IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v37y2010i2p83-99.html

Assessing the Efficacy of Structural Merger Remedies: Choosing Between Theories of Harm?

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Davies

  • Matthew Olczak

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Davies & Matthew Olczak, 2010. "Assessing the Efficacy of Structural Merger Remedies: Choosing Between Theories of Harm?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 37(2), pages 83-99, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:37:y:2010:i:2:p:83-99
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-010-9259-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11151-010-9259-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-010-9259-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919, November.
    2. Thibaud Vergé, 2010. "Horizontal Mergers, Structural Remedies, And Consumer Welfare In A Cournot Oligopoly With Assets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(4), pages 723-741, December.
    3. Compte, Olivier & Jenny, Frederic & Rey, Patrick, 2002. "Capacity constraints, mergers and collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 1-29, January.
    4. Stephen Davies & Bruce Lyons, 2007. "Mergers and Merger Remedies in the EU," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13008, June.
    5. Cosnita, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2009. "Negotiating remedies: Revealing the merger efficiency gains," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 188-196, March.
    6. Malcolm Coate & Shawn Ulrick, 2009. "Do Court Decisions Drive the Federal Trade Commission’s Enforcement Policy on Merger Settlements?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 34(2), pages 99-114, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luke Garrod & Matthew Olczak, 2014. "Collusion under Private Monitoring with Asymmetric Capacity Constraints," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2014-04, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    2. Luke Garrod & Matthew Olczak, 2017. "Collusion Under Imperfect Monitoring with Asymmetric Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(3), pages 654-682, September.
    3. Patrice Bougette & Oliver Budzinski & Frédéric Marty, 2025. "In the light of dynamic competition: should we make merger remedies more flexible?," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 505-530, September.
    4. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wey, Christian, 2014. "Remedies vs. Extreme Options in Merger Control," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100397, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2021. "Evidence Production in Merger Control: The Role of Remedies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, August.

    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. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    2. Boone, Jan, 2004. "Balance of Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 4733, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Friberg, Richard & Romahn, André, 2015. "Divestiture requirements as a tool for competition policy: A case from the Swedish beer market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-18.
    4. Stephen Davies & Matthew Olczak & Heather Coles, 2007. "Tacit collusion, firm asymmetries and numbers: evidence from EC merger cases," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2007-07, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    5. Flochel, Laurent & Versaevel, Bruno & de Villemeur, Étienne, 2009. "Optimal Collusion with Limited Liability and Policy Implications," TSE Working Papers 09-027, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Jul 2011.
    6. Allain, Marie-Laure & Boyer, Marcel & Kotchoni, Rachidi & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2015. "Are cartel fines optimal? Theory and evidence from the European Union," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 38-47.
    7. Jordi Gual & Núria Mas, 2011. "Industry Characteristics and Anti-Competitive Behavior: Evidence from the European Commission’s Decisions," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 39(3), pages 207-230, November.
    8. Simon Loertscher & Leslie M. Marx, 2019. "Mix‐and‐match divestitures and merger harm," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 346-366, September.
    9. Patrice Bougette, 2011. "Négociation d'engagements en matière de concentrations : une perspective d'économiste," Post-Print halshs-00580669, HAL.
    10. Romahn, André & Friberg, Richard, 2012. "Ex-Post Merger Review and Divestitures," IESE Research Papers D/1056, IESE Business School.
    11. Cosnita-Langlais, Andreea & Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2013. "Fight cartels or control mergers? On the optimal allocation of enforcement efforts within competition policy," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 34-40.
    12. António Brandão & Joana Pinho & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2014. "Asymmetric Collusion with Growing Demand," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 429-472, December.
    13. Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2012. "Entrepreneurial innovations, competition and competition policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 488-506.
    14. Switgard Feuerstein, 2005. "Collusion in Industrial Economics—A Survey," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 163-198, December.
    15. Argenton, Cédric & Müller, Wieland, 2012. "Collusion in experimental Bertrand duopolies with convex costs: The role of cost asymmetry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 508-517.
    16. Bougette, Patrice, 2010. "Preventing merger unilateral effects: A Nash-Cournot approach to asset divestitures," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 162-174, September.
    17. Etienne Billette de Villemeur & Laurent Flochel & Bruno Versaevel, 2009. "Optimal Collusion with Limited Severity Constraint," Post-Print halshs-00375798, HAL.
    18. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Christian Wey, 2021. "Evidence Production in Merger Control: The Role of Remedies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-12, August.
    19. Lionel Janin & Benoît Menoni, 2007. "L e contrôle des concentrations en France : une analyse empirique des avis du Conseil de la concurrence," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(2), pages 93-114.
    20. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Wey, Christian, 2016. "Structural remedies as a signaling device," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-6.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:kap:revind:v:37:y:2010:i:2:p:83-99. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.