IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rnp/wpaper/041812.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Institutional Initiative of Functioning of Firms in Conditions of a Bilateral Monopoly
[Институциональная Инициатива Функционирования Фирм В Условиях Двусторонней Монополии]

Author

Listed:
  • Meleshkina, Anna (Мелешкина, Анна)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA))

  • Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия)

    (Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA))

Abstract

The work is based on the methodology of a comprehensive economic analysis of the problems of resolving conflicts of interest in intermediate goods markets with high switching costs, both on the demand side and on the supply side. The research is based on developments in the field of theory of market organization, game theory and institutional economic theory. The work analyzes the range of issues related to the negotiation process in determining the price of the intermediate goods, as well as the development of contract terms that reduce the risk of antimonopoly disputes arising in the conditions of a bilateral monopoly.

Suggested Citation

  • Meleshkina, Anna (Мелешкина, Анна) & Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия), 2018. "Institutional Initiative of Functioning of Firms in Conditions of a Bilateral Monopoly [Институциональная Инициатива Функционирования Фирм В Условиях Двусторонней Монополии]," Working Papers 041812, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnp:wpaper:041812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.ranepa.ru/rnp/wpaper/041812.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
    3. Robert J. Aumann, 1995. "Repeated Games with Incomplete Information," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011476, December.
    4. Shastitko, Andrey & Shastitko, Anastasia, 2015. "Markets of joint products: A theoretical model and policy implications," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 199-216.
    5. Camerer, Colin, 1992. "The rationality of prices and volume in experimental markets," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 237-272, March.
    6. Nagarajan, Mahesh & Sosic, Greys, 2008. "Game-theoretic analysis of cooperation among supply chain agents: Review and extensions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 719-745, June.
    7. Ernst Fehr & Bettina Rockenbach, 2003. "Detrimental effects of sanctions on human altruism," Nature, Nature, vol. 422(6928), pages 137-140, March.
    8. James N. Morgan, 1949. "Bilateral Monopoly and the Competitive Output," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 63(3), pages 371-391.
    9. Amartya Sen, 1987. "Gender and Cooperative Conflicts," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-1987-018, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Jurdziak, Leszek, 2006. "Lignite price negotiation between opencast mine and power plant as a two-stage, two-person, cooperative, non-zero sum game," MPRA Paper 1600, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Sep 2006.
    11. Russell Cooper & Douglas V. DeJong & Robert Forsythe & Thomas W. Ross, 1989. "Communication in the Battle of the Sexes Game: Some Experimental Results," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(4), pages 568-587, Winter.
    12. Robert Axelrod, 1980. "More Effective Choice in the Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(3), pages 379-403, September.
    13. Joskow, Paul L, 1987. "Contract Duration and Relationship-Specific Investments: Empirical Evidence from Coal Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(1), pages 168-185, March.
    14. COOPER, R. & DEJONG, D.V. & FORSYTHE, R. & Tom Ross, 1989. "Communication In The Battle Of The Sexes Game," Carleton Industrial Organization Research Unit (CIORU) 89-03, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    15. Kerkvliet, Joe, 1991. "Efficiency and Vertical Integration: The Case of Mine-Mouth Electric Generating Plants," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 467-482, September.
    16. William Fellner, 1947. "Prices and Wages under Bilateral Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 61(4), pages 503-532.
    17. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    18. Brekke, Kurt R. & Straume, Odd Rune, 2004. "Bilateral monopolies and location choice," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 275-288, May.
    19. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    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. Spencer, Michael Andrew, 1995. "Structured and unstructured bargaining with positive transaction costs: an experimental investigation," ISU General Staff Papers 1995010108000018183, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Charness, Gary & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Lab Labor: What Can Labor Economists Learn from the Lab?," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 3, pages 229-330, Elsevier.
    3. Rigdon, Mary, 2009. "Trust and reciprocity in incentive contracting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 93-105, May.
    4. Irlenbusch, Bernd, 2004. "Relying on a man's word?: An experimental study on non-binding contracts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 299-332, September.
    5. Güth, Werner, 1998. "Sequential versus independent commitment: An indirect evolutionary analysis of bargaining rules," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 1998,5, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    6. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    7. Elges, Carsten, 2016. "Die Preissetzung in Unternehmenskooperationen: Erste spieltheoretische Überlegungen," Arbeitspapiere 162, University of Münster, Institute for Cooperatives.
    8. Lensberg, Terje & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus Reiner, 2021. "Cold play: Learning across bimatrix games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 419-441.
    9. Brosig, Jeannette, 2006. "Communication channels and induced behavior," MPRA Paper 14035, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. He, Simin & Offerman, Theo & van de Ven, Jeroen, 2019. "The power and limits of sequential communication in coordination games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 238-273.
    11. Tore Ellingsen & Magnus Johannesson, 2004. "Is There a Hold‐up Problem?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 475-494, October.
    12. Katharina Momsen, 2021. "The effects of price information and communication in markets with capacity constraints: An experiment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 871-892, November.
    13. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    14. Feicht, Robert & Grimm, Veronika & Rau, Holger A. & Stephan, Gesine, 2017. "On the impact of quotas and decision rules in collective bargaining," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 175-192.
    15. Spulber, Daniel F., 2016. "Patent licensing and bargaining with innovative complements and substitutes," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 693-713.
    16. Feicht, Robert & Grimm, Veronika & Rau, Holger A. & Stephan, Gesine, 2015. "On the Impact of Quotas and Decision Rules in Ultimatum Collective Bargaining," IZA Discussion Papers 9506, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Rami Zwick & Xiao-Ping Chen, 1999. "What Price Fairness? A Bargaining Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(6), pages 804-823, June.
    18. Fischer, Sven & Guth, Werner & Pull, Kerstin, 2007. "Is there as-if bargaining?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 546-560, August.
    19. James Andreoni, 2018. "Satisfaction Guaranteed: When Moral Hazard Meets Moral Preferences," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 159-189, November.
    20. Okada, Akira & Riedl, Arno, 2005. "Inefficiency and social exclusion in a coalition formation game: experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 278-311, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    antimonopoly policy; intermediate goods; market concentration; switching costs; transaction management mechanisms;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:rnp:wpaper:041812. 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: RANEPA maintainer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aneeeru.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.