IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

On the Evolution of Market Institutions: The Platform Design Paradox

  • Carlos Alós-Ferrer
  • Georg Kirchsteiger
  • Markus Walzl

This paper analyses a situation where market designers create new trading platforms and traders learn to select among them. We ask whether 'Walrasian' platforms, leading to market-clearing trading outcomes, will dominate the market in the long run. If several market designers are competing, we find that traders will learn to select non-market clearing platforms with prices systematically above the market-clearing level, provided at least one such platform is introduced by a market designer. This in turn leads all market designers to introduce such non-market clearing platforms. Hence platform competition induces non-competitive market outcomes.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series ULB Institutional Repository with number 2013/149586.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Mar 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in: Economic journal (2010) v.120 n° 543,p.215-243
Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/149586
Contact details of provider: Postal:
CP135, 50, avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles

Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Friedman, Daniel, 1993. "How Trading Institutions Affect Financial Market Performance: Some Laboratory Evidence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 410-35, July.
  2. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson, 2005. "Shrouded Attributes, Consumer Myopia, and Information Suppression in Competitive Markets," NBER Working Papers 11755, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Ellison, G., 1996. "Basins of Attraction, Long Run Equilibria, and the Speed of Step-by- Step Evolution," Working papers 96-4, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  4. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Triole, 2002. "Platform competition in two sided markets," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24929, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  5. Carlos Alós-Ferrer, 2000. "Finite Population Dynamics and Mixed Equilibria," Vienna Economics Papers 0008, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  6. Fudenberg, Drew & Ellison, Glenn, 2003. "Knife-Edge or Plateau: When Do Market Models Tip?," Scholarly Articles 3160493, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  7. Plott, Charles R., . "Industrial Organization Theory and Experimental Economics," Working Papers 405, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  8. Ed Hopkins, 2006. "Adaptive Learning Models of Consumer Behaviour," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000658, UCLA Department of Economics.
  9. Alvin E. Roth & Axel Ockenfels, 2002. "Last-Minute Bidding and the Rules for Ending Second-Price Auctions: Evidence from eBay and Amazon Auctions on the Internet," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1093-1103, September.
  10. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg & Markus Möbius, 2004. "Competing Auctions," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 2(1), pages 30-66, 03.
  11. Georg Kirchsteiger & Muriel Niederle & Jan Potters, 2005. "Endogenizing Market Institutions: An Experimental Approach," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/149583, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  12. Glen Ellison, 2010. "Learning, Local Interaction, and Coordination," Levine's Working Paper Archive 391, David K. Levine.
  13. Dan Ariely & Axel Ockenfels & Alvin E. Roth, 2002. "An Experimental Analysis of Ending Rules in Internet Auctions," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2002-47, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
  14. Binmore, K. & samuelson, L., 1996. "Muddling Through : Noisy Equilibrium Section," Working papers 9410r, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  15. Tamar Kugler & Zvika Neeman & Nir Vulkan, 2003. "Markets Versus Negotiations: An Experimental Investigation," Discussion Paper Series dp319, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
  16. David Lucking-Reiley & Daniel F. Spulber, 2000. "Business-to-Business Electronic Commerce," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0016, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
  17. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
  18. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, 09.
  19. repec:oup:restud:v:45:y:1978:i:1:p:133-53 is not listed on IDEAS
  20. Samuelson Larry, 1994. "Stochastic Stability in Games with Alternative Best Replies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 35-65, October.
  21. Kirchsteiger Georg & Alós-Ferrer Carlos, 2003. "Does Learning Lead to Coordination on Market Clearing Institutions?," Research Memorandum 053, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  22. Spiegler, Ran, 2006. "Competition over agents with boundedly rational expectations," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(2), pages 207-231, June.
  23. Benaim, Michel & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2000. "Deterministic Approximation of Stochastic Evolution in Games," Working Paper Series 534, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 30 Oct 2001.
  24. Lawrence Blume, 1993. "The Statistical Mechanics of Best-Response Strategy Revision," Game Theory and Information 9307001, EconWPA, revised 26 Jan 1994.
  25. Kandori Michihiro & Rob Rafael, 1995. "Evolution of Equilibria in the Long Run: A General Theory and Applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 383-414, April.
  26. Glenn Ellison & Drew Fudenberg, 2003. "Knife-Edge or Plateau: When Do Market Models Tip?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 118(4), pages 1249-1278.
  27. Ockenfels, Axel & Roth, Alvin E., 2006. "Late and multiple bidding in second price Internet auctions: Theory and evidence concerning different rules for ending an auction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 297-320, May.
  28. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
  29. Binmore, Ken & Samuelson, Larry, 1997. "Muddling Through: Noisy Equilibrium Selection," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 235-265, June.
  30. Davila, Antonio & Gupta, Mahendra & Palmer, Richard, 2003. "Moving Procurement Systems to the Internet:: the Adoption and Use of E-Procurement Technology Models," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 11-23, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/149586. 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: (Benoit Pauwels)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.