Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Modern Industrial Economics and Competition Policy: Open Problems and Possible Limits

Contents:

Author Info

  • Oliver Budzinski

    ()
    (Department of Environmental and Business Economics, University of Southern Denmark)

Abstract

Naturally, competition policy is based on competition economics made applicable in terms of law and its enforcement. Within the different branches of competition economics, modern industrial economics, or more precisely game-theoretic oligopoly theory, has become the dominating paradigm both in the U.S. (since the 1990s Post-Chicago movement) and in the EU (so-called more economic approach in the 2000s). This contribution reviews the state of the art in antitrust-oriented modern industrial economics and, in particular, critically discusses open questions and possible limits of basing antitrust on modern industrial economics. In doing so, it provides some hints how to escape current enforcement problems in industrial economics-based competition policy on both sides of the Atlantic. In particular, the paper advocates a change of the way modern industrial economics is used in competition policy: instead of more and more case-by-cases analyses, the insights from modern industrial economics should be used to design better competition rules. I like to thank the co-panelists Laurence Idot, Michele Polo and Daniel Rubin-feld as well as all the participants of the conference “Foundations and Limita-tions of an Economic Approach to Competition Law” (Max-Planck-Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law; Munich 12th / 13th March 2009), Arndt Christiansen and Nadine Lindstädt for very valuable and helpful comments.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.sdu.dk/~/media/Files/Om_SDU/Institutter/Miljo/ime/wp/budzinski93.ashx
File Function: First version, 2009-06
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics in its series Working Papers with number 93/09.

as in new window
Length: 58 pages
Date of creation: Jun 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:sdk:wpaper:93

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Niels Bohrs Vej 9, 6700 Esbjerg
Phone: (+45) 6550 1000
Fax: (+45) 6550 1091
Email:
Web page: http://www.sam.sdu.dk/ime
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: competition policy; antitrust; modern industrial economics; more economic approach; merger control;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Richard A. Posner, 1999. "The Law and Economics of the Economic Expert Witness," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 91-99, Spring.
  2. repec:reg:rpubli:109 is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Duso, Tomaso & Gugler, Klaus & Yurtoglu, Burcin B., 2011. "How effective is European merger control?," DICE Discussion Papers 15, Heinrich‐Heine‐Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
  4. Aigner, Gisela & Budzinski, Oliver & Christiansen, Arndt, 2007. "The analysis of coordinated effects in EU merger control: where do we stand after Sony/BMG and Impala?," IBES Diskussionsbeiträge 156, University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty for Economics and Business Administration.
  5. Richard J. Gilbert & Michael L. Katz, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft," Industrial Organization, EconWPA 0106001, EconWPA.
  6. Stephen Breyer, 2009. "Economic Reasoning and Judicial Review," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(535), pages F123-F135, 02.
  7. Budzinski, Oliver, 2007. "Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics," IBES Diskussionsbeiträge 158, University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty for Economics and Business Administration.
  8. Schmalensee, Richard, 1982. "Antitrust and the New Industrial Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(2), pages 24-28, May.
  9. Seldeslachts, Jo & Clougherty, Joseph A. & Barros, Pedro Pita, 2007. "Remedy for Now but Prohibit for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 218, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  10. Oliver Budzinski & Arndt Christiansen, 2007. "The Oracle/PeopleSoft Case: Unilateral Effects, Simulation Models and Econometrics in Contemporary Merger Control," Marburg Working Papers on Economics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung) 200702, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
  11. Schmalensee, Richard, 1987. "Horizontal Merger Policy: Problems and Changes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 41-54, Fall.
  12. Christoph Engel, 2006. "Competition as a Socially Desirable Dilemma," Working Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2006_12, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
  13. Becker, Gary S, 1983. "A Theory of Competition among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400, August.
  14. Oliver Budzinski & Jürgen-Peter Kretschmer, 2010. "Advertised Meeting-the-Competition Clauses: Collusion Instead of Price Discrimination," Working Papers, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics 99/10, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics.
  15. David S. Evans & Albert L. Nichols & Richard Schmalensee, 2005. "U.S. v. Microsoft: Did Consumers Win?," NBER Working Papers 11727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Aaron S. Edlin and Eric R. Emch., 1997. "The Welfare Losses from Price Matching Policies," Economics Working Papers, University of California at Berkeley 97-257, University of California at Berkeley.
  17. Kovacic, William E. & Shapiro, Carl, 1999. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley qt5zb4g387, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  18. Philip Crooke & Luke Froeb & Steven Tschantz & Gregory Werden, 1999. "Effects of Assumed Demand Form on Simulated Postmerger Equilibria," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 205-217, November.
  19. Oliver Budzinski & Isabel Ruhmer, 2008. "Merger Simulation in Competition Policy: A Survey," MAGKS Papers on Economics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung) 200807, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
  20. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919, 9.
  21. Dennis W. Carlton, 2007. "Does Antitrust Need to be Modernized?," EAG Discussions Papers, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division 200703, Department of Justice, Antitrust Division.
  22. Farrell, Joseph & Katz, Michael L, 2006. "The Economics of Welfare Standards in Antitrust," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley qt1tw2d426, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
  23. Matthew Weinberg, 2007. "The Price Effects of Horizontal Mergers: A Survey," Working Papers 62, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
  24. Oliver Budzinski, 2008. "A Note on Competing Merger Simulation Models in Antitrust Cases: Can the Best Be Identified?," MAGKS Papers on Economics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung) 200803, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
  25. Ivaldi, Marc & Verboven, Frank, 2005. "Quantifying the effects from horizontal mergers in European competition policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 669-691, December.
  26. Tenn, Steven & Froeb, Luke & Tschantz, Steven, 2010. "Mergers when firms compete by choosing both price and promotion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 695-707, November.
  27. Wernhard Möschel, 2001. "The Proper Scope of Government Viewed from an Ordoliberal Perspective: The Example of Competition Policy," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 157(1), pages 3-, March.
  28. repec:reg:wpaper:443 is not listed on IDEAS
  29. Audretsch, David B. & Baumol, William J. & Burke, Andrew E., 2001. "Competition policy in dynamic markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 613-634, April.
  30. Capps Jr., Oral & Church, Jeffrey & Alan Love, H., 2003. "Specification issues and confidence intervals in unilateral price effects analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 3-31, March.
  31. Ivaldi, Marc & Verboven, Frank, 2005. "Quantifying the effects from horizontal mergers: Comments on the underlying assumptions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 699-702, December.
  32. Jean-Luc Gaffard & Michel Quéré, 2006. "What’s the aim for competition policy: optimizing market structure or encouraging innovative behaviors?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 175-187, April.
  33. Lars Peter Hansen & James J. Heckman, 1996. "The Empirical Foundations of Calibration," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 87-104, Winter.
  34. Orley Ashenfelter & Daniel Hosken, 2008. "The Effect of Mergers on Consumer Prices: Evidence from Five Selected Case Studies," NBER Working Papers 13859, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  35. Arndt Christiansen and Wolfgang Kerber & Wolfgang Kerber, 2006. "Competition Policy with Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead of "Per se Rules vs. Rule of Reason"," Marburg Working Papers on Economics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung) 200606, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
  36. Parret, L.Y.J.M., 2008. "Sense and nonsense of rules on proof in cartel cases," Discussion Paper, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center 2008-004, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
  37. Gregory J. WERDEN, 1997. "Simulating The Effects Of Differentiated Products Mergers: A Practitioners' Guide," Department of Resource Economics Regional Research Project 967, University of Massachusetts.
  38. repec:reg:wpaper:109 is not listed on IDEAS
  39. Hausman, Jerry A. & Leonard, Gregory K., 2005. "Using merger simulation models: Testing the underlying assumptions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 693-698, December.
  40. Gregory Werden, 2001. "Microsoft's Pricing of Windows and the Economics of Derived Demand Monopoly," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 257-262, May.
  41. Michael J. Mandel, 1999. "Going for the Gold: Economists as Expert Witnesses," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 113-120, Spring.
  42. repec:reg:rpubli:443 is not listed on IDEAS
  43. Damien J. Neven, 2006. "Competition economics and antitrust in Europe," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 21(48), pages 741-791, October.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Empirische Ex-Post Evaluation von wettbewerbspolitischen Entscheidungen: Methodische Anmerkungen," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 69, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  2. Oliver Budzinski, 2010. "An Institutional Analysis of the Enforcement Problems in Merger Control," Working Papers, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics 101/10, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics.
  3. Budzinski, Oliver & Haji Ali Beigi, Maryam, 2013. "Competition policy agendas for industrializing countries," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 81, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  4. Budzinski, Oliver & Kuchinke, Björn A., 2012. "Deal or no deal? Consensual arrangements as an instrument of European competition policy," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 76, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  5. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Impact evaluation of merger control decisions," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 75, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
  6. Oliver Budzinski, 2011. "Impact Evaluation of Merger Decisions," Working Papers, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics 112/11, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics.
  7. Budzinski, Oliver, 2012. "Würde eine unabhängige europäische Wettbewerbsbehörde eine bessere Wettbewerbspolitik machen?," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 78, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sdk:wpaper:93. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ulla H. Oehlenschläger).

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.