{"word_count": 821, "character_count": 5920}
Le « grand retour » des majors du pétrole à la faveur du troisième choc pétrolier : Classes d’entreprises et groupes stratégiques de l’industrie pétrolière / Rodolphe Greggio et  Benoît Maffei, Gérer et comprendre, N° 120, juin 2015 http://www.annales.org/gc/2015/resumes/juin/02-gc-resum-FR-AN-AL-ES-juin-2015.html#02FRLe secteur pétrolier se caractérise depuis un certain nombre de décennies par un profond paradoxe : tout en ayant été exclues des gisements les plus rentables par des vagues de nationalisations intervenues notamment depuis les années 1970, et bien que désormais largement minoritaires en termes de parts de la production mondiale, les multinationales occidentales du pétrole ont réussi à conserver un solide leadership financier, technologique et stratégique, tandis que l’autonomie des opérateurs issus notamment des pays émergents demeure, quant à elle, tout à fait relative. La stabilité des positions comparées des acteurs présents dans la filière pétrolière induit à proposer une interprétation en termes de « classes d’entreprises », de préférence à la catégorie communément admise de « groupes stratégiques » - autrement dit à privilégier une subdivision sectorielle en catégories d’entreprises relativement étanches (bien qu’en constante rivalité/collaboration entre elles) dont les stratégies sont surdéterminées par des contraintes géopolitiques et industrielles qu’il est difficile de subvertir.The Resource Curse Revisited / Paul Stevens, Glada Lahn and Jaakko Kooroshy. London : Chatham House, Aug. 2015, 50 p. (Energy, Environment and Resources Research Paper) http://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/resource-curse-revisitedThe paper finds that while natural resources may provide low-income countries with a significant development opportunity, the prevailing extractives-led growth agenda is in urgent need of re-evaluation...The Scissors Effect: How structural trends and government intervention are damaging the major European electricity companies and affecting consumers / David Robinson. oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Aug. 2015, 37 p. (OIES paper : EL 14) http://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/EL-14.pdfThe major electricity companies (the ‘majors’) in Europe have not recovered from a significant decline in their combined market value that began in early 2008. If the causes are structural, as argued here, these companies may be unable or unwilling to finance the investments required to meet the EU policy goals of energy security, environmental sustainability, and acceptable costs. This research paper by David Robinson argues that the problems facing the European majors reflect a ‘scissors effect’, which has two interpretations. On the one hand, it is a dynamic process whereby certain revenue streams fall, while costs rise, literally cutting profitability. The scissors metaphor extends to a second interpretation: that profitability is being hit – or will be soon – both upstream and downstream. The paper emphasizes underlying structural trends (stagnant demand, decarbonization and more active consumer participation) and government intervention as causes of the scissors effect. Although the structural trends seem now to be irreversible, the future of the sector still depends importantly on government decisions. This paper argues that current electricity regulations and market design are unsustainable. To address this, it is necessary to clarify the respective roles of government and markets and to design regulations and markets for a decarbonized electricity model and for the transition to the new model. Where markets do have a role to play, it is essential that they be left to play that role. The proposal draws on the original spirit of liberalization, but reflects the importance of decarbonization and the technological changes that make active consumer participation in electricity markets a reality. While the majors have to rethink corporate and regulatory strategy, their first priority should be to engage in the debate about the future role of government and competitive markets.Private Sector Participation in Electricity Transmission and Distribution : experiences from Brazil, Peru, The Philippines, and Turkey. ESMAP, 2015, 20 p. (études de cas en ligne at http://www.esmap.org/esmap/node/55655) (Knowledge series ; 023/15)Foreword : Electric power systems are among the most capital-intensive parts of a modern economy; their successful development requires massive deployment of resources from both the public and private sectors. In recent decades, many countries have embarked on structural reform programs involving private sector participation (PSP) across the entire value chain of the power sector. Often as part of a broader marketoriented reform program, governments have resorted to PSP in transmission and distribution (T&#38;D) for a variety of reasons, including to: (i) offset years of underinvestment and poor operating performance under public ownership; (ii) attract considerable private investment to fill the financing gap stemming from new T&#38;D additions amid rapidly growing demand for electricity; and (iii) raise fiscal revenues by offloading state assets. In some cases (e.g., Brazil and Peru), a prolonged electricity supply crisis prompted government into structural reforms of the T&#38;D sector...The role of gas storage in internal market and in ensuring security of supply. Commission européenne. DG Energy, 2015, 303 p. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/REPORT-Gas%20Storage-20150728.pdfDepending on the design and characteristics, gas storage increases the sources of supply in times of high demand (e.g. due to seasonal variation) and contributes to the functioning of the gas market by providing short term flexibility. The study provides an in-depth analysis targeting the potential of gas storage for supporting the security of gas supplies.&#160;