The Role of Legal Frameworks in Enabling Transparency in Water Utilities’ Regulation Research Question: How can legal frameworks enable transparency in water utilities regulation? Justifications: 1.Corruption in the water sector 2.Information asymmetry between companies and regulators 3.Trust and legitimacy in a regulatory system 4.Information is the prerequisite for ‘accountability’ and ‘participation’ 5.Implementation of the Human Right to Water requires access to information ad Mova Al ‘Afghani | Supervisors: Prof. Dr Patricia Wouters, Dr Sarah H Findings (so far): Methodology: Comparative 1. Determine and justify case studies to be compared: Victoria (Australia), England (UK) and Jakarta (Indonesia) 2. Devise an analytical framework for evaluating “Transparency” 3. Apply analytical framework to case studies 4. Compare case studies 5. Conclude Analytical Framework: Active Disclosure Rules: 6. Policy Creation 7. Regulatory Process 8. Utilities Corporate Governance Passive Disclosure Rules: 9. Applicability 10.Exemptions 11.Relevance to Natural Monopoly Case study Ownershi p Regulator y Model Active Disclosure Rules Passive Disclosure Rules Policy creation: Who determines the ownership question? Regulatory Process Utilities’ Corporate Governance Victoria Publicly Owned Regulatio n by agency Parliament (Downstream), Premier’s Discretion (Upstream Bulkwater Supply). Contracts must be published. Customer Service and Service Levels are legislated. Tariff procedure regulated. Investment plan available. Related party transaction must be disclosed, arms length rule not clear Freedom of Information (FoI) Law applicable to downstream utilities, not applicable to concessionaire. England Full Divestit ure Regulatio n by agency Parliament. Assets sold through flotation. Customer Service and Service Levels are legislated. Tariff procedure regulated. Investment plan published. Related party transaction must be disclosed; arms length rule outlined in the regulatory account FoI and Environmental Information Regulation (EIR) not applicable to water utilities Jakarta Concessi on Regulatio n by agency and contract (hybrid) Governor’s discretion. Contracts were not awarded through concession. Confidentiality clause bars disclosure. Most of the customer service and service levels are contained in the contract (confidential). Tarif f procedure regulated. Investment plan not in the public domain. Arm’s length rule in the contract, no regulatory account FoI applicable to publicly owned utility but (likely) not applicable to concession partners

Poster template grad day

Download PPTX Report

Upload
mohamad-afghani
View
198
Download
9

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

The Role of Legal Frameworks in Enabling Transparency in Water Utilities’ Regulation

Research Question:How can legal frameworks enable transparency in water utilities regulation?

Justifications:1. Corruption in the water sector2. Information asymmetry between

companies and regulators3. Trust and legitimacy in a regulatory

system4. Information is the prerequisite for

‘accountability’ and ‘participation’5. Implementation of the Human Right

to Water requires access to information

Mohamad Mova Al ‘Afghani | Supervisors: Prof. Dr Patricia Wouters, Dr Sarah Hendry

Findings (so far):

Methodology: Comparative1. Determine and justify case studies to be

compared: Victoria (Australia), England (UK) and Jakarta (Indonesia)

2. Devise an analytical framework for evaluating “Transparency”

3. Apply analytical framework to case studies4. Compare case studies5. Conclude

Analytical Framework:Active Disclosure Rules:6. Policy Creation7. Regulatory Process8. Utilities Corporate GovernancePassive Disclosure Rules:9. Applicability10. Exemptions11. Relevance to Natural Monopoly

Case study

Ownership Regulatory Model

Active Disclosure Rules Passive Disclosure Rules

Policy creation: Who determines the ownership

question?

Regulatory Process Utilities’ Corporate Governance

Victoria Publicly Owned

Regulation by agency

Parliament (Downstream),Premier’s Discretion (Upstream Bulkwater Supply). Contracts must be published.

Customer Service and Service Levels are legislated. Tariff procedure regulated. Investment plan available.

Related party transaction must be disclosed, arms length rule not clear

Freedom of Information (FoI) Law applicable to downstream utilities, not applicable to concessionaire.

England Full Divestiture

Regulation by agency

Parliament. Assets sold through flotation.

Customer Service and Service Levels are legislated. Tariff procedure regulated. Investment plan published.

Related party transaction must be disclosed; arms length rule outlined in the regulatory account

FoI and Environmental Information Regulation (EIR) not applicable to water utilities

Jakarta Concession Regulation by agency and contract (hybrid)

Governor’s discretion. Contracts were not awarded through concession. Confidentiality clause bars disclosure.

Most of the customer service and service levels are contained in the contract (confidential). Tariff procedure regulated. Investment plan not in the public domain.

Arm’s length rule in the contract, no regulatory account

FoI applicable to publicly owned utility but (likely) not applicable to concession partners