Market Power and Platform Design in Decentralized Electricity Trading

TL;DR

This paper analyzes how platform design influences strategic behavior and market power in decentralized electricity trading, showing that design choices significantly affect efficiency and market outcomes.

Contribution

It develops a dynamic game model for prosumer trading, characterizes market power mechanisms, and quantifies how platform design impacts strategic incentives and efficiency.

Findings

Strategic prosumers withhold supply, increasing grid costs by about 6%.

Platform design can significantly reduce strategic distortions.

Decentralized trading can cut consumer bills by 40%, with strategic behavior reducing gains by only 8%.

Abstract

This paper studies how platform design shapes strategic behavior in decentralized electricity trading. We develop a finite-horizon dynamic game in which photovoltaic- and battery-equipped players ("prosumers") trade on a platform that maps aggregate imports and exports into internal buy and sell prices. We establish existence of a perfect conditional epsilon-equilibrium and characterize a Cournot-like market-power mechanism in an observable-types benchmark of the game: because the producer price is decreasing in aggregate exports, strategic prosumers withhold supply and underutilize storage relative to the price-taking benchmark. To quantify these effects, we use a multi-agent computational framework that exploits the differentiable structure of the platform's clearing rule to compare planner, price-taking, and strategic outcomes under alternative pricing mechanisms. In our baseline calibration, strategic play raises grid settlement cost by about 6 percent relative to price-taking. The magnitude of the distortion depends strongly on platform design: some designs can largely eliminate strategic incentives, while increased competition in storage ownership sharply reduces withholding, with most of the distortion disappearing once storage is split across more than three owners. We also find that information disclosure can improve competitive coordination but also increase the market power effects. Despite these distortions, the platform remains highly valuable overall, reducing a passive consumer's annual electricity bill by roughly 40 percent relative to exclusive grid settlement, with strategic behavior clawing back only about 8 percent of that saving. The results show that pricing rules, information disclosure, and ownership structure determine how much of the gains from decentralized electricity trading are realized.