IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v17y2021i6p1049-1064_12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monopoly as a ‘culture-history fact’: Knight, Menger, and the role of institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Salerno, Joseph T.
  • Dorobat, Carmen Elena
  • McCaffrey, Matthew C.

Abstract

Frank Knight's theory of monopoly price has received relatively little attention in the literature on Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. We argue that Knight accepted and refined the monopoly price theory of Carl Menger and his followers. Knight highlights the difference between monopoly as an inevitable outcome of departures from perfect competition, and monopoly as a contingent or ‘culture-history fact’. In the latter case, coercive institutional barriers to potential competition shape the choice set of consumers and producers, and provide a crucial method for identifying monopoly gains. There are three benefits to this account of Knight's contributions: it rehabilitates the focus on the institutional determinants of monopoly price, as opposed to the mainstream emphasis on market frictions and imperfections; it opens the way for a Mengerian monopoly price theory that seriously engages the study of institutions; and it adds new evidence and nuance to ongoing debates about Knight's place in economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Salerno, Joseph T. & Dorobat, Carmen Elena & McCaffrey, Matthew C., 2021. "Monopoly as a ‘culture-history fact’: Knight, Menger, and the role of institutions," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(6), pages 1049-1064, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:17:y:2021:i:6:p:1049-1064_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137421000515/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:17:y:2021:i:6:p:1049-1064_12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.