Designing Antitrust Rules for Assessing Unilateral Practices: A Neo-Chicago Approach
AbstractThis essay describes an approach for designing antitrust rules for assessing whether firms have engaged in anticompetitive unilateral practices that is based in part on the error-cost framework pioneered by Judge Easterbrook. We focus particularly on the role of economic theory and evidence in forming presumptions about the likelihood that unilateral business practices reduce welfare and on the implications of this role for the kinds of research that economists need to conduct concerning unilateral business practices. We then apply this approach to tying. Our approach towards designing legal rules proceeds in two steps. First, economic theory and empirical evidence are used to formulate explicitly a set of presumptions regarding the cost and likelihood of errors resulting from condemning welfare-increasing business practices or condoning welfare-reducing ones. Second, based on those presumptions, a legal rule that minimizes the cost of errors is selected. We will refer to this as a neo-Chicago approach, since it accepts the fundamental tenet of Chicago thinking that legal rules and legal outcomes can and should be assessed based on their efficiency properties, while also incorporating the learning of the Chicago and post-Chicago literatures in designing these rules.
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 InfoPaper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 4625.
Date of creation: Sep 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
Other versions of this item:
- David S. Evans & A. Jorge Padilla, 2004. "Designing Antitrust Rules For Assessing Unilateral Practices: A Neo-Chicago Approach," Working Papers wp2004_0417, CEMFI.
- Evans, David S. & Padilla, Jorge, 2004. "Designing Antitrust Rules for Assessing Unilateral Practices: A Neo-Chicago Approach," Working paper 336, Regulation2point0.
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
- L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Juan-José Ganuza & Gerard Llobet & Beatriz Domínguez, 2009.
"R& D in the Pharmaceutical Industry: A World of Small Innovations,"
INFORMS, vol. 55(4), pages 539-551, April.
- Beatriz Domínguez & Juan José Ganuza & Gerard Llobet, 2005. "R&D in the pharmaceutical industry: A world of small innovations," Economics Working Papers 936, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Beatriz Dominguez & Juan-José Ganuza & Gerard Llobet, 2006. "R&D In The Pharmaceutical Industry: A World Of Small Innovation," Working Papers wp2006_0601, CEMFI.
- David S. Evans & Michael Salinger, 2005. "Curing Sinus Headaches and Tying Law: An Empirical Analysis of Bundling Decongestants and Pain Relievers," CESifo Working Paper Series 1519, CESifo Group Munich.
- Díaz-Giménez, Javier & Pijoan-Mas, Josep, 2006.
"Flat Tax Reforms in the US: A Boon for the Income Poor,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
5812, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Javier Diaz-Gimenez & Josep Pijoan-Mas, 2006. "Flat Tax Reforms in the U.S.: a Boon for the Income Poor," Computing in Economics and Finance 2006 400, Society for Computational Economics.
- Javier Díaz-Giménez & Josep Pijoan-Mas, 2006. "Flat Tax Reforms In The U.S.: A Boon For The Income Poor," Working Papers wp2006_0611, CEMFI.
- Jose Ceron & Javier Suarez, 2006.
"Hot And Cold Housing Markets: International Evidence,"
- Ceron, Jose A. & Suarez, Javier, 2006. "Hot and Cold Housing Markets: International Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 5411, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- repec:hal:journl:halshs-00177629 is not listed on IDEAS
- Abel Elizalde & Rafael Repullo, 2004.
"Economic And Regulatory Capital. What Is The Difference?,"
- Elizalde, Abel & Repullo, Rafael, 2004. "Economic and Regulatory Capital: What is the Difference?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4770, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Aleix Calveras & Juan José Ganuza & Gerard Llobet, 2005.
"Regulation and opportunism: How much activism do we need?,"
Economics Working Papers
935, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Aleix Calveras & Juan-José Ganuza & Gerard Llobet, 2005. "Regulation And Opportunism: How Much Activism Do We Need?," Working Papers wp2005_0508, CEMFI.
- Yannis Katsoulacos & David Ulph, 2008. "On Optimal Legal Standards for Competition Policy: A General Welfare-Based Analysis," Discussion Paper Series, Department of Economics 200812, Department of Economics, University of St. Andrews.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
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.