IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwple/0512003.html

New Anti-Merger Theories: A Critique

Author

Listed:
  • Edward J. Lopez

    (San Jose State University)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate two new anti-merger instruments, innovation markets and unilateral effects, on the basis of economic theory and evidence. I first discuss how the economics of antitrust has developed over the years, with the intention of characterizing the intellectual inheritance of 1990s’ antitrust regulators. Within this context, I then discuss each anti-merger instrument, how it has been applied in specific cases, and how it accords with underlying economic science. On the basis of these arguments, antitrust regulators should pause and reconsider the theoretical and empirical bases of applying unilateral effects and innovation markets to merger investigations.

Suggested Citation

  • Edward J. Lopez, 2005. "New Anti-Merger Theories: A Critique," Law and Economics 0512003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwple:0512003
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 20. This paper was published in Cato Journal, Winter 2001. Stable URL:
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/le/papers/0512/0512003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Spence, Michael, 1983. "Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure: A Review Article," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 981-990, September.
    3. Robert D. Tollison, 1985. "Public Choice and Antitrust," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 4(3), pages 905-931, Winter.
    4. Faith, Roger L & Leavens, Donald R & Tollison, Robert D, 1982. "Antitrust Pork Barrel," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(2), pages 329-342, October.
    5. Fred S. McChesney, 1991. "Antitrust and Regulation: Chicago's Contradictory Views," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 10(3), pages 775-798, Winter.
    6. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    7. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1983. "Raising Rivals' Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 267-271, May.
    8. George J. Stigler, 1983. "The Origin of the Sherman Act," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 27, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
    9. Jorde, Thomas M & Teece, David J, 1990. "Innovation and Cooperation: Implications for Competition and Antitrust," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 75-96, Summer.
    10. McChesney, Fred S. & Shughart II, William F. (ed.), 1995. "The Causes and Consequences of Antitrust," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226556352, August.
    11. Brock, William A, 1983. "Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure: A Review Article," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(6), pages 1055-1066, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. E. Cefis & A. Sabidussi & E.J.J Schenk, 2007. "Do mergers of potentially dominant firms foster innovation? An empirical analysis for the manufacturing sector," Working Papers 07-20, Utrecht School of Economics.

    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. William F. Shughart, 2022. "On the Virginia school of antitrust: Competition policy, law & economics and public choice," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 1-19, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Michael C. Munger, 2022. "Giants among us: do we need a new antitrust paradigm?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 445-460, December.
    4. Rabah Amir, "undated". "Market Structure, Scale Economies and Industry Performance," CIE Discussion Papers 2000-03, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
    5. Dasgupta Utteeyo, 2011. "Are Entry Threats Always Credible?," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-41, December.
    6. Bryan Caplan & Edward Stringham, 2003. "Networks, Law, and the Paradox of Cooperation," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 16(4), pages 309-326, December.
    7. Paul H. Rubin & Mark A. Cohen, 1992. "Politically Imposed Entry Barriers," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 333-344, Summer.
    8. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    9. William Shughart & Fred McChesney, 2010. "Public choice theory and antitrust policy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 385-406, March.
    10. Attila Ambrus & Rossella Argenziano, 2004. "Network Markets and Consumers Coordination," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1481, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Donald Dewey, 1984. "What Price Theory Can—And Cannot—Do For Antitrust," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 3(2), pages 3-11, December.
    12. Majah-Leah Ravago & James Roumasset & Arsenio Balisacan, 2021. "Adapting Competition Law and Policy for Economic Development: Asian Illustrations," Working Papers 202103, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    13. Gary Dymski, 2016. "Reclaiming the analysis of market power and competition in crisis-prone capitalism: Reflections on The Great Leveler," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(12), pages 2532-2537, December.
    14. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    15. Michael G Jacobides & Ioannis Lianos, 2021. "Ecosystems and competition law in theory and practice [Ecosystem as structure: an actionable construct for strategy]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 30(5), pages 1199-1229.
    16. Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2000. "Risques à grande échelle dans les systèmes en réseau : quelques interrogations," CIRANO Working Papers 2000s-02, CIRANO.
    17. Joseph A. Clougherty & Nan Zhang, 2021. "Foreign investor reactions to risk and uncertainty in antitrust: U.S. merger policy investigations and the deterrence of foreign acquirer presence," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(3), pages 454-478, April.
    18. Charles Ka Yui Leung & Joe Cho Yiu Ng & Edward Chi Ho TANG, 2019. "What do we know about Housing Supply? The case of Hong Kong," GRU Working Paper Series GRU_2019_012, City University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics and Finance, Global Research Unit.
    19. Campos, Javier & Jiménez, Juan Luis & Perdiguero, Jordi, 2015. "Contestability and public concern about airfares: A case study in the Canary Islands," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 180-186.
    20. Charles Knoeber & Mark Walker, 2013. "On political connectedness and the arrest of Ivan Boesky," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 41-50, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • K - Law and Economics

    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:wpa:wuwple:0512003. 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: EconWPA The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask EconWPA to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.