Optimality of Entry Regulation under Incomplete Information
The lack of complete information of the government has been considered as a barrier to the optimal regulation, as it is well-known in price regulations literature. However, it is not true for the entry regulation: This paper shows that the performance of the entry regulation under incomplete information can be better than that under complete information. Under incomplete information, the incumbent firm would deviate from the monopoly behavior to signal itself as an efficient type and to trigger entry regulation which prevents excess entry in case that the incumbent is efficient. As a result, social welfare can be even higher than under complete information, since not only the optimal post-entry market structure is achieved as under complete information but the pre-entry price is even lower than that under complete information.
Volume (Year): 51 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Phone: +81-42-580-8000|
Web page: http://www.econ.hit-u.ac.jp/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- In-Koo Cho & David M. Kreps, 1997.
"Signaling Games and Stable Equilibria,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
896, David K. Levine.
- Kotaro Suzumura & Kazuharu Kiyono, 1987. "Entry Barriers and Economic Welfare," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 157-167.
- Jean Tirole & Jean-Jaques Laffont, 1985.
"Using Cost Observation to Regulate Firms,"
368, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Paul Milgrom & John Roberts, 1998.
"Limit Pricing and Entry Under Incomplete Information: An Equilibrium Analysis,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
245, David K. Levine.
- Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1982. "Limit Pricing and Entry under Incomplete Information: An Equilibrium Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 443-59, March.
- N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
- George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
- Kim, Jaehong, 2003. "Limit Pricing Through Entry Regulation," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 44(1), pages 1-13, June.
- Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1994.
"The New Economics of Regulation Ten Years After,"
Econometric Society, vol. 62(3), pages 507-37, May.
- Schmidt, Klaus M, 1996.
"The Costs and Benefits of Privatization: An Incomplete Contracts Approach,"
Journal of Law, Economics and Organization,
Oxford University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, April.
- Schmidt, Klaus M., 1996. "The costs and benefits of privatization: An incomplete contracts approach," Munich Reprints in Economics 19773, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Michael Spence, 1973. "Job Market Signaling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 87(3), pages 355-374.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hit:hitjec:v:51:y:2010:i:2:p:43-58. 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: (Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.