Adam Smith on Monopoly Theory. Making good a lacuna
AbstractThe paper analyzes Adam Smith’s views on monopoly focusing on Book IV and V of The Wealth of Nations and argues that Smith has left his analysis of monopoly in an embryonic form while the majority of scholars have assessed it starting from premises different from those, actually though implicitly, used by Smith to approach this subject. We show that Smith makes use of the word ‘monopoly’ to refer to a heterogeneous collection of market outcomes, besides that of a single seller market, and that Smith’s account of monopolists’ behavior is richer than that provided by later monopoly theorists.
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 InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 38411.
Date of creation: 27 Apr 2012
Date of revision:
Competition; Monopoly; Classical Economics; Adam Smith;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
- B31 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals - - - Individuals
- B12 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Classical (includes Adam Smith)
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
- D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Monopoly
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2012-05-08 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2012-05-08 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-HIS-2012-05-08 (Business, Economic & Financial History)
- NEP-HME-2012-05-08 (Heterodox Microeconomics)
- NEP-HPE-2012-05-08 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
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.:
- Garegnani, Pierangelo, 1983. "The Classical Theory of Wages and the Role of Demand Schedules in the Determination of Relative Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 309-13, May.
- Kurz,Heinz D. & Salvadori,Neri, 1995.
"Theory of Production,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521443258, October.
- Manuela Mosca, 2008. "On the origins of the concept of natural monopoly: Economies of scale and competition," European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 317-353.
- de Roover, Raymond, 1958. "The Concept of the Just Price: Theory and Economic Policy," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(04), pages 418-434, December.
- Gary Anderson & Robert D. Tollison, 1983. "Apologiae for Chartered Monopolies in Foreign Trade, 1600–1800," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 549-566, Winter.
- Ekelund Jr., Robert B., 1999. "Secret Origins of Modern Microeconomics," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226199993, January.
- Stigler, George J, 1982. "The Economists and the Problem of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(2), pages 1-11, May.
- Anderson, Gary M & Tollison, Robert D, 1982. "Adam Smith's Analysis of Joint-Stock Companies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(6), pages 1237-56, December.
- Salvadori, Neri & Signorino, Rodolfo, 2011. "Competition," MPRA Paper 38387, University Library of Munich, Germany.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.