IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/atlecj/v31y2003i2p123-132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Augustin cournot and neoclassical economics

Author

Listed:
  • Clarence Morrison

Abstract

This paper compares Cournot's exposition of elasticity of demand and the theory of the firm with modern exposition. In the case of the theory of the firm, this comparison is accomplished by translating the modern textbook exposition into Cournot's mathematics. It is demonstrated that Cournot's exposition translates into current usage in all cases but that the degree of convolution in the translation process varies from case to case. For elasticity, only trivial algebraic manipulation is involved. For monopoly, the inverse derivative rule translates Cournot's exposition into current usage. The case of perfect competition is much more complicated. Although Cournot gets the same result as current theory, his mathematics doesn't translate directly into current usage. But a comparison in the text that doesn't appear in his mathematics suggests that he considered the modern derivation but chose to use another derivation. One reason for doing this is rather obvious. It fits better into Cournot's unified approach to the theory of the firm. It might also be judged more elegant and mathematically precise. With regard to oligopoly, Cournot provided, in a different contest, the analytical structure that is now used in IO to analyze differentiated oligopoly. It is retierated that Cournot had a general method for finding equilibria for non-cooperative games and was aware of the fact that his method was more general than a single application. The relation between Cournot equilibria and Nash equilibria is discussed. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2003

Suggested Citation

  • Clarence Morrison, 2003. "Augustin cournot and neoclassical economics," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 31(2), pages 123-132, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:atlecj:v:31:y:2003:i:2:p:123-132
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02319865
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02319865
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02319865?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226199993 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Hugo Sonnenschein, 1968. "The Dual of Duopoly Is Complementary Monopoly: or, Two of Cournot's Theories Are One," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(2), pages 316-316.
    3. Roger B. Myerson, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and the History of Economic Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(3), pages 1067-1082, September.
    4. Scott Gordon, 1982. "Why Did Marshall Transpose the Axes?," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 31-45, Jan-Mar.
    5. Reghinos D. Theocharis, 1983. "Early Developments in Mathematical Economics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, edition 0, number 978-1-349-04949-3, September.
    6. James W. Friedman, 2000. "The legacy of Augustin Cournot," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 37(1), pages 31-46.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James W. Friedman, 2000. "The legacy of Augustin Cournot," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 37(1), pages 31-46.
    2. Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Çakır, Metin & Nolan, James, 2015. "Revisiting Concentration in Food and Agricultural Supply Chains: The Welfare Implications of Market Power in a Complementary Input Sector," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-17, May.
    4. Nir Billfeld & Moshe Kim, 2024. "Context-dependent Causality (the Non-Nonotonic Case)," Papers 2404.05021, arXiv.org.
    5. repec:fip:fedrer:y:1984:i:sep/oct:p:13-22:n:v.70no.5 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Claude d'Aspremont & Rodolphe Dos Santos Ferreira & Louis-André Gérard-Varet, 2007. "Competition For Market Share Or For Market Size: Oligopolistic Equilibria With Varying Competitive Toughness," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(3), pages 761-784, August.
    7. Paul Levine & Ron Smith, 2000. "Arms Export Controls and Proliferation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(6), pages 885-895, December.
    8. Hecking, Harald & Panke, Timo, 2014. "Quantity-setting Oligopolies in Complementary Input Markets - the Case of Iron Ore and Coking Coal," EWI Working Papers 2014-6, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI).
    9. Gianfranco Gambarelli & Guillermo Owen, 2004. "The Coming of Game Theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-18, April.
    10. Cristiano Cantore & Vasco J. Gabriel & Paul Levine & Joseph Pearlman & Bo Yang, 2013. "The science and art of DSGE modelling: II – model comparisons, model validation, policy analysis and general discussion," Chapters, in: Nigar Hashimzade & Michael A. Thornton (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Empirical Macroeconomics, chapter 19, pages 441-463, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Brennan, Timothy J., 2000. "The Economics of Competition Policy: Recent Developments and Cautionary Notes in Antitrust and Regulation," Discussion Papers 10716, Resources for the Future.
    12. Fatih Karanfil, 2011. "Environmental regulation in the presence of unrecorded economy," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 126-127, pages 91-108.
    13. Matt Van Essen, 2013. "Regulating the Anticommons: Insights from Public‐Expenditure Theory," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(2), pages 523-539, October.
    14. Chang, Ming Chung & Lin, Yun-Chieh & Lin, Chiu Fen, 2012. "Comparing Cournot Duopoly And Monopoly With Asymmetric Differentiated Goods," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 53(2), pages 177-200, December.
    15. Elizabeth Hoffman & Matthew L. Spitzer, 2011. "The Enduring Power of Coase," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 63-76.
    16. Byung‐Cheol Kim & Jay Pil Choi, 2010. "Customer Information Sharing: Strategic Incentives and New Implications," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 403-433, June.
    17. Didier Laussel & Ngo Van Long, 2012. "Vertical Disintegration: A Dynamic Markovian Approach," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 745-771, September.
    18. Bhatti, Bilal Ahmad & Broadwater, Robert, 2019. "Energy trading in the distribution system using a non-model based game theoretic approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 253(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Arshad Ali Javed & Patrick T.I. Lam & Albert P.C. Chan, 2014. "Change negotiation in public-private partnership projects through output specifications: an experimental approach based on game theory," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 323-348, April.
    20. M. Keith Chen & Barry J. Nalebuff, 2006. "One-Way Essential Complements," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1588, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    21. Laurent Linnemer, 2022. "Doubling Back on Double Marginalization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 61(1), pages 1-19, August.

    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:kap:atlecj:v:31:y:2003:i:2:p:123-132. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.