IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/egr/ejge00/v5i1p5-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of market power in economic growth: an analysis of the differences between EU and US competition policy theory, practice and outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Stephane Ciriani

    (Orange)

  • Marc Lebourges

    (Orange)

Abstract

The European Union has experienced weak economic performance over the past 15 years, compared to the United States. In order to restore investment, innovation, and therefore growth, the European Commission seeks to raise the level of static competition in all markets. The Commission’s economic policy is largely determined by its competition policy. This policy is derived from its doctrine on competition law, which regards the exercise of market power as a source of inefficiency and advocates that its effects should be banned. By contrast, the United States competition authorities, under the influence of the Chicago School, consider that market power is a necessary incentive to invest and a fair return on investment. Recent findings in economic growth theory, which state that increased competition intensity may harm endogenous innovation, provide a theoretical basis to support the United States approach and call for a review of European doctrine.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephane Ciriani & Marc Lebourges, 2016. "The role of market power in economic growth: an analysis of the differences between EU and US competition policy theory, practice and outcomes," European Journal of Government and Economics, Europa Grande, vol. 5(1), pages 5-28, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:egr:ejge00:v:5:i:1:p:5-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ejge.org/index.php/ejge/article/download/82/61
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-1037, October.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    3. Ivaldi, Marc & McCullough, Gerard, 2005. "Welfare Trade-Offs in US Rail Mergers," CEPR Discussion Papers 5000, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Frédéric Marty & Julien Pillot, 2011. "Pratiques de boycott ou refus d'accès à une facilité essentielle ? De Terminal Railroad à l'IRM d'Arcachon," Post-Print hal-00614944, HAL.
    5. Houngbonon, Georges Vivien & Jeanjean, Francois, 2014. "Is there a level of competition intensity that maximizes investment in the mobile telecommunications industry?," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101384, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    6. Diego A. Comin & Marti Mestieri, 2010. "The Intensive Margin of Technology Adoption," Harvard Business School Working Papers 11-026, Harvard Business School.
    7. Schmutzler, Armin, 2013. "Competition and investment — A unified approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 477-487.
    8. Philippe Askenazy & Christophe Cahn & Delphine Irac, 2008. "Competition, R&D and the cost of innovation," PSE Working Papers halshs-00586690, HAL.
    9. Paul Belleflamme & Cecilia Vergari, 2011. "Incentives To Innovate In Oligopolies," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 79(1), pages 6-28, January.
    10. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    11. Tobin, James, 1969. "A General Equilibrium Approach to Monetary Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 15-29, February.
    12. Jean-Baptiste Herbet, 2001. "Peut-on expliquer l'investissement à partir de ses déterminants traditionnels au cours de la décennie 90 ?," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 341(1), pages 85-106.
    13. Frédéric Marty & Julien Pillot, 2010. "Divergences transatlantiques en matière d'application de la théorie des facilités essentielles aux actifs immatériels," Revue d'économie industrielle, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 277-300.
    14. Bart van Ark & Mary O'Mahoney & Marcel P. Timmer, 2008. "The Productivity Gap between Europe and the United States: Trends and Causes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 25-44, Winter.
    15. Gilbert CETTE, 2015. "Which Role for ICTs as a Productivity Driver Over the Last Years and the Next Future?," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(100), pages 65-83, 4th quart.
    16. Frédéric Marty & Julien Pillot, 2009. "Les politiques de concurrence européenne et américaine face aux remises de fidélité accordées par une entreprise dominante : L’affaire Intel," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2009-26, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    17. Sacco, Dario & Schmutzler, Armin, 2011. "Is there a U-shaped relation between competition and investment?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 65-73, January.
    18. Paul M. Romer, 1994. "The Origins of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    antitrust; competition; endogenous growth; innovation; market power; market structure;

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:egr:ejge00:v:5:i:1:p:5-28. 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: (Europa Grande). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.