IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/liu/liucej/v10y2013i2p159-176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auctioneers vs. commissaires-priseurs: The carnival mirror of profession regulation in the international art market

Author

Listed:
  • Elisabetta Lazzaro
  • Nathalie Moureau

Abstract

This paper is a comparative analysis of the recent evolution of the French and the Anglo-Saxon profession regulations of auctioneers in terms of entry barriers and exercise of the profession. Firstly, following Stephen and Love's (1999) framework of the regulation of legal profession, we highlight the differences between regulations focussing on different levels (entry restrictions, advertising, fees, fee contracts, and organisational form). We show that French commissaire-priseurs and Anglo-Saxon auctioneers are bounded to quite opposed rules, relating to both the level of regulation (licensing against registration or certification) and the scope of this regulation. Secondly, we try to assess the success of these regulations in terms of economic efficiency by comparing the international markets shares of French and Anglo-Saxon auctioneers. We further highlight how a weak regulation can disturb prices mechanisms and, in some cases, favour speculation. The discussion of some emblematic scandals highlights distortions provoked by a strong, as well as a weak regulation

Suggested Citation

  • Elisabetta Lazzaro & Nathalie Moureau, 2013. "Auctioneers vs. commissaires-priseurs: The carnival mirror of profession regulation in the international art market," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 10(2), pages 159-176, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:liu:liucej:v:10:y:2013:i:2:p:159-176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ejce.liuc.it/18242979201302/182429792013100203.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    2. Ginsburgh, Victor, 2005. "The Economic Consequences of Droit De Suite in the European Union," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 61-71, March/Sep.
    3. Morris M. Kleiner, 2006. "Licensing Occupations: Ensuring Quality or Restricting Competition?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number lo, November.
    4. Chanont Banternghansa & Kathryn Graddy, 2011. "The impact of the Droit de Suite in the UK: an empirical analysis," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 35(2), pages 81-100, May.
    5. Orley Ashenfelter & Kathryn Graddy, 2003. "Auctions and the Price of Art," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(3), pages 763-787, September.
    6. Neil DE MARCHI & Hans J. VAN MIEGROET, 2000. "Rules versus play in early modern art market," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 2000023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    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. Alexander Cuntz & Matthias Sahli, 2024. "Intermediary liability and trade in follow-on innovation," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 48(1), pages 1-42, March.
    2. Chanont Banternghansa & Kathryn Graddy, 2011. "The impact of the Droit de Suite in the UK: an empirical analysis," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 35(2), pages 81-100, May.
    3. Amy Whitaker & Roman Kräussl, 2020. "Fractional Equity, Blockchain, and the Future of Creative Work," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(10), pages 4594-4611, October.
    4. Hinloopen, Jeroen & Onderstal, Sander, 2014. "Going once, going twice, reported! Cartel activity and the effectiveness of antitrust policies in experimental auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 317-336.
    5. Yixin Lu & Alok Gupta & Wolfgang Ketter & Eric van Heck, 2019. "Dynamic Decision Making in Sequential Business-to-Business Auctions: A Structural Econometric Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3853-3876, August.
    6. Anne LAYNE-FARRAR & Gerard LLOBET & Jorge PADILLA, 2014. "Patent Licensing in Vertically Disaggregated Industries: The Royalty Allocation Neutrality Principle," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(95), pages 61-84, 3rd quart.
    7. Etro, Federico & Stepanova, Elena, 2021. "Art return rates from old master paintings to contemporary art," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 94-116.
    8. Whitaker, Amy & Kräussl, Roman, 2023. "Art collectors as venture capitalists," CFS Working Paper Series 696, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    9. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Strategy-proof multi-object mechanism design: Ex-post revenue maximization with non-quasilinear preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    10. Richard Watt, 2014. "Copyright in visual art markets: some economic theory concerning resale royalties and other options," Chapters, in: Richard Watt (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Copyright, chapter 18, pages 328-342, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Laurent Lamy, 2013. "“Upping the ante”: how to design efficient auctions with entry?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 194-214, June.
    12. Michel Clement & Anke Lepthien & Tim Schulze, 2016. "Erfolgsfaktoren bei der Vermarktung von Kunst [Success Factors for Marketing of Arts]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 377-400, December.
    13. van Damme, E.E.C., 2002. "The Dutch UMTS-auction," Other publications TiSEM e33a97f5-c69b-4c3b-9aca-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Bruce Seaman, 2017. "¿Qué está en juego al optar entre distintas formas de apoyo para el sector cultural?," Estudios Públicos, Centro de Estudios Públicos, vol. 0(146), pages 121-162.
    15. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    16. Parag A. Pathak & Alex Rees-Jones & Tayfun Sönmez, 2020. "Immigration Lottery Design: Engineered and Coincidental Consequences of H-1B Reforms," NBER Working Papers 26767, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. J. Mark Ramseyer & Eric Rasmusen, 2013. "Lowering the Bar to Raise the Bar: Licensing Difficulty and Attorney Quality in Japan," Working Papers 2013-12, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    18. Jeremy Bulow & Jonathan Levin & Paul Milgrom, 2009. "Winning Play in Spectrum Auctions," NBER Working Papers 14765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Eshien Chong & Carine Staropoli & Anne Yvrande-Billon, 2014. "Auction versus Negotiation in Public Procurement: Looking for Empirical Evidence," Post-Print hal-00512813, HAL.
    20. Han, Seungjin, 2006. "Menu theorems for bilateral contracting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 157-178, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Art market; Profession regulation; Auctioneers; Cross-country analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J44 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Professional Labor Markets and Occupations
    • L43 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Legal Monopolies and Regulation or Deregulation
    • Z11 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics - - - Economics of the Arts and Literature
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    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:liu:liucej:v:10:y:2013:i:2:p:159-176. 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: Piero Cavaleri (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/liuccit.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.