Asset 1

Global Go To Think Tank Index (GGTTI) 2020 launched                    111,75 Think Tanks across the world ranked in different categories.                SDPI is ranked 90th among “Top Think Tanks Worldwide (non-US)”.           SDPI stands 11th among Top Think Tanks in South & South East Asia & the Pacific (excluding India).            SDPI notches 33rd position in “Best New Idea or Paradigm Developed by A Think Tank” category.                SDPI remains 42nd in “Best Quality Assurance and Integrity Policies and Procedure” category.              SDPI stands 49th in “Think Tank to Watch in 2020”.            SDPI gets 52nd position among “Best Independent Think Tanks”.                           SDPI becomes 63rd in “Best Advocacy Campaign” category.                   SDPI secures 60th position in “Best Institutional Collaboration Involving Two or More Think Tanks” category.                       SDPI obtains 64th position in “Best Use of Media (Print & Electronic)” category.               SDPI gains 66th position in “Top Environment Policy Tink Tanks” category.                SDPI achieves 76th position in “Think Tanks With Best External Relations/Public Engagement Program” category.                    SDPI notches 99th position in “Top Social Policy Think Tanks”.            SDPI wins 140th position among “Top Domestic Economic Policy Think Tanks”.               SDPI is placed among special non-ranked category of Think Tanks – “Best Policy and Institutional Response to COVID-19”.                                            Owing to COVID-19 outbreak, SDPI staff is working from home from 9am to 5pm five days a week. All our staff members are available on phone, email and/or any other digital/electronic modes of communication during our usual official hours. You can also find all our work related to COVID-19 in orange entries in our publications section below.    The Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) is pleased to announce its Twenty-third Sustainable Development Conference (SDC) from 14 – 17 December 2020 in Islamabad, Pakistan. The overarching theme of this year’s Conference is Sustainable Development in the Times of COVID-19. Read more…       FOOD SECIRITY DASHBOARD: On 4th Nov, SDPI has shared the first prototype of Food Security Dashboard with Dr Moeed Yousaf, the Special Assistant to Prime Minister on  National Security and Economic Outreach in the presence of stakeholders, including Ministry of National Food Security and Research. Provincial and district authorities attended the event in person or through zoom. The dashboard will help the government monitor and regulate the supply chain of essential food commodities.

Number of Downlaods: 23

Published Date: Feb 3, 1999

NEPRA Tariff Setting Strategy (PB-4)

Shahrukh Rafi Khan, SDPI
1999

Based on the information provided by WAPDA, it is difficult to assess if WAPDA’S requirement for a higher utility charge is justifiable. Utility rates need to be based on marginal unit costs and not on debt obligations. The relevant marginal unit cost would depend on demand and WAPDA’s marginal cost structure based on electricity generated via various sources (see below)

WAPDA’s marginal cost is a composite of the different methods via which it generates electricity including hydel, hydro and nuclear. I have termed these AB to GH and, for simplification, shown the marginal cost curve as an increasing step-function. (In fact, marginal cost for some modes of generation are likely to be falling). Based on some demand curve, once can estimate what the optimal price should be. As shown above, this is P*, based on power generation CD. This would suggest that WAPDA should only be using two generation modes (see AB and CD). In any case, with price set at P*, (i.e marginal cost pricing), the shaded areas above the MC curve and below the MR curve represents the consumer surplus WAPDA gets.

It is actually likely that WAPDA is losing a lot of the surplus via line losses. In its petition to NEPRA, WAPDA has made a commitment (5 a) to reduce energy losses to 20%. Thus WAPDA has acknowledged that they are energy losses and they are above 20%.

My recommendations are as follows:

a.    Ask WAPDA to provide a cost schedule (based on the actual cost structure) and a demand schedule (based on past experience). Only than will it be possible to see if the current tariff is below marginal cost.
b.    WAPDA’S claim for a tariff increase to meet debt obligations should be rejected out right. Efficient pricing has nothing to do with accumulated debt.
c.    WAPDA should be asked to provide more information on how it has calculated line losses. I would argue that losses of above 10% should not be considered acceptable by NEPRA. Also, WAPDA can not make requests for tariff increases to compensate it for its loss in consumer surplus.
d.    If the cost structure and demand curve does suggest a rate revision, NEPRA should only concede this based on strict service conditionalities such as assurance of no load shedding for a specified period, no brown outs and no power fluctuations.