IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The welfare effects of entry: the role of the input market

  • Arijit Mukherjee


  • Udo Broll
  • Soma Mukherjee

In a successive Cournot oligopoly, we show the welfare effects of entry in the final goods market with no scale economies but with cost difference between the firms. If the input market is very concentrated, entry in the final goods market always increases welfare. If the input market is moderately concentrated, entry in the final goods market reduces welfare if the entrant is moderately cost inefficient than the incumbents. If the input market is highly competitive, entry in the final goods market reduces welfare if the entrant is very much cost inefficient than the incumbents. Hence, entry in the final goods market is more desirable under a concentrated input market. It follows from our analysis that entry increases the profits of the incumbent final goods producers if their marginal costs are sufficiently lower than the entrant’s marginal cost.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

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:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer in its journal Journal of Economics.

Volume (Year): 98 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 (December)
Pages: 189-201

in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:jeczfn:v:98:y:2009:i:3:p:189-201
DOI: 10.1007/s00712-009-0097-4
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Naylor, Robin, 2002. "The Effects Of Entry In Bilateral Oligopoly," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 638, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  2. Ghosh, Arghya & Morita, Hodaka, 2007. "Social desirability of free entry: A bilateral oligopoly analysis," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 925-934, October.
  3. Noriaki Matsushima, 2005. "Industry profits and free entry in input markets," Discussion Papers 2005-20, Kobe University, Graduate School of Business Administration.
  4. Arghya Ghosh & Hodaka Morita, 2007. "Free entry and social efficiency under vertical oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 541-554, 06.
  5. Abiru, Masahiro & Nahata, Babu & Raychaudhuri, Subhashis & Waterson, Michael, 1998. "Equilibrium structures in vertical oligopoly," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 463-480, December.
  6. Perry, Martin K, 1984. "Scale Economies, Imperfect Competition, and Public Policy," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 313-33, March.
  7. Klemperer, Paul D, 1988. "Welfare Effects of Entry into Markets with Switching Costs," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 159-65, December.
  8. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1975. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 64, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  9. C.C. von Weizsaker, 1980. "A Welfare Analysis of Barriers to Entry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(2), pages 399-420, Autumn.
  10. Arijit Mukherjee, . "Note on a generalized wage rigidity result," Discussion Papers 07/04, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
  11. Arijit Mukherjee, . "Excessive entry in a bilateral oligopoly," Discussion Papers 08/02, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
  12. ANDERSON, Simon P. & DE PALMA, André & NESTEROV, Yurii, 1994. "Oligopolistic Competition and the Optimal Provision of Products," CORE Discussion Papers 1994034, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  13. Michael Spence, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 217-235.
  14. Greenhut, M L & Ohta, H, 1976. "Related Market Conditions and Interindustrial Mergers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 267-77, June.
  15. Bertrand Crettez & Marie-Cécile Fagart, 2008. "Does entry improve welfare? A general equilibrium approach to competition policy," EconomiX Working Papers 2008-14, University of Paris West - Nanterre la Défense, EconomiX.
  16. Arijit Mukherjee & Soma Mukherjee, 2008. "Excess-Entry Theorem: The Implications Of Licensing," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 76(6), pages 675-689, December.
  17. Masahiro Okuno-Fujiwara & Kotaro Suzumura, 1991. "Symmetric Cournot Oligopoly and Economic Welfare: A Synthesis," Discussion Paper Series a242, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  18. Kotaro Suzumura & Kazuharu Kiyono, 1987. "Entry Barriers and Economic Welfare," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(1), pages 157-167.
  19. Michael A. Salinger, 1988. "Vertical Mergers and Market Foreclosure," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 103(2), pages 345-356.
  20. Arghya Ghosh & Souresh Saha, 2007. "Excess Entry in the Absence of Scale Economies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 30(3), pages 575-586, March.
  21. Lahiri, Sajal & Ono, Yoshiyasu, 1988. "Helping Minor Firms Reduces Welfare," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1199-1202, December.
  22. 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.
  23. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:10:y:2007:i:12:p:1-9 is not listed on IDEAS
  24. Joshua S. Gans, 2007. "Concentration-Based Merger Tests and Vertical Market Structure," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50, pages 661-681.
  25. Jota Ishikawa & Barbara J. Spencer, 1996. "Rent-Shifting Export Subsidies with an Imported Intermediate Product," NBER Working Papers 5458, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Dhillon, Amrita & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2002. "A generalised wage rigidity result," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 285-311, March.
  27. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2007:i:33:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jeczfn:v:98:y:2009:i:3:p:189-201. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.