IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ide/wpaper/5853.html

Legal vs Ownership Unbundling in Network Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Cremer, Helmuth
  • Crémer, Jacques
  • De Donder, Philippe

Abstract

This paper studies the impact of legal unbundling vs ownership unbundling on the incentives of a network operator to invest and maintain its assets. We consider an industry where the upstream firm first chooses the size of a network, while several downstream firms then compete in selling goods and services that use this network as a necessary input. We contrast the (socially) optimal allocation with several equilibrium situations, depending on whether the upstream firm owns zero, one or two downstream firms. The first situation corresponds to ownership unbundling between upstream and downstream parts of the market. As for the other two cases, we equate legal unbundling with the following two assumptions. First, each downstream firm maximizes its own profit, without taking into account any impact on the upstream firm's profit. Second, the upstream firm is not allowed to discriminate between downstream firms by charging different access charges for the use of its network. On the other hand, we assume that the upstream firm chooses its network size in order to maximize its total profit, including the profit of its downstream subsidiaries. Our main results are as follows. Because the investment in the network is not protected, at the time at which it is made, by a contract, the upstream firm will not take into account the interests of its clients when choosing its size. This effect can be mitigated by allowing it to own part of the downstream industry. In other words, ownership separation is more detrimental to welfare than legal unbundling. We also obtain that these results are robust to the introduction of asymmetry in network needs across downstream firms, imperfect downstream competition and downstream investments.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Cremer, Helmuth & Crémer, Jacques & De Donder, Philippe, 2006. "Legal vs Ownership Unbundling in Network Industries," IDEI Working Papers 405, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    • Handle: RePEc:ide:wpaper:5853
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/medias/doc/wp/2006/legal_ownership.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
    2. Klein, Benjamin & Crawford, Robert G & Alchian, Armen A, 1978. "Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 297-326, October.
    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. Höffler, Felix & Kranz, Sebastian, 2011. "Legal unbundling can be a golden mean between vertical integration and ownership separation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 576-588, September.
    2. Ray REES & Sebastian SCHOLZ, 2010. "Electricity Market Design for Germany," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 2010-EN.
    3. Felix Höffler & Sebastian Kranz, 2011. "Imperfect legal unbundling of monopolistic bottlenecks," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 273-292, June.
    4. repec:ers:journl:v:xv:y:2012:i:sie:p:157-194 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Russell Pittman, 2007. "Make or buy on the Russian railway? Coase, Williamson, and Tsar Nicholas II," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 207-221, September.
    6. Isabel Soares & Paula Sarmento, 2012. "Unbundling in the Telecommunications and the Electricity Sectors: How Far should it Go?," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 157-194.
    7. Pollitt, Michael, 2008. "The arguments for and against ownership unbundling of energy transmission networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 704-713, February.
    8. Bastian Henze & Charles Noussair & Bert Willems, 2012. "Regulation of network infrastructure investments: an experimental evaluation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 1-38, August.
    9. Sven Heim, Bastian Krieger, and Mario Liebensteiner, 2020. "Unbundling, Regulation, and Pricing: Evidence from Electricity Distribution," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I).
    10. Ibarra-Yunez, Alejandro, 2015. "Energy reform in Mexico: Imperfect unbundling in the electricity sector," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 19-27.
    11. Arthur Schram & Aljaž Ule, 2024. "Regulatory independence may limit electoral holdup but entrench capture," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 198(3), pages 403-425, March.
    12. Brito Duarte & Pereira Pedro & Vareda João, 2012. "Does Vertical Separation Necessarily Reduce Quality Discrimination and Increase Welfare?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-44, November.
    13. Bolle, Friedel & Breitmoser, Yves, 2006. "On the Allocative Efficiency of Ownership Unbundling," Discussion Papers 255, European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder), Department of Business Administration and Economics.
    14. Raffaele Fiocco, 2012. "Competition and regulation with product differentiation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 287-307, December.
    15. Tsatsos, Aristidis, 2012. "Die Liberalisierung des russischen Gassektors: 3 Szenarios? [The liberalisation of the Russian gas sector: 3 scenarios?]," MPRA Paper 44623, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Tangerås, Thomas P., 2012. "Optimal transmission regulation of an integrated energy market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1644-1655.
    17. Benjamin Pakula & Georg Götz, 2011. "Organisational Structures in Network Industries – An Application to the Railway Industry," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201109, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    18. Nardi, Paolo, 2012. "Transmission network unbundling and grid investments: Evidence from the UCTE countries," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 50-58.
    19. Fiocco, Raffaele, 2011. "Competition and regulation in a differentiated good market," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2011-084, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    20. B. Willems & E. Ehlers, 2008. "Cross-Subsidies in the Electricity Sector," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 9(3), pages 201-228, September.
    21. Höffler, Felix & Kranz, Sebastian, 2007. "Legal Unbundling can be a Golden Mean between Vertical Integration and Separation," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 15/2007, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    22. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp1664 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Growitsch, Christian & Müller, Gernot & Stronzik, Marcus, 2008. "Ownership Unbundling in der Gaswirtschaft: Theoretische Grundlagen und empirische Evidenz," WIK Discussion Papers 308, WIK Wissenschaftliches Institut für Infrastruktur und Kommunikationsdienste GmbH.
    24. Nikogosian, Vigen & Veith, Tobias, 2011. "Vertical integration, separation and non-price discrimination: An empirical analysis of German electricity markets for residential customers," ZEW Discussion Papers 11-069, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Schmid, Andreas, 2007. "Incentive Compatibility and Efficiency in the contractual Insurer-Provider Relationship: Economic Theory and practical Implications: The Case of North Carolina," MPRA Paper 23311, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2008.
    2. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    3. Chong-En Bai & Zhigang Tao & Changqi Wu, 2004. "Revenue Sharing and Control Rights in Team Production: Theories and Evidence from Joint Ventures," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(2), pages 277-305, Summer.
    4. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    5. Raghuram G. Rajan & Luigi Zingales, 1998. "The Governance of the New Enterprise," CRSP working papers 487, Center for Research in Security Prices, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago.
    6. Hideshi Itoh, 2006. "The Theories of International Outsourcing and Integration : A Theoretical Overview from the Perspective of Organizational Economics," Microeconomics Working Papers 21891, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    7. de Bragança, Gabriel Godofredo Fiuza & Daglish, Toby, 2017. "Investing in vertical integration: electricity retail market participation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 355-365.
    8. Nadav Levy, 2024. "Partial ownership, control, and investment in vertical relationships," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 247-266, January.
    9. Alan Schwartz, 2004. "The Law and Economics of Costly Contracting," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 2-31, April.
    10. Argyres, Nicholas S. & Liebeskind, Julia Porter, 2002. "Governance inseparability and the evolution of US biotechnology industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 197-219, February.
    11. Ricard Gil & Frederic Warzynski, 2015. "Vertical Integration, Exclusivity, and Game Sales Performance in the US Video Game Industry," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(suppl_1), pages 143-168.
    12. Allain, Marie-Laure & Chambolle, Claire & Rey, Patrick & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Vertical integration as a source of hold-up: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    13. Holger Mueller, 2016. "Reallocation of Capital and Labor within Firms," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 152(4), pages 289-303, October.
    14. M’hand Fares, 2009. "Specific performance, separability condition and the hold-up problem," Post-Print hal-02655908, HAL.
    15. Temin, Peter & Maxwell, James, 2003. "Corporate contracting for health care," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 403-420, November.
    16. Mathews, Richmond D., 2006. "Strategic alliances, equity stakes, and entry deterrence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 35-79, April.
    17. Dirk Hackbarth & Richmond Mathews & David Robinson, 2014. "Capital Structure, Product Market Dynamics, and the Boundaries of the Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2971-2993, December.
    18. Oliver Hart & Jean Tirole, 1990. "Vertical Integration and Market Foreclosure," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 205-286.
    19. Martin Dufwenberg & Alec Smith & Matt Van Essen, 2013. "Hold-Up: With A Vengeance," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 896-908, January.
    20. Gary Anderson & Adam Gifford, 1996. "Between the constitution and the deep blue sea: Contractual controls on opportunism aboard pirate vessels," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 49-61, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L22 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Organization and Market Structure
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L95 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Gas Utilities; Pipelines; Water Utilities

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ide:wpaper:5853. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/idtlsfr.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.