Advertisement

Contracts for Difference and Risk Management in Multi-agent Energy Markets

  • Francisco Sousa
  • Fernando LopesEmail author
  • João Santana
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9086)

Abstract

The liberalization process of the power sector has led to competitive wholesale and retail markets. Market participants are exposed to risks associated with price volatility and uncertainties regarding production and consumption. This paper addresses these issues by analyzing and evaluating the role of contracts for difference (CFDs) as a financial product used to hedge against risk. The article presents several key features of software gents able to negotiate CFDs, paying special attention to risk management, notably risk attitude, and price negotiation. It starts with a contextualization of the subject, which is followed by the definition of a model to negotiate CFDs, involving several trading strategies and tactics. It starts with a contextualization of the subject, which is followed by the definition of a model to negotiate CFDs, involving a group of strategies to control the exposure of risk by software agents. Finally, a set of case studies is described to assess the performance of CFDs as a risk management tool and to compare their performance to forward bilateral contracts.

Keywords

Electricity markets Bilateral contracting Contracts for difference Risk management Trading strategies Autonomous software agents 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hunt, S., Shuttleworth, G.: Competition and Choice in Electricity. Wiley, Chichester (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hausman, E., Hornby, R., Smith, A.: Bilateral Contracting in Deregulated Electricity Markets. Report to the American Public Power Association, Synapse Energy Economics (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bajpai, P., Singh, S.: Electricity trading in competitive power market: an overview and key issues. In: International Conference on Power Systems, Kathmandu (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paiva, J.: Redes de Energia Elétrica. IST Press, Lisboa (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lopes, F., Mamede, N., Novais, A.Q., Coelho, H.: A Negotiation Model for Autonomous Computational Agents: Formal Description and Empirical Evaluation. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 12(3), 195–212 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lopes, F., Mamede, N., Novais, A.Q., Coelho, H.: Negotiation in a multi-agent supply chain system. In: Third Int. Workshop of the IFIP WG 5.7 Special Interest Group on Advanced Techniques in Production Planning & Control, pp. 153–168. Firenze University Press (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lopes, F., Mamede, N., Novais, A.Q., Coelho, H.: Negotiation among autonomous agents: experimental evaluation of integrative strategies. In: 12th Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 280–288. IEEE Computer Society Press (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lopes, F., Coelho, H.: Concession behaviour in automated negotiation. In: Buccafurri, F., Semeraro, G. (eds.) EC-Web 2010. LNBIP, vol. 61, pp. 184–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lopes, F., Coelho, H.: Strategic and Tactical Behaviour in Automated Negotiation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence 4(S10), 35–63 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lopes, F., Coelho, H. (eds.): Negotiation and Argumentation in Multi-agent Systems. Bentham Science, The Netherlands (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263–292 (1979)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press (1953)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Varian, R.: Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach. W. W. Norton & Company, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pratt, J.: Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large. Econometrica 32(1/2), 122–136 (1964)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Faratin, P., Sierra, C., Jennings, N.: Negotiation Decision Functions for Autonomous Agents. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems 24(3–4), 159–182 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Sousa
    • 1
  • Fernando Lopes
    • 2
    Email author
  • João Santana
    • 1
  1. 1.Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de Lisboa, INESC-IDLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.LNEG–National Research InstituteLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations