Innovation and the opportunity cost of monopoly
AbstractInnovation enables monopolists to lower their costs, expand their outputs, and reduce their prices. It is conventional to conclude that social welfare unambiguously increases as a result. Assuming linear demand and marginal cost, this paper shows, however, that innovation raises the opportunity cost of monopoly: as a firm enjoying market power becomes more efficient, greater amounts of surplus are sacrificed by consumers because of the progressive monopolist's failure to produce the new, larger competitive output. Innovation, in other words, increases the social value of competition by raising the deadweight cost of monopoly. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Managerial and Decision Economics.
Volume (Year): 29 (2008)
Issue (Month): 8 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1975. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 1-37, March.
- Reinganum, Jennifer R., .
"Innovation and Industry Evolution,"
426, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Gerosky, P A & Pomroy, R, 1990. "Innovation and the Evolution of Market Structure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 299-314, March.
- Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Paul Romer, 1991.
"Endogenous Technological Change,"
NBER Working Papers
3210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jorde, Thomas M & Teece, David J, 1990. "Innovation and Cooperation: Implications for Competition and Antitrust," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 75-96, Summer.
- Dasgupta, Partha & Gilbert, Richard J & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1982. "Invention and Innovation under Alternative Market Structures: The Case of Natural Resources," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(4), pages 567-82, October.
- Jonathan B. Baker, 1999. "Policy Watch: Developments in Antitrust Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 181-194, Winter.
- Stephen L. Parente & Edward C. Prescott, 1997.
"Monopoly rights: a barrier to riches,"
236, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Scitovsky, Tibor, 1990. "The Benefits of Asymmetric Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 135-48, Winter.
- Dilorenzo, Thomas J., 1985. "The origins of antitrust: An interest-group perspective," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 73-90, June.
- Jackson, Raymond, 1970. "The Consideration of Economies in Merger Cases," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(4), pages 439-47, October.
- Romano, Richard E, 1987. "A Note on Market Structure and Innovation When Inventors Can Enter," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 353-58, March.
- Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-86, June.
- Brodley, Joseph F, 1990. "Antitrust Law and Innovation Cooperation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 97-112, Summer.
- DePrano, Michael E & Nugent, Jeffrey B, 1969. "Economies as an Antitrust Defense: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(5), pages 947-53, December.
- Blundell, Richard & Griffith, Rachel & van Reenen, John, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 529-54, July.
- Federico Etro, 2004. "Innovation by leaders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 281-303, 04.
- Swan, Peter L, 1970. "Market Structure and Technological Progress: The Influence of Monopoly on Product Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 627-38, November.
- Williamson, Oliver E, 1969. "Economies as an Antitrust Defense: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(5), pages 954-59, December.
- Elvio Accinelli & Leonardo Tenorio, 2012. "Monopolios naturales y tecnología," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(1), pages 99-115, May.
- Federico Etro, 2006. "Market Leaders and Industrial Policy," Working Papers 103, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2006.
- Shuntian Yao & Lydia L. Gan, 2006. "The Welfare Effects of Monopoly Innovation," Economic Growth centre Working Paper Series 0609, Nanyang Technolgical University, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Economic Growth centre.
- Yao, Shuntian & Gan, Lydia, 2010. "Monopoly innovation and welfare effects," Economics Discussion Papers 2010-10, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.