IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/blg/journl/v9y2014i3p107-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Market Structure Matter? Evidence From The Indian Cement Industry

Author

Listed:
  • SINGH K. Sanjay

    (Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, India)

  • SINGH K. Sunny

    (Indian Institute of Management Lucknow, India)

  • RAGHAV Shalini

    (RAGHAV Shalini)

Abstract

The main objective of this paper is to answer the question; does the market structure explain the variation in profitability of Indian cement industry? If yes, which measure; if no, why not? To answer this question, we used the empirical technique, the Davidson-MacKinnon’s J test, to test the non-nested hypotheses to choose among the three competing measures of the market structure, CR4, HHI, and CV of market share. We found that none of the measures of market structure are able to explain the variation in profitability of the Indian cement industry. In other words, neither concentration (measured in terms of CR4 and HHI) nor efficiency of the firms (measured in terms of CV of market share) is able to explain the variation in profitability. This result is in line with our expectation since, unlike industry profitability, none of the measures of market structure changed significantly during the sample period. Since Competition Commission of India in June 2012 found 11 cement companies indulging in a price cartel, it is clear from the findings that market structure alone cannot explain the behavior of firms in certain market such as cement industry in India. To detect cartel in such market, more detailed examination is required both at industry as well as firm level.

Suggested Citation

  • SINGH K. Sanjay & SINGH K. Sunny & RAGHAV Shalini, 2014. "Does Market Structure Matter? Evidence From The Indian Cement Industry," Studies in Business and Economics, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 9(3), pages 107-124, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:blg:journl:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:107-124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eccsf.ulbsibiu.ro/RePEc/blg/journl/9310singh&singh&raghav.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    2. Fred A. Forgey & Walter E. Mullendore & Ronald C. Rutherford, 1997. "Market Structure in the Residential Real Estate Brokerage Market," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 14(2), pages 107-116.
    3. Kwoka, John E, Jr, 1981. "Does the Choice of Concentration Measure Really Matter?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 445-453, June.
    4. Peltzman, Sam, 1977. "The Gains and Losses from Industrial Concentration," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(2), pages 229-263, October.
    5. Demsetz, Harold, 1973. "Industry Structure, Market Rivalry, and Public Policy," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 1-9, April.
    6. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    7. Kwoka, John E, Jr, 1979. "The Effect of Market Share Distribution on Industry Performance," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 61(1), pages 101-109, February.
    8. Ravenscraft, David J, 1983. "Structure-Profit Relationships at the Line of Business and Industry Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 65(1), pages 22-31, February.
    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. Schmalensee, Richard., 1985. "Testing the differential efficiency hypothesis," Working papers 1628-85., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Micha Gisser & Raymond Sauer, 2000. "The Aggregate Relation between Profits and Concentration is Consistent with Cournot Behavior," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 16(3), pages 229-246, May.
    3. Michael Salinger, 1990. "The Concentration-Margins Relationship Reconsidered," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 287-335.
    4. Slade, Margaret E., 2004. "Competing models of firm profitability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 289-308, March.
    5. Mark J. Roberts & Dylan Supina, 1997. "Output Price and Markup Dispersion in Micro Data: The Roles of Producer Heterogeneity and Noise," NBER Working Papers 6075, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. J. David Brown & John S. Earle, 2000. "Competition and Firm Performance: Lessons from Russia," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 296, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    7. Schmalensee, Richard, 1985. "Do Markets Differ Much?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 341-351, June.
    8. Natália Barbosa & Helen Louri, 2005. "Corporate Performance: Does Ownership Matter? A Comparison of Foreign- and Domestic-Owned Firms in Greece and Portugal," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 27(1), pages 73-102, August.
    9. Wenyi Chu & Chien-Nan Chen & Chuang-Hung Wang, 2008. "The market share--profitability relationships in the securities industry," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(6), pages 813-826, July.
    10. Abdur Chowdhury, 1996. "An empirical test of the structure‐conduct‐performance paradigm in the Asian and Pacific basin countries," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 233-251.
    11. Mark J Roberts & Dylan Supina, 1997. "Output Price And Markup Dispersion In Micro Data: The Roles Of Producer And Heterogeneity And Noise," Working Papers 97-10, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    12. Darko Tipurić & Mirjana Pejić Bach, 2009. "Changes in Industrial Concentration in the Croatian Economy (1995-2006)," EFZG Working Papers Series 0903, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb.
    13. Hoskins, Jake D. & Carson, Stephen J., 2022. "Industry conditions, market share, and the firm’s ability to derive business-line profitability from diverse technological portfolios," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 178-192.
    14. Mueller, Dennis C., 1996. "Lessons from the United States's antitrust history," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 415-445, June.
    15. Allen N. Berger & David B. Humphrey, 1994. "Bank scale economies, mergers, concentration, and efficiency: the U.S. experience," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 94-23, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    16. Jalal D. Akhavein & Allen N. Berger & David B. Humphrey, "undated". "The Effects of Megamergers on Efficiency and Prices: Evidence from a Bank Profit Function," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 1997-09, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), revised 10 Dec 2019.
    17. J-L Hu & C-Y Fang, 2010. "Do market share and efficiency matter for each other? An application of the zero-sum gains data envelopment analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(4), pages 647-657, April.
    18. Azzeddine Azzam & David Rosenbaum, 2001. "Differential efficiency, market structure and price," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(10), pages 1351-1357.
    19. Jin Lung Peng & Lih Ru Chen & Jennifer L. Wang & Larry Y. Tzeng, 2017. "Diversification Versus Strategic Focus: Evidence from Insurance Intermediaries in Taiwan," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 42(3), pages 530-555, July.
    20. Eleonora Bartoloni & Maurizio Baussola, 2015. "Persistent Product Innovation and Market-oriented Behaviour: the Impact on Firms' Performance," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali dises1505, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).

    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:blg:journl:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:107-124. 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: Mihaela Herciu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feulbro.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.