Market Structure and the Competitive Effects of Vertical Integration
We analyze the competitive effects of backward vertical integration in a model with oligopolistic firms that exert market power upstream and downstream. In contrast to previous literature, we show that a small degree of vertical integration is always procompetitive because efficiency effects dominate foreclosure effects. Moreover, vertical integration even to monopoly can be procompetitive. With regard to market structure, we find, somewhat surprisingly, that vertical integration is more likely to be procompetitive if the industry is more concentrated. Our model thus suggests that antitrust authorities should be particularly wary of vertical integration in relatively competitive industries. We demonstrate that the quantitative welfare effects can be substantial there.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, The University of Melbourne, 4th Floor, FBE Building, Level 4, 111 Barry Street. Victoria, 3010, Australia|
Phone: +61 3 8344 5355
Fax: +61 3 8344 6899
Web page: http://fbe.unimelb.edu.au/economics
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Volker Nocke & Michael D. Whinston, 2008.
"Dynamic Merger Review,"
NBER Working Papers
14526, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lafontaine, Francine & Slade, Margaret, 2007.
"Vertical Integration and Firm Boundaries : The Evidence,"
The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS)
799, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Francine Lafontaine & Margaret Slade, 2007. "Vertical Integration and Firm Boundaries: The Evidence," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 629-685, September.
- Catherine C. de Fontenay & Joshua S. Gans, 2004.
"Vertical Integration in the Presence of Upstream Competition,"
Department of Economics - Working Papers Series
904, The University of Melbourne.
- Catherine C. de Fontenay & Joshua S. Gans, 2005. "Vertical Integration in the Presence of Upstream Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(3), pages 544-572, Autumn.
- Joshua Gans & Catherine de Fontenay, 2004. "Vertical Integration in the Presence of Upstream Competition," Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings 7, Econometric Society.
- Yongmin Chen, 2000.
"On Vertical Mergers and Their Competitive Effects,"
Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers
0383, Econometric Society.
- Volker Nocke & Lucy White, 2007.
"Do Vertical Mergers Facilitate Upstream Collusion?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1321-1339, September.
- Lucy White & Volker Nocke, 2004. "Do Vertical Mergers Facilitate Upstream Collusion?," 2004 Meeting Papers 45, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Nocke, Volker & White, Lucy, 2004. "Do Vertical Mergers Facilitate Upstream Collusion?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4186, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Volker Nocke & Lucy White, 2003. "Do Vertical Mergers Facilitate Upstream Collusion?," PIER Working Paper Archive 03-033, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
- Péter Eső & Volker Nocke & Lucy White, 2010.
"Competition for scarce resources,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 524-548.
- Inderst, Roman & Valletti, Tommaso, 2011. "Incentives for input foreclosure," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 820-831, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mlb:wpaper:1136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Katherine Perez)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.