IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bailouts in a Common Market: A Strategic Approach


  • Ela Glowicka


Governments in the EU grant Rescue and Restructure Subsidies to bail out ailing firms. In an international asymmetric Cournot duopoly we study effects of such subsidies on market structure and welfare. We adopt a common market setting, where consumers from the two countries form one market. We show that the subsidy is positive also when it fails to prevent the exit. The reason is a strategic effect, which forces the more efficient firm to make additional costreducing effort. When the exit is prevented, allocative and productive efficiencies are lower and the only gaining player is the rescued firm. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG - (Bail-out in gemeinsamen Märkten: Ein strategischer Ansatz) Die Regierungen der EU gewähren staatliche Beihilfe zur Rettung und Umstrukturierung von Unternehmen in Schwierigkeiten. In einem internationalen asymmetrischen Cournot-Duopol werden die Wohlfahrtseffekte und die Konsequenzen solcher Beihilfe für die Marktstruktur analysiert. Grundannahme ist ein gemeinsamer Markt, auf dem Verbraucher aus zwei Ländern zusammenkommen. Es wird gezeigt, dass die optimale Beihilfe positiv ist, auch wenn der Marktaustritt einer Firma nicht verhindert werden kann. Der Grund hierfür ist ein strategischer Effekt, der die effizientere Firma zu einer zusätzlichen kostenreduzierenden Maßnahme veranlasst. Wird der Marktaustritt verhindert, sind Allokations- und Produktionseffizienzen geringer, und der einzige aufholende Teilnehmer ist die gerettete Firma.

Suggested Citation

  • Ela Glowicka, 2005. "Bailouts in a Common Market: A Strategic Approach," CIG Working Papers SP II 2005-20, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
  • Handle: RePEc:wzb:wzebiv:spii2005-20

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text (original version)
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. d'Aspremont, Claude & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1133-1137, December.
    2. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 1997. "Public Policy towards R&D in Oligopolistic Industries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 642-662, September.
    3. Marc Escrihuela-Villar, 2008. "Innovation And Market Concentration With Asymmetric Firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 195-207.
    4. Zhao, Jingang, 2001. "A characterization for the negative welfare effects of cost reduction in Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 455-469, March.
    5. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    6. Neary, J. Peter, 1994. "Cost asymmetries in international subsidy games: Should governments help winners or losers?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 197-218, November.
    7. James A. Brander & Barbara J. Spencer, 1983. "Strategic Commitment with R&D: The Symmetric Case," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 225-235, Spring.
    8. Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Sinclair-Desgagne, Bernard, 1996. "On the heterogeneity of firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 531-539, April.
    9. Timothy Besley & Paul Seabright, 1999. "The effects and policy implications of state aids to industry: an economic analysis," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 14(28), pages 13-53, April.
    10. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    11. Philippe Aghion & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "On the welfare effects and political economy of competition-enhancing policies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(498), pages 800-824, October.
    12. Aiginger, Karl & Pfaffermayr, Michael, 1997. "Looking at the Cost Side of "Monopoly."," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 245-267, September.
    13. Lahiri, Sajal & Ono, Yoshiyasu, 1988. "Helping Minor Firms Reduces Welfare," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1199-1202, December.
    14. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    15. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    16. Leahy, Dermot & Montagna, Catia, 2001. "Strategic Trade Policy with Heterogeneous Costs," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 177-182, July.
    17. Vickers, John, 1995. "Concepts of Competition," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 1-23, January.
    18. Collie, David R., 2000. "State aid in the European Union: The prohibition of subsidies in an integrated market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 867-884, August.
    19. David Collie, 2002. "Prohibiting State Aid in an Integrated Market: Cournot and Bertrand Oligopolies with Differentiated Products," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 215-231, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Glowicka, Ela, 2006. "Effectiveness of bailouts in the EU," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 176, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.

    More about this item


    subsidies; asymmetric oligopoly; exit; European Union;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L52 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Industrial Policy; Sectoral Planning Methods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:spii2005-20. 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: (Jennifer Rontganger). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.