IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-02316767.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competition and Investment: What do we know from the literature?

Author

Listed:
  • Wilfried Sand-Zantman

    (GREMAQ - Groupe de recherche en économie mathématique et quantitative - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, IDEI - Institut d'Economie Industrielle - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse)

  • Jérôme Mathis

    (LEDa - Laboratoire d'Economie de Dauphine - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres)

Abstract

The link between competition and investment is one of the most important relationshipsexamined in economics. For more than two centuries economists have held conflicting viewsof which market structures create the most favorable environment for economic growth, whileacknowledging that it benefits from investment in both infrastructure and innovation.According to Adam Smith's fundamental lessons, competition guarantees that consumers'needs are best satisfied, minimizing the rents left to the firms. Economists of the Austrianschool have criticized this view and instead emphasized that even more important than thecompetition structure is the competitive process. An even more skeptical view was offered bySchumpeter who argued that concentrated market structures are optimal and monopoly rentsare a driving force that promotes economic growth.A parallel can be drawn between innovation and investment which then gives rise to twoconflicting effects of competition on investment. First, strong product market competitiondecreases profits and then lowers incentives to innovate. Second, competition may providefirms with incentives to innovate to escape from competition in the product market. This"escape competition" effect dominates when the ex-post market power is relatively high whilethe opposite holds when the market is more competitive. The two effects are embedded in theinverse U-shaped curve between competition and innovation developed by Aghion et al.(2005) so the optimal degree of competition is intermediate.A look at the investment in infrastructure also offers a contrasted view on the benefits ofcompetition. Alesina et al. (2005) studied the role that overall regulation, barriers to entry andpublic ownership play in investment for many nonmanufacturing industries (energy,transports, communication). They showed that competition-enhancing policies do promoteinvestment. But studies more focused on the (fixed-line) telecommunications sector havehighlighted a possible negative impact on network investment when market entry is promotedthrough local loop unbundling. Additionally, the impact of unbundling -- which can be seenas a competition-enhancing policy – on penetration rate is still under debate but seems to be atbest negligible.Therefore, the impact of competition on investment depends both on precise competitionenhancing measures and the type of investment at stake.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilfried Sand-Zantman & Jérôme Mathis, 2014. "Competition and Investment: What do we know from the literature?," Working Papers hal-02316767, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02316767
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02316767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02316767/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. MacDonald, James M, 1994. "Does Import Competition Force Efficient Production?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(4), pages 721-727, November.
    2. Crandall, Robert W. & Eisenach, Jeffrey A. & Ingraham, Allan T., 2013. "The long-run effects of copper-loop unbundling and the implications for fiber," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 262-281.
    3. Mattia Nardotto & Tommaso Valletti & Frank Verboven, 2015. "Unbundling The Incumbent: Evidence From Uk Broadband," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 330-362, April.
    4. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    5. Alberto Alesina & Silvia Ardagna & Giuseppe Nicoletti & Fabio Schiantarelli, 2005. "Regulation And Investment," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(4), pages 791-825, June.
    6. Carlin Wendy & Schaffer Mark & Seabright Paul, 2004. "A Minimum of Rivalry: Evidence from Transition Economies on the Importance of Competition for Innovation and Growth," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-45, September.
    7. Peltzman, Sam, 1971. "Pricing in Public and Private Enterprises: Electric Utilities in the United States," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 109-147, April.
    8. Coublucq Daniel & Ivaldi Marc & McCullough Gerard, 2018. "The Static-Dynamic Efficiency Trade-off in the US Rail Freight Industry: Assessment of an Open Access Policy," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 267-301, December.
    9. David Sappington & J. Sidak, 2003. "Incentives for Anticompetitive Behavior by Public Enterprises," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 22(3), pages 183-206, May.
    10. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    11. Vickers, John, 1985. "Pre-emptive patenting, joint ventures, and the persistence of oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 261-273, September.
    12. Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & John van Reenen, 1999. "Market Share, Market Value and Innovation in a Panel of British Manufacturing Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 529-554.
    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. Houngbonon, Georges Vivien & Jeanjean, Francois, 2014. "Is there a level of competition intensity that maximizes investment in the mobile telecommunications industry?," 25th European Regional ITS Conference, Brussels 2014 101384, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Maman Setiawan & Rina Indiastuti & Achmad K. Hidayat & Endang Rostiana, 2021. "R&D and Industrial Concentration in the Indonesian Manufacturing Industry," JOItmC, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-12, April.
    3. Houngbonon, Georges Vivien & Jeanjean, François, 2016. "What level of competition intensity maximises investment in the wireless industry?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 774-790.
    4. Liang Wang & Qiming Sun, 2022. "Market Competition, Infrastructure Sharing, and Network Investment in China’s Mobile Telecommunications Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Pamela Mondliwa & Sumayya Goga & Simon Roberts, 2021. "Competition, Productive Capabilities and Structural Transformation in South Africa," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(2), pages 253-274, April.

    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. Richard Gilbert, 2006. "Looking for Mr. Schumpeter: Where Are We in the Competition-Innovation Debate?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 6, pages 159-215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ben Dkhil, Inès, 2014. "Regulation and Investment in Telecom Network Infrastructure Facilities: The Recent Developments and Debates," MPRA Paper 72910, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Feb 2015.
    3. Brouwer, E. & van der Wiel, H.P., 2010. "Competition and Innovation : Pushing Productivity Up or Down?," Discussion Paper 2010-52, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    4. Szűcs, Ferenc, 2010. "Adaptáció, verseny és innováció [Adaptation, competition and innovation]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 59-70.
    5. Emil Palikot, 2023. "Competition–Innovation Nexus: Product vs. Process, Does It Matter?," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Brouwer, E. & van der Wiel, H.P., 2010. "Competition and Innovation : Pushing Productivity Up or Down?," Other publications TiSEM 9efe62df-d940-4471-8bc7-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    8. Kovác, Eugen & Vinogradov, Viatcheslav & Zigic, Kresimir, 2010. "Technological leadership and persistence of monopoly under endogenous entry: Static versus dynamic analysis," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1421-1441, August.
    9. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    10. Benavente, José Miguel & Zuñiga, Pluvia, 2022. "How Does Market Competition Affect Firm Innovation Incentives in Emerging Countries? Evidence from Chile and Colombia," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12198, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Ramiro de Elejalde & Carlos Ponce & Flavia Roldán, 2018. "Innovation and competition: evidence from Uruguayan firms," Documentos de Investigación 116, Universidad ORT Uruguay. Facultad de Administración y Ciencias Sociales.
    12. Tobias Kretschmer & Eugenio J. Miravete & Jose C. Pernias, 2012. "Competitive Pressure and the Adoption of Complementary Innovations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1540-1570, June.
    13. Francesco Daveri & Rémy Lecat & Maria Laura Parisi, 2016. "Service Deregulation, Competition, and the Performance of French and Italian Firms," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 63(3), pages 278-302, July.
    14. Gaëtan Nicodème & Jacques-Bernard Sauner-Leroy, 2007. "Product Market Reforms and Productivity: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature on the Transmission Channels," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 53-72, March.
    15. MARSCHINSKI Robert & DE AMORES HERNANDEZ Antonio & AMOROSO Sara & BAUER Peter & CARDANI Roberta & CSEFALVAY Zoltan & GENTY Aurelien & GKOTSIS Petros & GREGORI Wildmer & GRASSANO Nicola & HERNANDEZ GUE, 2021. "EU competitiveness: recent trends, drivers, and links to economic policy: A Synthesis Report," JRC Research Reports JRC123232, Joint Research Centre.
    16. Xavier Vives, 2008. "Innovation And Competitive Pressure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 419-469, December.
    17. Christos Genakos & Tommaso Valletti & Frank Verboven, 2018. "Evaluating market consolidation in mobile communications," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 33(93), pages 45-100.
    18. Philippe Aghion & Stefan Bechtold & Lea Cassar & Holger Herz, 2018. "The Causal Effects of Competition on Innovation: Experimental Evidence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 162-195.
    19. Ghosh, Arghya & Kato, Takao & Morita, Hodaka, 2017. "Incremental innovation and competitive pressure in the presence of discrete innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 1-14.
    20. Banerjee, Rajabrata & Gupta, Kartick, 2021. "Do country or firm-specific factors matter more to R&D spending in firms?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 75-95.

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-02316767. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.