IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v41y2010i3p524-548.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition for scarce resources

Author

Listed:
  • Péter Eső
  • Volker Nocke
  • Lucy White

Abstract

We model a downstream industry where firms compete to buy capacity in an upstream market which allocates capacity efficiently. Although downstream firms have symmetric production technologies, we show that industry structure is symmetric only if capacity is sufficiently scarce. Otherwise it is asymmetric, with one large, “fat,” capacity‐hoarding firm and a fringe of smaller, “lean,” capacity‐constrained firms. As demand varies, the industry switches between symmetric and asymmetric phases, generating predictions for firm size and costs across the business cycle. Surprisingly, increasing available capacity can cause a reduction in output and consumer surplus by resulting in such a switch.

Suggested Citation

  • Péter Eső & Volker Nocke & Lucy White, 2010. "Competition for scarce resources," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 524-548, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:41:y:2010:i:3:p:524-548
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00110.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00110.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00110.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-1137, December.
    2. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2006. "License Auctions and Market Structure," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 371-396, June.
    3. Marie-Odile Yanelle, 1997. "Banking Competition and Market Efficiency," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(2), pages 215-239.
    4. David Besanko & Ulrich Doraszelski, 2004. "Capacity Dynamics and Endogenous Asymmetries in Firm Size," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 23-49, Spring.
    5. Riordan, Michael H, 1998. "Anticompetitive Vertical Integration by a Dominant Firm," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1232-1248, December.
    6. Lang, Larry H P & Stulz, Rene M, 1994. "Tobin's q, Corporate Diversification, and Firm Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1248-1280, December.
    7. Robert Wilson, 1979. "Auctions of Shares," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(4), pages 675-689.
    8. Jean-Pierre Benoit & Vijay Krishna, 1987. "Dynamic Duopoly: Prices and Quantities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 23-35.
    9. Maarten C.W. Janssen & Vladimir A. Karamychev, 2010. "Do auctions select efficient firms?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1319-1344, December.
    10. Saloner, Garth, 1987. "Cournot duopoly with two production periods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 183-187, June.
    11. Davidson, Carl & Deneckere, Raymond J, 1990. "Excess Capacity and Collusion," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 31(3), pages 521-541, August.
    12. Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2000. "Auctions with Downstream Interaction Among Buyers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 768-791, Winter.
    13. Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "A Primer on Foreclosure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 33, pages 2145-2220, Elsevier.
    14. Jehiel, Philippe & Moldovanu, Benny & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1996. "How (Not) to Sell Nuclear Weapons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 814-829, September.
    15. Ghemawat, Pankaj, 1990. "The snowball effect," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 335-351, September.
    16. Debora L. Spar, 2006. "Markets: Continuity and Change in the International Diamond Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(3), pages 195-208, Summer.
    17. J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), 1999. "Handbook of Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    18. Severin Borenstein, 1988. "On the Efficiency of Competitive Markets for Operating Licenses," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(2), pages 357-385.
    19. Péter Eső & Volker Nocke & Lucy White, 2010. "Competition for scarce resources," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 524-548, September.
    20. Rotemberg, Julio J. & Woodford, Michael, 1999. "The cyclical behavior of prices and costs," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 16, pages 1051-1135, Elsevier.
    21. Maggi, Giovanni, 1996. "Strategic Trade Policies with Endogenous Mode of Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 237-258, March.
    22. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
    23. Jonathan Cave & Stephen W. Salant, 1996. "Cartel Quotas under Majority Rule," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Agricultural Markets, pages 273-309, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    24. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    25. Dana James D. & Spier Kathryn E., 2007. "Entry Deterrence in a Duopoly Market," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-37, April.
    26. Jan Eeckhout & Boyan Jovanovic, 2002. "Knowledge Spillovers and Inequality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1290-1307, December.
    27. Krishna, Kala, 1993. "Auctions with Endogenous Valuations: The Persistence of Monopoly Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(1), pages 147-160, March.
    28. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    29. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(1), pages 1-31.
    30. Stahl, Dale O, II, 1988. "Bertrand Competition for Inputs and Walrasian Outcomes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 189-201, March.
    31. Michael A. Salinger, 1988. "Vertical Mergers and Market Foreclosure," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(2), pages 345-356.
    32. Severin Borenstein, 1991. "The Dominant-Firm Advantage in Multiproduct Industries: Evidence from the U. S. Airlines," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1237-1266.
    33. Severin Borenstein, 1989. "Hubs and High Fares: Dominance and Market Power in the U.S. Airline Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 344-365, Autumn.
    34. Volker Nocke, 2007. "Collusion and dynamic (under-) investment in quality," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(1), pages 227-249, March.
    35. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan, 1993. "Treasury Auction Bids and the Salomon Squeeze," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(4), pages 1403-1419, September.
    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. Huasheng Song & Ruqu Wang & Jianliang Ye, 2018. "Scarce human resources and equilibrium industry structure," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 99-119, June.
    2. Martimort, David & Pouyet, Jérôme, 2020. "Downstream mergers in vertically related markets with capacity constraints," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Pehr-Johan Norbäck & Lars Persson, 2009. "The Organization of the Innovation Industry: Entrepreneurs, Venture Capitalists, and Oligopolists," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(6), pages 1261-1290, December.
    4. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    5. Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2005. "Allocative and Informational Externalities in Auctions and Related Mechanisms," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000490, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Cherbonnier, Frédéric & Salant, David & Van Der Straeten, Karine, 2021. "Getting auctions for transportation capacity to roll," TSE Working Papers 21-1254, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Hongjun Zhong, 2002. "postbid market interaction and auction choice," Microeconomics 0210002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Onur A. Koska & Ilke Onur & Frank Stähler, 2018. "The scope of auctions in the presence of downstream interactions and information externalities," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 107-136, October.
    9. Rey, Patrick & Salant, David, 2017. "Allocating essential inputs," TSE Working Papers 17-820, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Jun 2019.
    10. Roberto Burguet & József Sákovics, 2017. "Competitive foreclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(4), pages 906-926, December.
    11. Maarten Janssen & Vladimir A. Karamychev & Emiel Maasland, 2009. "Auctions with Flexible Entry Fees," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-109/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Simon Loertscher & Leslie Marx, 2014. "An Oligopoly Model for Analyzing and Evaluating (Re)-Assignments of Spectrum Licenses," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(3), pages 245-273, November.
    13. Bourreau, Marc & Hombert, Johan & Pouyet, Jerome & Schutz, Nicolas, 2007. "Wholesale Markets in Telecommunications," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 0703, CEPREMAP.
    14. Kangsik Choi & DongJoon Lee, 2020. "Do firms choose overcapacity or undercapacity in a vertical structure?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(5), pages 839-847, July.
    15. Normann, Hans-Theo, 2009. "Vertical integration, raising rivals' costs and upstream collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 461-480, May.
    16. Jehiel, Phillipe & Moldovanu, Benny, 2001. "The European UMTS/IMT-2000 License Auctions," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 01-20, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    17. Zenger, Hans, 2013. "Competition and collusion with fixed output," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 259-261.
    18. Simon Loertscher & Markus Reisinger, 2014. "Market structure and the competitive effects of vertical integration," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(3), pages 471-494, September.
    19. Janssen, Maarten C.W. & Karamychev, Vladimir A., 2009. "Auctions, aftermarket competition, and risk attitudes," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 274-285, March.
    20. Maarten Janssen & Vladimir Karamychev, 2013. "Gaming in Combinatorial Clock Auctions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 13-027/VII, Tinbergen Institute, revised 16 Dec 2013.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance

    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:bla:randje:v:41:y:2010:i:3:p:524-548. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/randdus.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.