IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/trf/wpaper/497.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A simple way to identify the degree of collusion under proportional reduction

Author

Listed:
  • Shcherbakov, Oleksandr
  • Wakamori, Naoki

Abstract

Proportional reduction is a common cartel practice, in which cartel members reduce their output by the same percentage. We develop a simple method to quantify this reduction relative to a benchmark market equilibrium scenario. Our measure is continuous, has a simple interpretation as the “degree of collusion" and nests the earlier models in the existing literature. More importantly, by exploiting firms ex post heterogeneity and optimality conditions, Corts (1999) critique can be addressed by estimating time-varying degree of industry monopolization from a short panel of firm-level observations. We illustrate the method in Monte-Carlo simulations and in application to the data from the Joint Executive Committee railroad cartel.

Suggested Citation

  • Shcherbakov, Oleksandr & Wakamori, Naoki, 2015. "A simple way to identify the degree of collusion under proportional reduction," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 497, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    • Handle: RePEc:trf:wpaper:497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/24505/1/497.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmalensee, Richard, 1987. "Competitive advantage and collusive optima," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 351-367.
    2. Green, Edward J & Porter, Robert H, 1984. "Noncooperative Collusion under Imperfect Price Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 87-100, January.
    3. Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2000. "A Dynamic Oligopoly with Collusion and Price Wars," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 207-236, Summer.
    4. Catherine D. Wolfram, 1999. "Measuring Duopoly Power in the British Electricity Spot Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 805-826, September.
    5. Bresnahan, Timothy F., 1982. "The oligopoly solution concept is identified," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 87-92.
    6. Rotemberg, Julio J & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "A Supergame-Theoretic Model of Price Wars during Booms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(3), pages 390-407, June.
    7. David Genesove & Wallace P. Mullin, 1998. "Testing Static Oligopoly Models: Conduct and Cost in the Sugar Industry, 1890-1914," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 355-377, Summer.
    8. Robert H. Porter, 1983. "A Study of Cartel Stability: The Joint Executive Committee, 1880-1886," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 301-314, Autumn.
    9. Lau, Lawrence J., 1982. "On identifying the degree of competitiveness from industry price and output data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 93-99.
    10. Glenn Ellison, 1994. "Theories of Cartel Stability and the Joint Executive Committee," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 37-57, Spring.
    11. Steven Puller, 2009. "Estimation of competitive conduct when firms are efficiently colluding: addressing the Corts critique," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(15), pages 1497-1500.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Oleksandr Shcherbakov & Naoki Wakamori, 2017. "Identifying the Degree of Collusion Under Proportional Reduction," Staff Working Papers 17-51, Bank of Canada.
    2. Luis Orea & Jevgenijs Steinbuks, 2018. "Estimating Market Power In Homogenous Product Markets Using A Composed Error Model: Application To The California Electricity Market," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(2), pages 1296-1321, April.
    3. Connor, John M., 2003. "Private International Cartels: Effectiveness, Welfare, And Anticartel Enforcement," Staff Papers 28645, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    4. Richard Schmalensee, 2012. "“On a Level with Dentists?” Reflections on the Evolution of Industrial Organization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(3), pages 157-179, November.
    5. Coccorese, Paolo & Girardone, Claudia & Shaffer, Sherrill, 2021. "What affects bank market power in the euro area? A country-level structural model approach," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    6. Adam Rosen, 2007. "Identification and estimation of firms' marginal cost functions with incomplete knowledge of strategic behavior," CeMMAP working papers CWP03/07, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    7. Dae‐Wook Kim & Christopher R. Knittel, 2006. "Biases In Static Oligopoly Models? Evidence From The California Electricity Market," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 451-470, December.
    8. Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2000. "A Dynamic Oligopoly with Collusion and Price Wars," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 207-236, Summer.
    9. Carmen García & Joan Ramon Borrell & José Manuel Ordóñez-de-Haro & Juan Luis Jiménez, 2022. "Managers’ expectations, business cycles and cartels’ life cycle," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 451-484, June.
    10. Corts, Kenneth S., 1998. "Conduct parameters and the measurement of market power," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 227-250, November.
    11. Alberto Salvo, 2004. "Inferring Conduct under the Threat of Entry: The Case of the Brazilian Cement Industry," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 38, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    12. Porter, Robert H., 2020. "Mergers and coordinated effects," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    13. K. Sudhir & Pradeep K. Chintagunta & Vrinda Kadiyali, 2005. "Time-Varying Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 96-109, September.
    14. Ari Hyytinen & Frode Steen & Otto Toivanen, 2018. "Cartels Uncovered," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 190-222, November.
    15. Kamerschen, David R. & Klein, Peter G. & Porter, David V., 2005. "Market structure in the US electricity industry: A long-term perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 731-751, September.
    16. Bing Xu & Adrian Van Rixtel & Michiel Van Leuvensteijn, 2013. "Measuring bank competition in China: a comparison of new versus conventional approaches applied to loan markets," BIS Working Papers 422, Bank for International Settlements.
    17. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978.
    18. Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2000. "A Dynamic Oligopoly with Collusion and Price Wars," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 207-236, Summer.
    19. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    20. Juan‐Pablo Montero & Juan Ignacio Guzman, 2010. "Output‐Expanding Collusion In The Presence Of A Competitive Fringe," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 106-126, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cartel; Proportional Reduction; Degree of collusion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • C36 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation

    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:trf:wpaper:497. 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: Tamilla Benkelberg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.