IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v44y2023i4p1876-1894.html

Choosing legal rules or standards in antitrust enforcement: A proposal for extending and facilitating the use of the decision‐theoretic approach

Author

Listed:
  • Yannis Katsoulacos
  • David Ulph

Abstract

The choice of legal standards (LSs) in antitrust enforcement, to guide the assessment of potentially anticompetitive conduct, in order to decide whether there is liability or not, has been hotly debated for many years. The debate has gained in intensity in recent years as a result of the concerns expressed in many countries with the antitrust treatment of the major digital platforms. This article provides a detailed presentation of a new methodology for defining LSs along the continuum of LSs, depending on the screens assessed at different stages of the continuum. This is followed by a detailed formal examination of how all the pertinent factors that could influence error minimisation interact to determine the optimal LSs for different conducts and markets. The framework can be used to examine how the choice of error minimising LSs depends on the context in which specific conduct types are undertaken.

Suggested Citation

  • Yannis Katsoulacos & David Ulph, 2023. "Choosing legal rules or standards in antitrust enforcement: A proposal for extending and facilitating the use of the decision‐theoretic approach," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 1876-1894, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:4:p:1876-1894
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.3787
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3787
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.3787?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seifert, Jacob, 2020. "Optimal legal standards for competition policy revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    2. William E. Kovacic & Carl Shapiro, 2000. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    3. Isaac Ehrlich & Richard A. Posner, 1974. "An Economic Analysis of Legal Rulemaking," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 257-286, January.
    4. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 2020. "Optimal legal standards for competition policy further re-visited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    5. John Vickers, 2005. "Abuse of Market Power," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 115(504), pages 244-261, June.
    6. A. Douglas Melamed & Nicolas Petit, 2019. "The Misguided Assault on the Consumer Welfare Standard in the Age of Platform Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 54(4), pages 741-774, June.
    7. Yannis Katsoulacos, 2019. "On the choice of legal standards: a positive theory for comparative analysis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 125-165, October.
    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. Arndt Christiansen & Wolfgang Kerber, 2006. "Competition Policy With Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead Of “Per Se Rules Vs Rule Of Reason”," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 215-244.
    2. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 2020. "Optimal legal standards for competition policy further re-visited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    3. Musa Abdu & Adamu Jibir, 2019. "Sources of Market Power among Firms in Sub-Saharan Africa: Do Institutions Matter in Competitive Policies?," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 24(2), pages 115-148, July-Dec.
    4. Yannis Katsoulacos & Galateia Makri & Eleni Metsiou, 2019. "Antitrust Enforcement in Europe in the Last 25 Years: Developments and Challenges," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 55(1), pages 5-26, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci & Bruno Deffains, 2007. "Uncertainty of Law and the Legal Process," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(4), pages 627-656, December.
    7. Magnus Söderberg, 2008. "Uncertainty and regulatory outcome in the Swedish electricity distribution sector," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 79-94, February.
    8. Zahid Amadxarif & James Brookes & Nicola Garbarino & Rajan Patel & Eryk Walczak, 2019. "The language of rules: textual complexity in banking reforms," Bank of England working papers 834, Bank of England.
    9. Dietrich Earnhart & Sarah Jacobson & Yusuke Kuwayama & Richard T. Woodward, 2023. "Discretionary Exemptions from Environmental Regulation: Flexibility for Good or for Ill," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 99(2), pages 203-221.
    10. Louis Kaplow, 1992. "A Model of the Optimal Complexity of Rules," NBER Working Papers 3958, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Motta, Massimo & Karlinger, Liliane, 2007. "Exclusionary Pricing and Rebates When Scale Matters," CEPR Discussion Papers 6258, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Ogus, Anthony, 2001. "Regulatory Institutions and Structures," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30704, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    13. Bartsch, Elga, 1997. "Environmental liability, imperfect information, and multidimensional pollution control," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 139-146, March.
    14. Francesco Parisi, 2004. "Positive, Normative and Functional Schools in Law and Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 259-272, December.
    15. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.
    16. Barbara Koremenos, 2013. "What’s left out and why? Informal provisions in formal international law," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 137-162, June.
    17. Nicola Giocoli, 2013. "Games judges don't play: predatory pricing and strategic reasoning in US antitrust," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 271-330.
    18. Octavian-Dragomir Jora & Gheorghe Hurduzeu & Mihaela Iacob & Georgiana-Camelia Cre?an, 2017. "“Dialectical Contradictions” in the Neoclassical Theory and Policy Regarding Market Competition: The Consumer and His Continuos Burden of Crisis," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(45), pages 544-544, May.
    19. Cassey Lee, 2007. "Legal Traditions and Competition Policy," Chapters, in: Paul Cook & Raul Fabella & Cassey Lee (ed.), Competitive Advantage and Competition Policy in Developing Countries, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. World Bank & Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2017. "A Step Ahead," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 27527, April.

    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:wly:mgtdec:v:44:y:2023:i:4:p:1876-1894. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    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.