IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/39211.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Old lady charm: a comment

Author

Listed:
  • Signorino, Rodolfo

Abstract

I start from Nicola Giocoli’s acute rational reconstruction of current US antitrust debate which shows that there really is no shortage of plausible explanations to the Chicago persistent appeal puzzle. Each explanation, taken in isolation, is, at best, only partial. In my view, the persistent appeal of Chicago antitrust owes much to the enduring grip of the equilibrium end-state notion of competition within top US Economics Departments and to the (alleged) resilience of market competition, absent entry/exit barriers, in the face of Type II Errors committed by antitrust Agencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Signorino, Rodolfo, 2012. "Old lady charm: a comment," MPRA Paper 39211, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39211/1/MPRA_paper_39211.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neri Salvadori & Rodolfo Signorino, 2016. "Competition," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 6, pages 70-81, Edward Elgar Publishing.
      • Salvadori, Neri & Signorino, Rodolfo, 2011. "Competition," MPRA Paper 38387, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. 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.
    3. Gilbert, Richard J, 1989. "The Role of Potential Competition in Industrial Organization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 107-127, Summer.
    4. Nicola Giocoli, 2015. "Old lady charm: explaining the persistent appeal of Chicago antitrust," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 96-122, March.
    5. Mark Blaug, 1997. "Not Only an Economist," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1122.
    6. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Reder, Melvin W, 1982. "Chicago Economics: Permanence and Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-38, March.
    8. Samuelson, Paul A, 1978. "The Canonical Classical Model of Political Economy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 16(4), pages 1415-1434, December.
    9. Bailey, Elizabeth E, 1981. "Contestability and the Design of Regulatory and Antitrust Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 178-183, May.
    10. Kaldor, Nicholas, 1972. "The Irrelevance of Equilibrium Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(328), pages 1237-1255, December.
    11. Steven G. Medema, 2010. "Adam Smith and the Chicago School," Chapters, in: Ross B. Emmett (ed.), The Elgar Companion to the Chicago School of Economics, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. G. J. Stigler, 1972. "Perfect Competition, Historically Contemplated," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Charles K. Rowley (ed.), Readings in Industrial Economics, chapter 7, pages 105-130, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Neri Salvadori & Rodolfo Signorino, 2013. "The Classical Notion of Competition Revisited," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 149-175, Spring.
    2. Neri Salvadori & Rodolfo Signorino, 2016. "Competition," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 6, pages 70-81, Edward Elgar Publishing.
      • Salvadori, Neri & Signorino, Rodolfo, 2011. "Competition," MPRA Paper 38387, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Schmidt André, 2008. "Ordnungsökonomische Wettbewerbskonzepte: Die Wettbewerbspolitik im Spannungsfeld zwischen Freiheit und Effizienz / Order Economic Concepts of Competition: Competition Policy between Economic Freedom a," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 59(1), pages 209-236, January.
    4. Amavilah, Voxi Heinrich, 2012. "Baumol, Panzar, and Willig’s Theory of Contestable Markets and Industry Structure: A Summary of Reactions," MPRA Paper 41974, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Nicolaï Foss & Nils Stieglitz, 2012. "Modern Resource-based Theory(ies)," Chapters, in: Michael Dietrich & Jackie Krafft (ed.), Handbook on the Economics and Theory of the Firm, chapter 20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. M. S. Addleson, 1984. "General Equilibrium and ‘Competition’: On Competition as Strategy," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 52(2), pages 104-113, June.
    7. Kessides, Ioannis N. & Willig, Robert D., 1995. "Restructuring regulation of the rail industry for the public interest," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1506, The World Bank.
    8. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4153 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Frederic Jennings, 2010. "Toward a Horizonal Theory of Justice: Efficiency, Equity, Rights and Capabilities in a Free Market Economy," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 77-87, January.
    10. Tahiru Azaaviele Liedong, 2022. "The Liability of Tribe in Corporate Political Activity: Ethical Implications for Political Contestability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(3), pages 623-644, December.
    11. Martin Gaynor & Deborah Haas-Wilson, 1999. "Change, Consolidation, and Competition in Health Care Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 141-164, Winter.
    12. Luca Zamparelli, 2009. "Average cost and marginal cost pricing in Marshall: Textual analysis and interpretation," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 665-694.
    13. Ross C. Singleton, 1997. "Competition Policy For Developing Countries: A Long‐Run, Entry‐Based Approach," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(2), pages 1-11, April.
    14. Jerome Ellig & Jack High, 1992. "Social Contracts And Pipe Dreams," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 10(1), pages 39-51, January.
    15. Metcalfe, John S. & Ramlogan, Ronnie & Uyarra, E., 2002. "Economic Development and the Competitive Process," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30612, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    16. Richard Arena, 1992. "Libre concurrence et concurrence entravée : trois exemples historiques," Cahiers d'Économie Politique, Programme National Persée, vol. 20(1), pages 77-91.
    17. Elizabeth E. Bailey, 2002. "Aviation Policy: Past and Present," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(1), pages 12-20, July.
    18. Jean-Marc Siroën, 1993. "Marchés contestables, différenciation des produits et discrimination des prix," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 44(3), pages 569-592.
    19. Mark Blaug, 2001. "Is Competition Such a Good Thing? Static Efficiency versus Dynamic Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(1), pages 37-48, August.
    20. David Starkie & Margaret Starrs, 1984. "Contestability and Sustainability in Regional Airline Markets," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 60(3), pages 274-283, September.
    21. Stephen Martin, 2015. "Areeda–Turner and the Treatment of Exclusionary Pricing under U.S. Antitrust and EU Competition Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 46(3), pages 229-252, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Chicago school of law and economics; Type I and Type II Errors; entry barriers and horizontal merger regulation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D40 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - General
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies

    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:pra:mprapa:39211. 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.