volumes, their competitive positions and financial stability will decrease (see, for example: [Khovalova T.V., 2017; Trachuk A. V., 2011a, b; Ryapm I., 2013].).</p><p>While maintaining the current practice of including these volumes in electricity prices for other consumers, further growth of cross-section subsidizing in the power engineering industry will lead to a significant increase in the tariff burden for industrial enterprises in the long term (for the latter, the price level may exceed analogous indicators of European countries in most regions of Russia by 2026 under other equal conditions).</p></sec><sec><title>CROSS-SECTION SUBSIDING: METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING</title><p>The calculation of the amount of cross-section subsidizing essentially depends on how to determine the economically justified price for certain categories of consumers. Even if prices for actual payments for electricity and related services are unchanged, a change in legislation regulating the calculation of an economically justified price may lead to an increase or decrease in cross-section subsidizing (for example, if the number of voltage levels or the number of hours of use of capacity for different tariff groups changes).</p><p>It is objectively impossible to determine costs of the industry related to supply of electricity to each particular consumer (except for cases of autonomous power supply) unambiguously and reliably. In the general power system, almost all equipment is involved in power supply to the entire aggregate of consumers simultaneously. The power system itself is designed on the principle of minimizing total costs of all users (not only electric, but also thermal energy) [Dolmatov I., Zolotova I., 2015]. Thus, it is impossible to determine the composition of equipment (and, consequentially, costs) justified from the standpoint of power supply to a particular consumer. If you try to take simulation for a certain category (group) of consumers, there inevitably arises the problem of justifying a certain classification of consumers (for example, what are the objective differences in the amount of infrastructure necessary to supply a household and a small store? Based on what does the regulator make no pricing distinction for households located at a great distance from each other and at different distances from the generating facility within the same subject of the Russian Federation? etc.).</p><p>Due to features of calculation described above, there are various estimates of the amount of cross-section subsidizing in the power engineering industry (from 220 to 400 billion RUR).</p><p>The solution to the problem of cross-section subsidizing turns out to depend on improving the methodological base. Digitalization of management processes and optimization of operations in the electricity (capacity) markets provide opportunities for detailed pricing and consideration of specific power supply conditions (capacity reservation, reliability category accounting, individualization of the tariff menu of retail consumers) [Trachuk A. V., Linder N. V., 2018; Dzyuba A.R, Solovieva TA., 2018]. This circumstance can significantly affect the methodology for calculating cross-section subsidizing and its magnitude. Thus, it is necessary to update the relevant estimates of the amount of cross-section subsidizing taking into account various initiatives to introduce changes in the methodology for calculating tariffs.</p></sec><sec><title>PROPOSALS TO REDUCE CROSS-SECTION SUBSIDING</title><p>When determining the forecasted dynamics of reducing cross- section subsidizing, it is necessary that the following conditions are fulfilled simultaneously:</p><p>Fig. 5 presents the forecast of retail electricity prices for the population, other consumers and cross-section subsidizing volumes formed taking into account following scenarios:</p><p> </p><fig id="fig-5"><caption><p>Fig. 5. The forecast of reducing cross-section subsiding</p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g005.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/jint4efwu3rbSCbjLQRMM2wTPt7o8K6XRJSuNZ5a.png</uri></graphic></fig><p>The contribution of the increase in tariffs for electricity for the population of 6% to the consumer price index will be 0.075 p., that is, it will not have a significant inflationary pressure.</p><p>Given the scenarios for calculations until 2025, electricity prices for households and other consumers will converge, starting from 2025, tariffs for the population will exceed the levels of retail electricity prices for other consumers; by 2028 the amount of cross-section subsidizing will be reduced to 234 billion RUR (by 49 billion RUR for 10 years)</p><p> </p><fig id="fig-6"><caption><p>Fig. 6. The volume of cross-section subsidizing (forecast, without VAT), billion RUR.</p><p> </p></caption><graphic xlink:href="ecr-0-2-g006.png"><uri content-type="original_file">https://cdn.elpub.ru/assets/journals/ecr/2018/2/APZB6JZuEHMs9KDDH8xAC3p4gLT4HWVsKEllFAZp.png</uri></graphic></fig><p>In the object electricity pricing simulation, the cross-section subsidizing mechanism shall be completely excluded (the amount of cross-subsidization is reduced to zero): the average level of tariffs for electricity for the population should cover real costs of production, transmission and distribution of energy to this group of consumers. To support indigent citizens, it is necessary to use the targeted support mechanism, including a support tool for paying for utilities provided for by the current legislation.</p><p>As model calculations show, a significant reduction in the amount of cross-section subsidizing can be achieved by 2036 under considered scenarios and fulfillment of these conditions (Figure 6).</p><p>In accordance with regulatory legal acts, a phased reduction in the amount of cross-section subsidizing to an optimal level equal to subsidizing the most indigent households is envisaged by 2022 (in 2012, prices make about 45-50 billion RUR for about 30% of households) [Order as of 2013]. In considered scenarios, this level can be reached no earlier than 2032. To achieve these objectives, it is necessary that annual tariffs for electricity for the population increase more intensively (a increased of at least 10% per year).</p><p>CONCLUSIONS</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ассоциация НП «Совет рынка» ( [б.г.]). URL: http://www.np-sr.ru.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ассоциация НП «Совет рынка» ( [б.г.]). URL: http://www.np-sr.ru.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Володин Ю. В., Линдер Н. В. (2017) Тарифная политика и перекрестное субсидирование в электро- и теплоэнергетике // Стратегии бизнеса. № 1. С. 37–47.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Володин Ю. В., Линдер Н. В. (2017) Тарифная политика и перекрестное субсидирование в электро- и теплоэнергетике // Стратегии бизнеса. № 1. С. 37–47.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Дзюба А. П., Соловьева И. А. (2018). Управление спросом на электропотребление в России // Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент. № 1. С. 72–80.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Дзюба А. П., Соловьева И. А. (2018). Управление спросом на электропотребление в России // Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент. № 1. С. 72–80.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Долматов И., Золотова И. (2015) Сколько стоит избыточная мощность генераторов? // Энергорынок. № 8. С. 32–35.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Долматов И., Золотова И. (2015) Сколько стоит избыточная мощность генераторов? // Энергорынок. № 8. С. 32–35.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Долматов И. А., Золотова И. Ю., Маскаев И. В. (2017). Новый тарифный режим для естественных монополий в России: каким он должен быть? // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3–4. С. 30–37.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Долматов И. А., Золотова И. Ю., Маскаев И. В. (2017). Новый тарифный режим для естественных монополий в России: каким он должен быть? // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3–4. С. 30–37.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Золотова И. Ю. (2017). Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: эмпирический анализ, оценка эффективности собственной генерации // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (101). С. 70–77.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Золотова И. Ю. (2017). Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: эмпирический анализ, оценка эффективности собственной генерации // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (101). С. 70–77.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Линдер Н. В., Трачук А. В. (2017). Влияние перекрестного субсидирования в электро- и теплоэнергетике на изменение поведения участников оптового и розничного рынков электро- и теплоэнергии // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (101). С. 78–86.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Линдер Н. В., Трачук А. В. (2017). Влияние перекрестного субсидирования в электро- и теплоэнергетике на изменение поведения участников оптового и розничного рынков электро- и теплоэнергии // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (101). С. 78–86.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Постановление Правительства РФ от 29.12.2011 № 1178 (ред. от 17.02.2018) «О ценообразовании в области регулируемых цен (тарифов) в электроэнергетике» // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_125116 / .</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Постановление Правительства РФ от 29.12.2011 № 1178 (ред. от 17.02.2018) «О ценообразовании в области регулируемых цен (тарифов) в электроэнергетике» // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_125116 / .</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Прогноз социально-экономического развития Российской Федерации на 2018 год и на плановый период 2019 и 2020 годов ( [б.г.]) // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_282738 / .</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Прогноз социально-экономического развития Российской Федерации на 2018 год и на плановый период 2019 и 2020 годов ( [б.г.]) // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_282738 / .</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Распоряжение Правительства РФ от 03.04.2013 № 511‑р (ред. от 29.11.2017) «Об утверждении Стратегии развития электросетевого комплекса Российской Федерации» // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_144676 / .</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Распоряжение Правительства РФ от 03.04.2013 № 511‑р (ред. от 29.11.2017) «Об утверждении Стратегии развития электросетевого комплекса Российской Федерации» // КонсультантПлюс. URL: http://www.consultant.ru / document / cons_doc_LAW_144676 / .</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ряпин И. (2013) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: итог пятнадцатилетней борьбы / Энергетический центр Московской школы управления «Сколково». М. 97 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ряпин И. (2013) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: итог пятнадцатилетней борьбы / Энергетический центр Московской школы управления «Сколково». М. 97 с.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Селляхова О. (2012) Перекрестное субсидирование и социальная норма электропотребления // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 6. С. 32–48.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Селляхова О. (2012) Перекрестное субсидирование и социальная норма электропотребления // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 6. С. 32–48.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В. (2011а). Развитие механизмов регулирования электроэнергетики в условиях ее реформирования // Экономика и управление. № 2 (64). С. 60–63.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В. (2011а). Развитие механизмов регулирования электроэнергетики в условиях ее реформирования // Экономика и управление. № 2 (64). С. 60–63.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В. (2010). Риски роста концентрации на рынке электроэнергии / Энергорынок. № 3. С. 28–32.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В. (2010). Риски роста концентрации на рынке электроэнергии / Энергорынок. № 3. С. 28–32.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В. (2011б) Реформирование естественных монополий: цели, результаты и направления развития. М.: Экономика.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В. (2011б) Реформирование естественных монополий: цели, результаты и направления развития. М.: Экономика.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В. (2017) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: подходы к моделированию снижения его объемов // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 1 (100). С. 24–35.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В. (2017) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: подходы к моделированию снижения его объемов // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 1 (100). С. 24–35.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В. (2018). Технологии распределенной генерации: эмпирические оценки факторов применения // Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент. № 1. С. 32–50.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В. (2018). Технологии распределенной генерации: эмпирические оценки факторов применения // Стратегические решения и риск-менеджмент. № 1. С. 32–50.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В., Зубакин В. А. и др. (2017) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: проблемы и пути решения. СПб.: Реальная экономика. 121 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Трачук А. В., Линдер Н. В., Зубакин В. А. и др. (2017) Перекрестное субсидирование в электроэнергетике: проблемы и пути решения. СПб.: Реальная экономика. 121 с.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ховалова Т. В. (2017). Моделирование эффективности перехода на собственную генерацию // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (102). С. 44–57.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ховалова Т. В. (2017). Моделирование эффективности перехода на собственную генерацию // Эффективное Антикризисное Управление. № 3 (102). С. 44–57.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Eurostat. URL: http://ec.europa.eu / eurostat / web / main / home.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Eurostat. URL: http://ec.europa.eu / eurostat / web / main / home.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
