IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jeczfn/v107y2012i3p239-255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leaders and competitors

Author

Listed:
  • Susumu Cato
  • Ryoko Oki

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to investigate the properties of equilibrium in a market with a leader. In particular, we examine how the equilibrium values depend on existing competitors. When the number of competitors is exogenously given, most equilibrium values, including the leader’s strategies, depend on the structure of the competitors: the number of incumbent competitors, their technologies, and their objective functions. In contrast, when an entry is endogenous, the equilibrium values, including not only the leader’s strategies but the entrants’ as well, are independent of such properties of the incumbent competitors. We provide several applications of our main result in industrial organization issues. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Susumu Cato & Ryoko Oki, 2012. "Leaders and competitors," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 239-255, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jeczfn:v:107:y:2012:i:3:p:239-255
    DOI: 10.1007/s00712-012-0271-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00712-012-0271-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00712-012-0271-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Federico Etro, 2006. "Aggressive leaders," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 146-154, March.
    2. Hiroaki Ino & Toshihiro Matsumura, 2012. "How Many Firms Should Be Leaders? Beneficial Concentration Revisited," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1323-1340, November.
    3. Kovác, Eugen & Vinogradov, Viatcheslav & Zigic, Kresimir, 2010. "Technological leadership and persistence of monopoly under endogenous entry: Static versus dynamic analysis," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1421-1441, August.
    4. Davidson, Carl & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2007. "Horizontal mergers with free entry," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 157-172, February.
    5. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1988. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt0tp305nx, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. Federico Etro, 2008. "Stackelberg Competition with Endogenous Entry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1670-1697, October.
    7. Okuno-Fujiwara, Masahiro & Suzumura, Kotaro, 1993. "Symmetric Cournot Oligopoly and Economic Welfare: A Synthesis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(1), pages 43-59, January.
    8. Ludovic Julien, 2011. "A note on Stackelberg competition," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(2), pages 171-187, June.
    9. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 1990. "Horizontal Mergers: An Equilibrium Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 107-126, March.
    10. Attila Tasnádi, 2010. "Quantity-setting games with a dominant firm," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 99(3), pages 251-266, April.
    11. Suzumura, Kotaro, 1992. "Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1307-1320, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Toshihiro Matsumura & Osamu Kanda, 2005. "Mixed Oligopoly at Free Entry Markets," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 27-48, February.
    14. Masatoshi Kato & Yuji Honjo, 2009. "The persistence of market leadership: evidence from Japan," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(6), pages 1107-1133, December.
    15. Delbono, Flavio & Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1993. "Regulating innovative activity : The role of a public firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 35-48, March.
    16. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Etro, Federico Gabriele & Kraft, Kornelius, 2008. "The Effect of Entry on R&D Investment of Leaders: Theory and Empirical Evidence," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-078, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Iwai, Katsuhito, 2000. "A contribution to the evolutionary theory of innovation, imitation and growth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 167-198, October.
    18. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-366, May.
    19. Ishibashi, Ikuo & Matsumura, Toshihiro, 2006. "R&D competition between public and private sectors," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(6), pages 1347-1366, August.
    20. repec:bla:ausecp:v:41:y:2002:i:2:p:185-90 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Cato, Susumu & Oki, Ryoko, 2011. "The top-dog and the lean and hungry look strategies in endogenous entry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2776-2782.
    22. Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna, 1998. "R&D Competition in a Mixed Duopoly under Uncertainty and Easy Imitation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 415-428, September.
    23. Susumu Cato, 2011. "Privatization Policy And Cost‐Reducing Investment By The Private Sector," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 79(6), pages 1157-1178, December.
    24. Susumu Cato, 2012. "The Efficiency Of The State‐Owned Firm And Social Welfare: A Note," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(2), pages 275-285, April.
    25. Federico Etro, 2004. "Innovation by leaders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 281-303, April.
    26. Akira Nishimori & Hikaru Ogawa, 2002. "Public Monopoly, Mixed Oligopoly and Productive Efficiency," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 185-190, June.
    27. Daughety, Andrew F, 1990. "Beneficial Concentration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1231-1237, 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. Federico Etro, 2023. "Hybrid Marketplaces with Free Entry of Sellers," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 62(2), pages 119-148, March.
    2. Hiroaki Ino & Akira Miyaoka, 2016. "Government-induced Production Commitment in the Open Economy," Discussion Paper Series 142, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University, revised May 2016.
    3. Angela C. Chao & Jen-yao Lee & Leonard F.S. Wang, 2017. "Stackelberg Competition, Innovation and Social Efficiency of Entry," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 85(1), pages 1-12, January.

    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. Susumu Cato & Toshihiro Matsumura, 2019. "Entry License Tax: Stackelberg versus Cournot," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 175(2), pages 258-271.
    2. Federico Etro, 2010. "Endogenous market structures and antitrust policy," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 57(1), pages 9-45, March.
    3. Hiroaki Ino & Toshihiro Matsumura, 2012. "How Many Firms Should Be Leaders? Beneficial Concentration Revisited," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1323-1340, November.
    4. Wang, Leonard F.S. & Lee, Jen-yao, 2013. "Foreign penetration and undesirable competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 729-732.
    5. Federico Etro, 2014. "The Theory Of Endogenous Market Structures," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 804-830, December.
    6. Hiroaki Ino & Toshihiro Matsumura, 2010. "What role should public enterprises play in free-entry markets?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 101(3), pages 213-230, November.
    7. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    8. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:33:p:1-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Federico Etro, 2014. "Some thoughts on the Sutton approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 99-113, June.
    10. Junichiro Ishida & Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2011. "Market Competition, R&D And Firm Profits In Asymmetric Oligopoly," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 484-505, September.
    11. Long, Ngo Van & Soubeyran, Antoine, 2001. "Cost Manipulation Games in Oligopoly, with Costs of Manipulating," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(2), pages 505-533, May.
    12. Angela C. Chao & Jen-yao Lee & Leonard F.S. Wang, 2017. "Stackelberg Competition, Innovation and Social Efficiency of Entry," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 85(1), pages 1-12, January.
    13. Chen, Jiaqi & Lee, Sang-ho & Muminov, Timur K., 2019. "Time-inconsistent Output Subsidy/Tax Policies in Free-entry Mixed Markets," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 60(1), pages 61-77, June.
    14. Cato, Susumu & Oki, Ryoko, 2011. "The top-dog and the lean and hungry look strategies in endogenous entry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2776-2782.
    15. Toshihiro Matsumura & Yasunori Okumura, 2014. "Comparison between specific taxation and volume quotas in a free entry Cournot oligopoly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 125-132, October.
    16. Etro, Federico, 2016. "Research in economics and industrial organization," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 511-517.
    17. Levin, Mark (Левин, Марк) & Matrosova, K. (Матросова, К.), 2016. "Research, Modeling and Process Management Dissemination of Innovations in Socio-Economic Systems [Исследование, Моделирование И Управление Процессами Распространения Инноваций В Социально-Экономиче," Working Papers 1443, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    18. Maria José Gil-Moltó & Joanna Poyago-Theotoky & Vasileios Zikos, 2011. "R&D Subsidies, Spillovers, and Privatization in Mixed Markets," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 233-255, July.
    19. Greg Shaffer & Stephen W. Salant, 1999. "Unequal Treatment of Identical Agents in Cournot Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 585-604, June.
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:24:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Saha, Souresh, 2014. "Firm's objective function and product and process R&D," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 484-494.
    22. Haraguchi, Junichi & Matsumura, Toshihiro, 2017. "Firms' Costs, Profits, Entries, and Innovation under Optimal Privatization Policy," MPRA Paper 80927, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Leadership; Endogenous entry; Strategic commitment; Incumbent competitor; L11; L13; L16;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure

    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:kap:jeczfn:v:107:y:2012:i:3:p:239-255. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.