IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/doi10.1086-662991.html

Why the Entry Regulation of Mobile Phone Manufacturing in China Collapsed: The Impact of Technological Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Zhimin Liao
  • Xiaofang Chen

Abstract

This paper analyzes why an entry regulation that generated large rents was abruptly abolished. We argue that the rents supporting the regulation dissipated because a new technology encouraged illegal entry by raising the cost of enforcement. In 1998, China introduced a licensing system for the manufacturing of mobile phones. This system created large monopoly rents for those who received the licenses. Later, in 2003, an integrated chip was invented that significantly lowered the costs of manufacturing mobile phones. Immediately thereafter, thousands of unlicensed manufacturers started producing mobile phones. The manufacturers who had been licensed previously suffered large losses from this competition, and many went bankrupt. The new chip technology raised the cost of enforcement by making entry extremely cheap. The regulators turned to local governments and telephone network operators for assistance in suppressing the illegal phones, but both groups did not cooperate because they benefited from the flourishing illegal phone industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhimin Liao & Xiaofang Chen, 2011. "Why the Entry Regulation of Mobile Phone Manufacturing in China Collapsed: The Impact of Technological Innovation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 207-228.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/662991
    DOI: 10.1086/662991
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/662991
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/662991
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/662991?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. Editors, 2016. "16 and all that," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 16(1), pages 3-4, March.
    2. Richard A. Posner, 1971. "Taxation by Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 22-50, Spring.
    3. George J. Stigler, 1971. "The Theory of Economic Regulation," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 2(1), pages 3-21, Spring.
    4. Jarrell, Gregg A, 1984. "Change at the Exchange: The Causes and Effects of Deregulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 273-312, October.
    5. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
    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. Ghamat, Salar & Pun, Hubert & Critchley, Greg & Hou, Pengwen, 2021. "Using intellectual property agreements in the presence of supplier and third-party copycatting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 680-692.
    2. Shim, Yongwoon & Shin, Dong-Hee, 2016. "Neo-techno nationalism: The case of China’s handset industry," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 197-209.
    3. Belitski, Maksim & Desai, Sameeksha, 2024. "Filtering or facilitating productive entrepreneurship?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    4. Liao Zhimin, 2015. "No Proper Name, No Proper Conduct: Company Affiliation and Product Quality in Wenzhou," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 45-67, June.

    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. David Slattery & Joseph G. Nellis, 2011. "Rethinking the Role of Regulation in the Aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis: The Case of the UK," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 58(3), pages 407-423, September.
    2. William C. Mitchell, 1990. "Interest Groups: Economic Perspectives and Contributions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 2(1), pages 85-108, January.
    3. Liao Zhimin, 2015. "No Proper Name, No Proper Conduct: Company Affiliation and Product Quality in Wenzhou," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 45-67, June.
    4. Harold Mulherin, J., 2007. "Measuring the costs and benefits of regulation: Conceptual issues in securities markets," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(2-3), pages 421-437, June.
    5. James W. Hughes & Michael J. Moore & Edward A. Snyder, 2002. ""Napsterizing" Pharmaceuticals: Access, Innovation, and Consumer Welfare," NBER Working Papers 9229, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Randall S. Kroszner & Philip E. Strahan, 1998. "What Drives Deregulation? Economics and Politics of the Relaxation of Bank Branching Restrictions," NBER Working Papers 6637, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Larry Blank & John Mayo, 2009. "Endogenous Regulatory Constraints and the Emergence of Hybrid Regulation," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 35(3), pages 233-255, November.
    8. Manouchehr Mokhtari & Doha Abdelhamid, 2008. "Neocapture: regulatory competition in an open market world," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-24.
    9. George Daly & Thomas Mayor, 1986. "Equity, efficiency and environmental quality," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 141-159, January.
    10. Sam Peltzman, 2022. "“The theory of economic regulation” after 50 years," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(1), pages 7-21, October.
    11. Kamath Shyam J., 1994. "Privatization: A Market Prospect Perspective," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 53-104, March.
    12. repec:elg:eechap:15325_11 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Walter Hettich & Stanley L. Winer, 2006. "Analyzing the Interdependence of Regulation and Taxation," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(4), pages 355-380, July.
    14. Anastasi, Sebastian C. & Marsella, Alexander & Melo, Vitor & Stephenson, E. Frank & Wagner, Gary A., 2025. "Short-term rental bans and the hotel industry: Evidence from New York city," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    15. Bruce Yandle, 2022. "George J. Stigler’s theory of economic regulation, bootleggers, baptists and the rebirth of the public interest imperative," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 193(1), pages 23-34, October.
    16. Randall S. Kroszner & Philip E. Strahan, 1997. "The political economy of deregulation: evidence from the relaxation of bank branching restrictions in the United States," Research Paper 9720, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    17. Rachel Geoffroy & Heemin Lee, 2021. "The Role of Academic Research in SEC Rulemaking: Evidence from Business Roundtable v. SEC," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 59(2), pages 375-435, May.
    18. John Goodman & Philip Porter, 1988. "Theory of competitive regulatory equilibrium," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 51-66, October.
    19. J.A. den Hertog, 2010. "Review of economic theories of regulation," Working Papers 10-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    20. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    21. Rodrigo M. S. Moita & Claudio Paiva, 2013. "Political Price Cycles in Regulated Industries: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 94-121, February.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/662991. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    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.