IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lam/wpaper/12-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Consumer Information Curtails Market Power in the Funeral Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Thierry BLAYAC
  • Patrice BOUGETTE
  • Christian MONTET

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to show, based on the case of the French market, that consumer perception of different funeral service offers, along with new entry in a special storing facility service (“chambre funéraire”), can be sufficient to impose competitive pressures on the various suppliers, including the former monopolist. With a discrete choice experiment implemented in Lyon, France, we find evidence that, contrary to widely shared beliefs about this specific market, demand for funeral services seems characterized by relatively high price elasticities, at least as soon as consumers are fully informed about the opportunities open to them in this market. Consumer behavior has actually changed in favor of a better assessment of the different possibilities of services supplied and of their relative price. We then implement simulations in local markets and show that, with good consumer information, the market power of the supposedly dominant firm is much less important than it is generally believed. Furthermore, simulations stress the procompetitive effects of setting up a new storing facility by any businesses. We finally show that, if some improvements can still be brought to the functioning of this market, they should come from a better regulation of consumer information and of the entry of firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Thierry BLAYAC & Patrice BOUGETTE & Christian MONTET, 2012. "How Consumer Information Curtails Market Power in the Funeral Industry," Working Papers 12-12, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Apr 2012.
  • Handle: RePEc:lam:wpaper:12-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lameta.univ-montp1.fr/Documents/DR2012-12.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2012
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919.
    2. Lori Parcel, 2008. "Stiff Competition: Vertical Relationships in Cremation Services," Discussion Papers 07-041, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    3. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    4. Harrington, David E & Krynski, Kathy J, 2002. "The Effect of State Funeral Regulations on Cremations Rates: Testing for Demand Inducement in Funeral Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 199-225, April.
    5. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    6. David E. Harrington, 2007. "Markets: Preserving Funeral Markets with Ready-to-Embalm Laws," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 201-216, Fall.
    7. Javier Elizalde, 2012. "A theoretical approach to market definition analysis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 449-475, December.
    8. Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "Understanding Regulation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 11(4), pages 439-451, September.
    9. Hensher, David A, 1986. "Sequential and Full Information Maximum Likelihood Estimation of a Nested Logit Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 657-667, November.
    10. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    11. Judith A. Chevalier & Fiona M. Scott Morton, 2008. "State Casket Sales Restrictions: A Pointless Undertaking?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(1), pages 1-23, February.
    12. Louviere, Jordan J & Hensher, David A, 1983. "Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(3), pages 348-361, December.
    13. Ekelund, Robert B, Jr & Ford, George S, 1997. "Nineteenth Century Urban Market Failure?: Chadwick on Funeral Industry Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 27-51, July.
    14. Paul W. Dobson & Michael Waterson, 2005. "Chain‐Store Pricing Across Local Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 93-119, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Blayac, Thierry & Bougette, Patrice, 2017. "Should I go by bus? The liberalization of the long-distance bus industry in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 50-62.

    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. repec:inr:wpaper:248291 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:inr:wpaper:248290 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Harrington, David, 2018. "Constraining Rivals: The Effect of State-Mandated Facility Requirements on the Locations and Sizes of Funeral Homes," Working Papers 06958, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    4. Mariel, Petr & Ayala, Amaya de & Hoyos, David & Abdullah, Sabah, 2013. "Selecting random parameters in discrete choice experiment for environmental valuation: A simulation experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 44-57.
    5. Daniel J. Smith & Noah J. Trudeau, 2019. "The Undertaker’s Cut: Challenging the Rational Basis for Casket Licensure," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 34(Summer 20), pages 23-41.
    6. Jerry Ellig, 2015. "State funeral regulations: inside the black box," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 97-123, August.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Parsons, George R. & Hidrue, Michael K. & Kempton, Willett & Gardner, Meryl P., 2014. "Willingness to pay for vehicle-to-grid (V2G) electric vehicles and their contract terms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 313-324.
    9. Gary Madden & Michael Simpson & Scott Savage, 2002. "Broadband Delivered Entertainment Services: Forecasting Australian Subscription Intentions," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 78(243), pages 422-432, December.
    10. Alison Cathles & David E. Harrington & Kathy Krynski, 2010. "The Gender Gap in Funeral Directors: Burying Women with Ready‐to‐Embalm Laws?," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 48(4), pages 688-705, December.
    11. Takanori Ida & Toshifumi Kuroda, 2009. "Discrete choice model analysis of mobile telephone service demand in Japan," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 65-80, February.
    12. Achtnicht, Martin, 2011. "Do environmental benefits matter? Evidence from a choice experiment among house owners in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2191-2200, September.
    13. David E. Harrington & Jaret Treber, 2020. "Constraining Competition With State Mandated Facility Requirements," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(4), pages 659-674, October.
    14. Tin Cheuk Leung, 2013. "What Is the True Loss Due to Piracy? Evidence from Microsoft Office in Hong Kong," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 1018-1029, July.
    15. Han-Shen Chen & Chu-Wei Chen, 2019. "Economic Valuation of Green Island, Taiwan: A Choice Experiment Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren Bøye Olsen & Suzanne E. Vedel & John Kinyuru & Kennedy O. Pambo, 2016. "Integrating sensory evaluations in incentivized discrete choice experiments to assess consumer demand for cricket flour buns in Kenya," IFRO Working Paper 2016/02, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    17. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    18. Barr, Rhona F. & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Investigating fishers' preferences for the design of marine Payments for Environmental Services schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 91-103.
    19. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Siikamki, Juha, 2001. "Valuing Benefits of Finnish Forest Biodiversity Conservation: Fixed and Random Parameter Logit Models for Pooled Contingent Valuation and Contingent Rating/Ranking Survey Data," Western Region Archives 321696, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    21. Basu, Debasis & Hunt, John Douglas, 2012. "Valuing of attributes influencing the attractiveness of suburban train service in Mumbai city: A stated preference approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1465-1476.
    22. Arouna, Aminou & Adegbola, Patrice Y. & Raphael, Babatunde & Diagne, Aliou, 2015. "Contract farming preferences by smallholder rice producers in Africa: a stated choice model using mixed logic," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 210957, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law
    • L43 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Legal Monopolies and Regulation or Deregulation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lam:wpaper:12-12. 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: Patricia Modat (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lamplfr.html .

    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.