IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wzb/wzebiv/spii2004-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Export Orientation and Domestic Merger Policy: Theory and Some Empirical Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph A. Clougherty
  • Anming Zhang

Abstract

The recent 'open-economy industrial organization' literature generally finds export-orientation to enhance the weight of post-merger international competitive gains; thereby, favoring lenient domestic merger policy. We observe, however, that mergers seldom generate the ‘significant synergies’ that are supportive of international competitive gains. Further, we explore a joint-economies of production effect which suggests that domestic mergers tend to generate international competitive losses (not gains). Accordingly, we contend that export-orientation favors strict (not lenient) domestic merger policy. In order to support this contention, we develop a model illustrative of how non-synergistic domestic mergers in the presence of international sales might reduce national welfare and incur stringent merger-reviews. Further, using a panel data set composed of U.S. merger policy by manufacturing sector over the 1990-2001 period, we empirically support export-orientation leading to strict merger policy. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Exportorientierung und nationale Fusionspolitik: Theorie und empirische Belege) In der neueren Literatur zur Industrieökonomie in offenen Volkswirtschaften wird allgemein herausgestellt, dass die Zunahme internationaler Wettbewerbs-vorteile durch eine Fusion umso stärker ins Gewicht fällt, je höher die Exportorientierung der Volkswirtschaft ist. Mithin wird eine nachsichtige nationale Fusionskontrolle befürwortet. Im Gegensatz dazu stellen wir fest, dass Unternehmenszusammenschlüsse oft nicht die beabsichtigten signifi-kanten Synergieeffekte haben, die die internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit des Unternehmens tatsächlich stärken würden. Stattdessen führen Fusionen eher zu internationalen Wettbewerbsnachteilen. Eine Ursache dafür finden wir im "joint economies of production - Effekt", den wir hier näher untersuchen. Entsprechend kommen wir zu der Auffassung, dass die Exportorientierung einer Volkswirtschaft statt für eine nachsichtige eher für eine strenge Fusions-kontrolle spricht. Das von uns entwickelte Modell veranschaulicht, wie Fusionen von Unter-nehmen, bei denen der Synergieeffekt ausbleibt, in einer offenen Volkswirt-schaft die Wohlfahrt des Landes reduzieren, und lässt erkennen, dass diese Auswirkungen strengere Fusionsprüfungen nahe legen. Auch empirisch belegen wir unsere These über den Zusammenhang von Exportorientierung und strengerer Fusionspolitik anhand von Paneldaten der Jahre 1990-2001, in denen die US-amerikanischen Fusionsentscheidungen nach den Sektoren des produzierenden Gewerbes geordnet zusammengefasst sind.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph A. Clougherty & Anming Zhang, 2004. "Export Orientation and Domestic Merger Policy: Theory and Some Empirical Evidence," CIG Working Papers SP II 2004-10, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
  • Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:spii2004-10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://skylla.wz-berlin.de/pdf/2004/ii04-10.pdf
    File Function: Full text (original version)
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brander, James & Krugman, Paul, 1983. "A 'reciprocal dumping' model of international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3-4), pages 313-321, November.
    2. Martin Richardson, 2017. "Trade and Competition Policies: Concordia Discors?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Dimensions of Trade Policy, chapter 11, pages 221-242, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1990. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-126, March.
    4. Horn, Henrik & Levinsohn, James, 2001. "Merger Policies and Trade Liberalisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(470), pages 244-276, April.
    5. Gugler, Klaus & Mueller, Dennis C. & Yurtoglu, B. Burcin & Zulehner, Christine, 2003. "The effects of mergers: an international comparison," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 625-653, May.
    6. Ghosal, Vivek, 2002. "Potential foreign competition in US manufacturing," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 1461-1489, December.
    7. Levinsohn, James, 1993. "Testing the imports-as-market-discipline hypothesis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Siegfried, John J, 1975. "The Determinants of Antitrust Activity," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 559-574, October.
    9. David Sibley & Ken Heyer, 2003. "Selected Economic Analysis at the Antitrust Division: The Year in Review," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 23(2), pages 95-119, September.
    10. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    11. Barros, Pedro P. & Cabral, Luis, 1994. "Merger policy in open economies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 1041-1055, May.
    12. Zhang, Anming & Zhang, Yimin, 1996. "Stability of a Cournot-Nash equilibrium: The multiproduct case," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 441-462.
    13. Harrison, Ann E., 1994. "Productivity, imperfect competition and trade reform : Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1-2), pages 53-73, February.
    14. Gregor Andrade & Mark Mitchell & Erik Stafford, 2001. "New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 103-120, Spring.
    15. Lin Bian & D. G. McFetridge, 2000. "The efficiencies defence in merger cases: implications of alternative standards," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 297-318, May.
    16. Yano, Makoto, 2001. "Trade Imbalance and Domestic Market Competition Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(3), pages 729-750, August.
    17. Brander, James A., 1981. "Intra-industry trade in identical commodities," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Tae Hoon Oum & Anming Zhang & Yimin Zhang, 1995. "Airline Network Rivalry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 28(4a), pages 836-857, November.
    19. Keith Head & John Ries, 1997. "International Mergers and Welfare under Decentralized Competition Policy," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(4), pages 1104-1123, November.
    20. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    21. Warzynski, Frederic, 2001. "Did tough antitrust policy lead to lower mark-ups in the US manufacturing industry?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 139-144, January.
    22. Auquier, A A & Caves, R E, 1979. "Monopolistic Export Industries, Trade Taxes, and Optimal Competition Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(355), pages 559-581, September.
    23. Joseph A Clougherty, 2001. "Globalization and the Autonomy of Domestic Competition Policy: An Empirical Test on the World Airline Industry," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 32(3), pages 459-478, September.
    24. Dixit, Avinash K, 1986. "Comparative Statics for Oligopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(1), pages 107-122, February.
    25. Sorgard, Lars, 1997. "Domestic merger policy in an international oligopoly: The Nordic market for electricity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 239-253, May.
    26. Granger, C W J, 1969. "Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(3), pages 424-438, July.
    27. James Tobin, 1956. "Estimation of Relationships for Limited Dependent Variables," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 3R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    28. Long, William F & Schramm, Richard & Tollison, Robert D, 1973. "The Economic Determinants of Antitrust Activity," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(2), pages 351-364, October.
    29. Lin Bian, 2000. "The efficiencies defence in merger cases: implications of alternative standards," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 297-318, May.
    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. Marina Tsygankova, 2007. "The Export of Russian Gas to Europe: Breaking Up the Monopoly of Gazprom," Energy and Environmental Modeling 2007 24000062, EcoMod.
    2. Joseph A. Clougherty & Anming Zhang, 2009. "Domestic rivalry and export performance: theory and evidence from international airline markets," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 440-468, May.
    3. Ohashi, Hiroshi & Toyama, Yuta, 2017. "The effects of domestic merger on exports: A case study of the 1998 Korean automobile industry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 147-164.
    4. Rikard Forslid & Jonas Häckner & Astri Muren, 2011. "Trade costs and the timing of competition policy adoption," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 171-200, February.
    5. Joseph A. Clougherty, 2005. "Industry Trade Balance And Domestic Merger Policy: Empirical Evidence From U.S. Merger Policy For Manufacturing Sectors," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(3), pages 404-415, July.
    6. Sugata Marjit & Moushakhi Ray, 2020. "Asset Level Heterogeneity, Competition and Export Incentives: The Role of Credit Rationing," CESifo Working Paper Series 8208, CESifo.
    7. Ho, Chun-Yu & McCarthy, Patrick & Wang, Yanhao, 2021. "Competition and countervailing power: Evidence from the China Eastern and Shanghai Airlines merger," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. Joseph Clougherty, 2010. "Competition Policy Trends and Economic Growth: Cross-National Empirical Evidence," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 111-127.
    9. Marjit, Sugata & Ray, Moushakhi, 2017. "Export profitability, competition and technology," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 35-45.
    10. Nobuyuki Takashima & Yasunori Ouchida, 2020. "Quality‐improving R&D and merger policy in a differentiated duopoly: Cournot and Bertrand equilibria," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(7), pages 1338-1348, October.
    11. Nakamura, Masao & Zhang, Anming, 2018. "Foreign direct investment with host country market structures, with empirical application to Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 43-53.
    12. Tsygankova, Marina, 2012. "An evaluation of alternative scenarios for the Gazprom monopoly of Russian gas exports," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 153-161.

    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. Joseph A. Clougherty, 2005. "Industry Trade Balance And Domestic Merger Policy: Empirical Evidence From U.S. Merger Policy For Manufacturing Sectors," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(3), pages 404-415, July.
    2. Joseph A. Clougherty, 2005. "Antitrust holdup source, cross‐national institutional variation, and corporate political strategy implications for domestic mergers in a global context," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 769-790, August.
    3. Joseph A. Clougherty, 2003. "Industry Trade-Balance and Domestic Merger Policy: Some Empirical Evidence from the U.S," CIG Working Papers SP II 2003-19, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    4. Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, 2014. "Cross-Border Mergers and Market Segmentation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(2), pages 229-257, June.
    5. Joseph A. Clougherty & Anming Zhang, 2009. "Domestic rivalry and export performance: theory and evidence from international airline markets," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 440-468, May.
    6. Kjell Erik Lommerud & Odd Rune Straume & Lars Sørgard, 2006. "National versus international mergers in unionized oligopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 212-233, March.
    7. Rikard Forslid & Jonas Häckner & Astri Muren, 2011. "Trade costs and the timing of competition policy adoption," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(1), pages 171-200, February.
    8. Andreas Haufler & Søren Bo Nielsen, 2008. "Merger policy to promote 'global players'? A simple model," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 517-545, July.
    9. Zhang, Anming, 2005. "Competition Models of Strategic Alliances," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 75-100, January.
    10. Frank Stähler & Thorsten Upmann, 2008. "Market Entry Regulation and International Competition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 611-626, September.
    11. Breinlich, Holger & Nocke, Volker & Schutz, Nicolas, 2017. "International aspects of merger policy: A survey," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 415-429.
    12. Avalos, Marcos & Schatán, Claudia, 2004. "Condiciones de competencia en el contexto internacional: Cemento, azúcar y fertilizantes en Centroamérica," EGAP Working Papers 2004-08, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México.
    13. Neven, Damien J. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik, 2000. "The allocation of jurisdiction in international antitrust," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(4-6), pages 845-855, May.
    14. Andreas Haufler & Christian Schulte, 2007. "Merger Policy and Tax Competition," Working Papers 035, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    15. Arijit Mukherjee & Umut Erksan Senalp, 2021. "Firm‐productivity and cross border merger," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 838-859, September.
    16. Ulus Aysegul & Yildiz Halis M., 2012. "On the Relationship between Tariff Levels and the Nature of Mergers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-40, December.
    17. Andreas Haufler & Christian Schulte, 2011. "Merger policy and tax competition: the role of foreign firm ownership," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(2), pages 121-145, April.
    18. Tannista Banerjee & Arnab Nayak, 2015. "Comparing Domestic and Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 43(4), pages 489-499, December.
    19. Park, Jong-Hun & Zhang, Anming & Zhang, Yimin, 2001. "Analytical models of international alliances in the airline industry," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 865-886, November.
    20. Beladi, Hamid & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2012. "Footloose foreign firm and profitable domestic merger," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 186-194.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    open-economy; merger-policy; export-orientation; antitrust;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General

    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:wzb:wzebiv:spii2004-10. 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: Jennifer Rontganger (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cicwzde.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.