IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/14825_10.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Market definition under attack: how relevant is the relevant market?

In: The Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law

Author

Listed:
  • Hila Nevo

Abstract

This book focuses on experiences with the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) of 2007 in China. It uses carefully-chosen case studies to examine how the competition authorities in China discuss cases and how they use economic reasoning in their decision-making process.

Suggested Citation

  • Hila Nevo, 2013. "Market definition under attack: how relevant is the relevant market?," Chapters, in: Michael Faure & Xinzhu Zhang (ed.), The Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law, chapter 10, pages 301-324, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:14825_10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781781003237.00021.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Werden, Gregory J., 1997. "Simulating The Effects Of Differentiated Products Mergers: A Practitioners' Guide," Strategy and Policy in the Food System: Emerging Issues, June 20-21, 1996, Washington, D.C. 25942, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    2. Roy J. Epstein & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 2002. "Merger Simulation: A Simplified Approach with New Applications," Industrial Organization 0201002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Ivaldi, Marc & Verboven, Frank, 2005. "Quantifying the effects from horizontal mergers in European competition policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 669-691, December.
    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. Oliver Budzinski & Isabel Ruhmer, 2010. "Merger Simulation In Competition Policy: A Survey," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 277-319.
    2. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    3. Marie Goppelsroeder & Maarten Pieter Schinkel & Jan Tuinstra, 2008. "Quantifying The Scope For Efficiency Defense In Merger Control: The Werden‐Froeb‐Index," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 778-808, December.
    4. Mathiesen, Lars & Nilsen, Øivind Anti & Sørgard, Lars, 2011. "Merger simulations with observed diversion ratios," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 83-91, June.
    5. Oliver Budzinski & Arndt Christiansen, 2007. "The Oracle/PeopleSoft Case: Unilateral Effects, Simulation Models and Econometrics in Contemporary Merger Control," Marburg Working Papers on Economics 200702, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    6. Slade, Margaret E., 2006. "Merger Simulations of Unilateral Effects : What Can We Learn from the UK Brewing Industry?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 767, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    7. Jerome Foncel & Marc Ivaldi & Jrisy Motis, 2008. "An Econometric Workbench for Comparing the Substantive and Dominance Tests in Horizontal Merger Analysis," Working Papers 0833, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    8. Oliver Budzinski, 2009. "Modern Industrial Economics and Competition Policy: Open Problems and Possible Limits," Working Papers 93/09, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    9. Damien Neven & Hans Zenger, 2008. "Ex Post Evaluation of Enforcement: A Principal-Agent Perspective," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 477-490, December.
    10. Oliver Budzinski, 2008. "A Note on Competing Merger Simulation Models in Antitrust Cases: Can the Best Be Identified?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200803, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    11. Gregory Swinand & Hugh Hennessy, 2014. "Estimating postal demand elasticities using the PCAIDS method," Chapters, in: Michael A. Crew & Timothy J. J. Brennan (ed.), The Role of the Postal and Delivery Sector in a Digital Age, chapter 5, pages 65-74, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    13. Pereira, Pedro & Ribeiro, Tiago, 2011. "The impact on broadband access to the Internet of the dual ownership of telephone and cable networks," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 283-293, March.
    14. Ivaldi, Marc & Lörincz, Szabolcs, 2005. "A Full Equilibrium Relevant Market Test: Application to Computer Servers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4917, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Elpiniki Bakaouka & Marc Escrihuela-Villar & Walter Ferrarese, 2022. "Endogenous Horizontal Mergers in Homogeneous Goods Industries with Bertrand Competition," DEA Working Papers 96, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    16. Marc Ivaldi & Catherine Muller-Vibes, 2018. "The differentiated effect of advertising on readership: evidence from a two-sided market approach," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 363-376, September.
    17. Céline Bonnet & Pierre Dubois, 2010. "Inference on vertical contracts between manufacturers and retailers allowing for nonlinear pricing and resale price maintenance," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 139-164, March.
    18. Sven Heim & Kai Hüschelrath & Ulrich Laitenberger, 2016. "The Duration of the EC Merger Control Process: Determinants and the Impact of the 2004 Merger Regulation Reform," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 37-62, February.
    19. Robert M. Adams & Kenneth P. Brevoort & Elizabeth K. Kiser, 2007. "Who Competes With Whom? The Case Of Depository Institutions," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 141-167, March.
    20. Ivaldi, Marc & Motis, Jrissy, 2007. "Mergers as Auctions," IDEI Working Papers 461, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.

    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:elg:eechap:14825_10. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.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.