To increase the energy efficiency of the Russian economics it is necessary to incentivize the reduction of consumption of energy resources by different organizations including Distribution Network Operators. The existing system of regulation of electricity distribution tariffs in the Russian Federation contains incentives for Distribution Network Operators to reduce only their electricity losses. The paper develops a method of calculating energy efficiency indicators for Distribution Network Operators and an approach to accounting these indicators in electric power distribution tariffs in case of setting tariffs using benchmarks or using the method of long-term indexation of the total required revenue. The advantage of the method suggested in the article compared to energy efficiency incentives used in different European countries and the US consists in the fact that it does not complicate tariff-setting procedures and does not require significant investments, increasing transaction costs or extensive amendments to existing legislation.

The current electric power distribution tariff-setting processes are too complicated and subjective, and transaction costs in the power distribution industry make up to 50% of all the costs. The method of an automated rapid assessment of the Total Required Revenue of Distribution Network Operators suggested in the article is based on the identified dependencies between the Total Required Revenues of Distribution Network Operators, their cost items and operational indicators taking into account the possibilities of automated data collection from existing and sustainably operating state information systems. On the one hand, such an approach does not require additional expenses on creating and supporting new databases. On the other hand, it allows simplifying the information exchange between Distribution Network Operators and regulating organizations, to reduce the number of papers necessary for calculating electric power distribution tariffs, and to increase the rapidness of tariff-setting processes. As a result implementation of an automated rapid assessment of the Total Required Revenue in distribution tariff-setting processes allows reducing transaction costs and increasing the objectivity of calculations.

No abstract

Currently, in most countries of the world, activities are distinguished that are considered natural monopolies and regulated ei-ther by the state (executive authority) or by public organizations. Regulation of natural monopolies takes a lot of resources and requires analysis of a large amount of information, but decisions taken are often unreasonable, as confirmed by judicial practice. The principles of assigning organizations to monopolies and the methods of their regulation have changed significantly over time. The article reviews studies on the evolution of approaches to regulating the activities of mo-nopolies in the world from ancient Rome to the present. The purpose of the retrospective analysis was to identify the main patterns of development of economists’ views on the problem of regulating monopolies and their comparison with the stages of social and economic development of society. As a result, a causal diagram (Ishikawa diagram) of the evolution of monopoly regulation methods was constructed. The main socio-economic fac-tors affecting the understanding of the essence of monopolies and the methods used to regulate them have been established. Socio-economic fac-tors characteristic of the modern - digital - stage of the development of society are determined. As a result of the study, the need to create a new system for regulating the activities of monopolies, which, on the one hand, meets the requirements of the digital economy (has a clear structure and logic; is able to request, collect and analyse the informa-tion necessary for regulatory decisions; uses in the process of regulation reliable and objective information obtained from intelligent metering devices or databases through unified information interaction systems), and on the other hand, meets the goals of sustainable development and does not prevent the spread of competition in cases where the monopoly ceases to be effective.