IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/121044.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

(Lack of) Competition, Coordination, and Information Sharing in the Pork Industry: United States, 2009-2020

Author

Listed:
  • Donna, Javier
  • Walsh, Anita

Abstract

In 2020, an antitrust lawsuit was filed against the Pork Integrators alleging a §1 Sherman Act violation. At the center of the Lawsuit, there is an alleged exchange of atomistic information about the Pork integrators’ operations using Agri Stats, Inc. as a clearinghouse. We use the Su-preme Court benchmark in American Column & Lumber to discuss two questions that arise from the Lawsuit. The first is whether the association of Pork Integrators and Agri Stats, Inc. resulted in the restraint of interstate commerce, the main specific issue at stake in the pork Law-suit. The second is whether information-exchange agreements using clearinghouses like Agri Stats, Inc. lessen competition and offend United States antitrust law, a more general issue be-yond the pork Lawsuit. We find that there appears to be ample evidence in the Lawsuit to merit prosecution regarding both trade restraints and information-sharing agreements. We conclude by discussing the role of the Agencies in setting the standards in information-exchange agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Donna, Javier & Walsh, Anita, 2022. "(Lack of) Competition, Coordination, and Information Sharing in the Pork Industry: United States, 2009-2020," MPRA Paper 121044, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:121044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/121044/1/MPRA_paper_121044.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1990. "Multimarket Contact and Collusive Behavior," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 1-26, Spring.
    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. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    2. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    3. Conconi, Paola & Perroni, Carlo, 2009. "Do credible domestic institutions promote credible international agreements?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 160-170, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Haerang Park, 2021. "Testing for Pricing Behavior in the Mortgage Loan Market," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 270-293, September.
    6. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Faouzi Bensebaa, 2003. "La dynamique concurrentielle:défis analytiques et méthodologiques," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 6(1), pages 5-37, March.
    8. Stenborg, Markku, 2002. "Economics of Joint Dominance," Discussion Papers 834, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    9. Haufler, Andreas & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2004. "Tacit collusion and international commodity taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 577-600, March.
    10. Miguel Ángel Ropero, 2021. "Entry deterrence when the potential entrant is your competitor in a different market," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(3), pages 1010-1030, January.
    11. Elizabeth L. Rose & Kiyohiko Ito, 2009. "Past Interactions and New Foreign Direct Investment Location Decisions," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 641-669, October.
    12. Meghan R. Busse, 2000. "Multimarket Contact and Price Coordination in the Cellular Telephone Industry," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 287-320, June.
    13. Scott Baker & Pak Yee Lee & Claudio Mezzetti, 2011. "Intellectual property disclosure as threat," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 7(1), pages 21-38, March.
    14. Garcia-Gallego, Aurora & Georgantzis, Nikolaos, 2001. "Multiproduct activity in an experimental differentiated oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 493-518, March.
    15. Roldan, Flavia, 2011. "Covert networks and antitrust policy," IESE Research Papers D/932, IESE Business School.
    16. Randall Morck, 2011. "Finance and Governance in Developing Economies," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 375-406, December.
    17. Kaushik Basu & Avinash Dixit, 2017. "Too Small to Regulate," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, March.
    18. Jeanine Miklós-Thal, 2011. "Optimal collusion under cost asymmetry," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(1), pages 99-125, January.
    19. Pham, Tho & Talavera, Oleksandr & Yang, Junhong, 2016. "Multimarket Competition and Profitability: Evidence from Ukrainian banking," MPRA Paper 72376, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Alberto Salvo, 2010. "Trade flows in a spatial oligopoly: gravity fits well, but what does it explain?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 63-96, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antitrust; Price-fixing; Competition; Information Sharing; Cartel; Pork Industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:pra:mprapa:121044. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.