This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

To protect in order to serve, adverse effects of leniency programs in view of industry asymmetry

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Leliefeld, Daniel (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie (Free University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics Sciences, Business Administration and Economitrics)
Motchenkova, Evgenia

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper studies the application of leniency programs. An analysis of the structure and design of leniency programs and existing literature raises a new question: Are leniency programs effective, in the sense that they deter cartels from formation, in asymmetrical markets? A game theoretical model, which allows for asymmetry and predatory pricing, is used to provide an answer. A leniency program does not always lead to a breach of trust. We find that, in certain industries, leniency programs are unable to break collusion. They may have the adverse effect in the sense that they strengthen cartel stability or may even lead to abuse of market power. A relatively large firm can use coercion to remove the option to a smaller firm to self-report to the authorities, thus removing the risk of prosecution posed by the program. In industries characterized by a certain degree of asymmetry in market shares and high sunk costs this is an even more likely scenario. In view of this limitation, a number of policy implications are provided in the paper. Policies aimed at the removal of the threat of retaliation need to be considered in order to convict and deter these kinds of cartels.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: ftp://zappa.ubvu.vu.nl/20070002.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics in its series Serie Research Memoranda with number 0002.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dgr:vuarem:2007-2

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.feweb.vu.nl

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (R. Dam).

Related research
Keywords: Antitrust policy; Antitrust Law; Self-reporting; Leniency programs;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
  1. Garoupa, Nuno, 2001. "Optimal magnitude and probability of fines," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1765-1771, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
  3. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1982. "Limit Pricing and Entry under Incomplete Information: An Equilibrium Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 443-59, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Blonski, Matthias & Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2003. "Prisoners' Other Dilemma," CEPR Discussion Papers 3856, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  5. Motchenkova, E., 2004. "Effects of leniency programs on cartel stability," Discussion Paper 020, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  6. Gary S. Becker, 1968. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76, pages 169. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Motchenkova, Evgenia & Laan, Rob van der, 2005. "Strictness of leniency programs and cartels of asymmetric firms," Discussion Paper 74, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
  8. Motchenkova, E. & Kort, P.M., 2004. "Analysis of the properties of current penalty schemes for violations of antitrust law," Discussion Paper 97, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS is also providing many rankings, for example of authors and institutions.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-9.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.