SpringerLink
Log in

Achieving Electricity Liberalisation in Türkiye

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Neoliberal Transformation of Electricity

  • 55 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter covers the introduction of liberalisation period (2001–2015), and revolves around the question of how and why electricity liberalisation, as a foreign-inspired policy and a reflection of global power structures, influenced Türkiye’s domestic energy policy preferences. Major political economic factors affecting the introduction of liberalisation, and their interactions, are revealed in two parts. The first part analyses external political economic factors which affected Türkiye’s domestic energy policy preferences from the perspective of structural power, and the second part clarifies how internal economic and political factors converged with those in the external realm. It explains how a convergence between internal and external political economic factors emerged prior to actual liberalisation, triggered the reform and sustained it. Thus, connections through which power structures influence agents’ preferences and behaviours are explored through the case of Türkiye.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 58.84
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 74.89
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Data was compiled from the European Investment Bank database: https://www.eib.org/en/projects/loans/index.htm?

  2. 2.

    Letter of Intent, June 1998: https://www.imf.org/external/np/loi/062698.htm.

  3. 3.

    Data was collected from the IMF database: http://www.imf.org/external/np/fin/tad/extarr2.aspx?memberKey1=980&date1key=2018-07-31.

  4. 4.

    Data was collected from http://www.trlibor.org/ for TRLibor, from https://www.emmi-benchmarks.eu/ for Euribor, and from https://www.global-rates.com/ for USD Libor.

  5. 5.

    For some examples: IEA, Electricity Market Reform: An IEA Handbook, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2000; OECD and IEA, Lessons from Liberalised Electricity Markets, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2005; IEA, Regulatory Institutions in Liberalised Electricity Markets, IEA, Paris, 2001; IEA, Distributed Generation in Liberalised Electricity Markets, IEA, Paris, 2002; World Bank, Taking Stock of the Political Economy of Power Sector Reforms in Develo** Countries, Policy Research Working Paper 8518, 2018.

  6. 6.

    For some examples: Turkey’s Energy Transition: Milestones and Challenges, World Bank, Washington DC, 2015; Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Turkey 2009 Review, IEA, 2010; Energy Policies of IEA Countries: Turkey 2016 Review, IEA, 2016; Creating Markets in Turkey’s Power Sector, Note 33, World Bank, 2017; IEA encourages Turkey to deepen energy market reforms, IEA, September 20, 2016, https://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2016/september/iea-encourages-Türkiye-to-deepen-energy-market-reforms.html.

  7. 7.

    The term ‘norm projection capability’ was adapted from the term ‘power projection capability’, by considering that the EU prefers to perceive itself and to be perceived by the others as a normative power prioritising its values, regardless of the validity of this claim.

  8. 8.

    IB: Public Investment Budget, EIB: Energy Investment Budget, TB: Total Budget.

  9. 9.

    EIB: Energy Investment Budget, TB: Total Budget.

  10. 10.

    The term ancien régime was used to refer to the dominance of royalist bureaucrats in pre-revolution France originally. Here, the term ancien régime was used to refer to the previous periods when bureaucrats who had anti-neoliberal and statist approaches had dominance in sha** the policies.

  11. 11.

    For some examples, see: Chamber of Electrical Engineers (EMO), Elektrik Özelleştirmeleri Raporu, Ankara, 2012; MMO, Türkiye’nin Enerji Görünümü, Ankara, 2010; EMO, Elektrik Piyasaya, Ateş Vatandaşın Cebine Düştü, Ankara, 2010; EMO, Elektrik Piyasası Çöküyor, Kamu İşbaşına, Ankara, 2007.

References

  • Akkemik, K., & Oğuz, F. (2011). Regulation, efficiency and equilibrium: A general equilibrium analysis of liberalization in the Turkish electricity market. Energy, 3282–3292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alıcı, O. (2019, November). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ataç, Y. (2005, April 18). MGK’da gündem enerji güvenliği. Retrieved from Hürriyet: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/mgk-da-gundem-enerji-guvenligi-312419

  • Atiyas, İ. (2006). Elektrik Sektöründe Serbestleşme ve Düzenleyici Reform. TESEV Yayınları.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atiyas, İ, Çetin, T., & Gülen, G. (2012). Reforming Turkish energy markets: Political economy, regulation and competition in the search for energy policy. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, L., & Drazen, A. (1997). Capital-account liberalization as a signal. American Economic Review, 138–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Başlı, M. (2019, November 20). Interview. (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilgin, P. (2007). Only strong states can survive in Turkey’s geography: The uses of “geopolitical truths” in Turkey. Political Geography, 740–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, A. (2007). Regime theory. In Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law. Oxford Public International Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camadan, E., & Erten, İ. E. (2011). An evaluation of the transitional Turkish electricity balancing and settlement market: Lessons for the future. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 1325–1334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coşkun, B. B., & Carlson, R. (2010). New energy geopolitics: Why does Turkey matter? Insight Turkey, 205–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Çetin, T. (2014). Structural and regulatory reform in Turkey: Lessons from public utilities. Utilities Policy, 94–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Çetin, T., & Oğuz, F. (2007). The politics of regulation in the Turkish electricity market. Energy Policy, 1761–1770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durakoğlu, S. (2011). Political institutions of electricity regulation: The case of Turkey. Energy Policy, 5578–5587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dünya. (2008, June 25). Kamu 58 milyon YTL’lik faturayı ödemezse, elektrik üreticisi şalter indirecek. Retrieved from Dünya: https://www.dunya.com/ekonomi/kamu-58-milyon-ytl039lik-faturayi-odemezse-elektrik-ureticisi-salter-haberi-30826

  • EPDK. (2017). Elektrik Piyasası Gelişim Raporu 2017. Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdoğdu, E. (2007). Regulatory reform in Turkish energy industry: An analysis. Energy Policy, 984–993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertuğrul, A., & Selçuk, F. (2001). A brief account of the Turkish economy, 1980–2000. Russian and East European Finance and Trade, 6–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (1998). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2001). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2002). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2005). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2007). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2008). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2010). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2012). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2015). Turkey Progress Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin, R. (2001). Global political economy: Understanding the international economic order. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gürakar, E., Zeytinoğlu, H. C., Miscioğlu, K. İ., & Aydoğan, R. E. (2016). Yolsuzluk Raporları 2016: Türkiye Enerji Sektörüne İlişkin Bir Değerlendirme. TESEV Yayınları.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggard, S., & Simmons, B. A. (1987). Theories of international regimes. International Organization, 491–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: The case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politcs, 275–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, A. K. (2011). Turkey’s energy strategy and the Middle East: Between a rock and a hard place. Turkish Studies, 603–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hürriyet. (2006, July 2). Ürküten karanlık. Retrieved from Hürriyet: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/urkuten-karanlik-4684595

  • Hürriyet. (2014, October 7). Çiftçinin elektrik borcunu yeniden yapılandırması için son tarih 30 Kasım. Retrieved from Hürriyet: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/ekonomi/ciftcinin-elektrik-borcunu-yeniden-yapilandirmasi-icin-son-tarih-30-kasim-27336114

  • International Monetary Fund. (2021, February 22). IMF conditionality. Retrieved from International Monetary Fund: https://www.imf.org/en/About/Factsheets/Sheets/2016/08/02/21/28/IMF-Conditionality

  • Kahraman, S. (2011). Turkey and the European Union: In the Middle East: Reconciling or competing with each other? Turkish Studies, 699–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karbuz, S., & Sanlı, B. (2010). On formulating a new energy strategy for Turkey. Insight Turkey, 89–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, R. (1984). After hegemony: Cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Köktaş, H. (2020, March). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. D. (1982). Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables. International Organization, 185–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, S. G. (1990). The 1990s: Decade of global economic and political crisis. Economic and Political Weekly, PE47–PE52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Development. (2014). Onuncu Kalkınma Planı Yurtiçi Tasarruflar Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu. Ministry of Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obaoğlu, O. (2019, November). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2002). Regulatory reform in electricity, gas and road freight transport. OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2014). OECD economic surveys: Turkey 2014. OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oğuzlu, H. T. (2012). Turkey and the European Union: Europeanization without membership. Turkish Studies, 229–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Öniş, Z. (2003). Domestic politics versus global dynamics: Towards a political economy of the 2000 and 2001 financial crisis in Turkey. In Z. Öniş & B. Rubin (Eds.), The Turkish economy in crisis (pp. 1–30). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Öniş, Z. (2011). Power, interests, and coalitions: The political economy of mass privatisations in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 707–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özbuğday, F. C., Öğünlü, B., & Alma, H. (2016). The sustainability of Turkish electricity distributors and last-resort electricity suppliers: What did transition from vertically integrated public monopoly to regulated competition with privatized and unbundled firms bring about? Utilities Policy, 50–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özelleştirme İdaresi Başkanlığı. (2010a). 2009 Faaliyet Raporu. Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özelleştirme İdaresi Başkanlığı. (2010b). 2010b Faaliyet Raporu. Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özelleştirme İdaresi Başkanlığı. (2016). 2015 Faaliyet Raporu. Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özkıvrak, Ö. (2005). Electricity restructuring in Turkey. Energy Policy, 1339–1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez-Martín, M. E., Francés, G. E., & Borda, R. d. (2015). Will energy save FDI inflows to Turkey from the cool down of EU accession prospects? A case study of how geo-political alliances and regional networks matter. Turkish Studies, 608–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitti, K. (2019, October). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sönmez, Ü. (2011a). The political economy of market and regulatory reforms in Turkey: The logic and unintended consequences of ad-hoc strategies. New Political Economy, 101–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sönmez, Ü. (2011b). Türkiye'de piyasa reformları ve düzenleyici reformlar: Aktör-merkezli bir tarihsel yaklaşım önerisi. Toplum ve Bilim, 133–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • State Planning Organisation. (2001). Elektrik Özel İhtisas Raporu. Ankara.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stopford, J. M., Strange, S., & Henley, J. S. (1991). Rival states, rival firms: Competition for world market shares. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. (1992). States, firms and diplomacy. International Affairs, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. (1994). States and markets. Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. (2015). Casino capitalism. Manchester University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2017, June 8). What is political risk? Retrieved from The Economist: https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2017/06/08/what-is-political-risk

  • Toksöz, M. (2002). Turkey’s energy market—Issues in reform. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans, 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tülek, Y. (2019, November). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Uçkun, D., & Doerr, M. (2010). Emerging markets: Theory and practice/Turkey’s reforms post 2001 crisis. Journal of Global Analysis, 51–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulusoy, A., & Oğuz, F. (2007). The privatization of electricity distribution in Turkey: A legal and economic analysis. Energy Policy, 5021–5034.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ünal, S. (2013). Europeanisation of the Turkish energy sector: A case study on the electricity market. Middle East Technical University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vatan. (2005, January 18). Çiftçinin borç faizi silindi. Retrieved from Vatan: https://www.gazetevatan.com/ekonomi/ciftcinin-borc-faizi-silindi-44999

  • Yazıtaş, F. (2020, February). (S. Ünal, Interviewer).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeni Şafak. (2006, July 4). Şalter zam için inmiş. Retrieved from Yeni Şafak: https://www.yenisafak.com/arsiv/2006/temmuz/04/e02.html

  • Yıldız, T. (2010). Turkey energy economy and future energy vision. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Ankara, Türkiye

    Serhan Ünal

Authors
  1. Serhan Ünal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Serhan Ünal .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ünal, S. (2023). Achieving Electricity Liberalisation in Türkiye. In: Neoliberal Transformation of Electricity. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-0282-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-0282-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-0281-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-0282-8

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation