Trade policy with increasing returns and imperfect competition : Contradictory results from competing assumptions
AbstractA number of recent papers reach different conclusions concerning the effects of trade and industrial policy on imperfectly competitive industries; the implications for policy are therefore sensitive to assumptions concerning both firm behaviour and market structure. This paper sets out a single model within which policy can be examined under a variety of assumptions concerning market structures. The results obtained from this model can be compared to results already obtained in the literature, and the model allows further analysis of some interesting cases. We consider the four types of market structure generated by oligopoly versus free entry, and segmented markets versus integrated markets. By employing simple functional forms we are able to make direct comparisons between these cases. We conclude that the effects of trade and industrial policies are greater when markets are segmented than when they are integrated, and that, if transport costs are small, policy is more potent when the number of firms is fixed than when there is free entry.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of International Economics.
Volume (Year): 24 (1988)
Issue (Month): 3-4 (May)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505552
Other versions of this item:
- Markusen, James R. & Venables, Anthony J., 1986. "Trade Policy with Increasing Returns and Imperfect Competition: Contradictory Results from Competing Assumptions," CEPR Discussion Papers 120, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wendy Shamier).
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.