IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v4y2008i4p1009-1029..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Antitrust Law Index For Empirical Analysis Of International Competition Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Michael W. Nicholson

Abstract

This paper introduces means of quantifying the global proliferation in antitrust laws, particularly through measures to assess the presence of such laws across a large set of countries. The Antitrust Law Index maps the presence of “laws on the book” into a numerical measure of competition regimes by assigning binomial scores for the presence of particular laws in a jurisdiction, and then summing the individual components to yield a total score. The key result is that strong laws do not necessarily represent effective antitrust policy. There appears to be a nonlinear relationship between adaptation of antitrust laws and the size of national economies. The results suggest that the impetus for adopting antitrust laws appears to be related to the guidelines of “model” laws and highlights the gap between de jure legislation and de facto implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael W. Nicholson, 2008. "An Antitrust Law Index For Empirical Analysis Of International Competition Policy," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1009-1029.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:4:y:2008:i:4:p:1009-1029.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhn009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Klaus Friesenbichler, 2014. "EU Accession, Domestic Market Competition and Total Factor Productivity. Firm Level Evidence," WIFO Working Papers 492, WIFO.
    2. Joan-Ramon Borrell & Juan Luis Jiménez & Carmen García, 2014. "Evaluating Antitrust Leniency Programs," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 107-136.
    3. Klaus Friesenbichler & Michael Böheim & Daphne Channa Laster, 2014. "Market Competition in Transition Economies: A Literature Review," WIFO Working Papers 477, WIFO.
    4. Timothy Besley & Nicola Fontana & Nicola Limodio, 2021. "Antitrust Policies and Profitability in Nontradable Sectors," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 251-265, June.
    5. Hüschelrath, Kai, 2009. "Methodologische Grundlagen einer Evaluation von Wettbewerbspolitik," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-084, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Robert Feinberg & Mieke Meurs & Kara Reynolds, 2012. "Maintaining New Markets: Explaining Antitrust Enforcement in Central and Eastern Europe," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 203-219, June.
    7. Bogumiła Mucha-Leszko & Magdalena Kąkol, 2009. "Wzrost znaczenia i formy międzynarodowej polityki konkurencji," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 5-6, pages 21-38.
    8. Anu Bradford & Adam S. Chilton & Christopher Megaw & Nathaniel Sokol, 2019. "Competition Law Gone Global: Introducing the Comparative Competition Law and Enforcement Datasets," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 411-443, June.
    9. Konstantin A. Kholodilin & Linus Pfeiffer, 2021. "Measuring Unmeasurable: How to Map Laws to Numbers Using Leximetrics," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1933, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Tay-Cheng Ma, 2012. "Legal tradition and antitrust effectiveness," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 1263-1297, December.
    11. Niels Petersen, 2013. "Antitrust Law And The Promotion Of Democracy And Economic Growth," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 593-636.

    More about this item

    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:oup:jcomle:v:4:y:2008:i:4:p:1009-1029.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    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.