IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v5y2009i4p747-786..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition Versus Property Rights: American Antitrust Law, The Freiburg School, And The Early Years Of European Competition Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Giocoli

Abstract

This paper investigates the influence of the American antitrust tradition on the foundation and early years of European competition policy. Four main propositions summarize my argument made in this paper. First, when one takes the competition versus property rights dichotomy into account, it becomes evident that the economists' contribution to the historical evolution of U.S. antitrust law has been smaller than usually believed. Second, the American antitrust tradition has had less influence than is commonly claimed over the foundations of European Economic Community (EEC) competition policy. Third, a law and economics argument based on the constitutional standing of competition rules, an argument initially put forward by the highly influential Freiburg School of Ordoliberalism, played a crucial role in the birth of EEC antitrust policy. Fourth, the ordoliberal origin of EEC competition rules, when combined with the Community's integration goal, helps explain why the impact of the competition versus property rights dichotomy on European antitrust law has been limited and, contrary to the U.S. example, solved more favorably to competition than to property rights.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Giocoli, 2009. "Competition Versus Property Rights: American Antitrust Law, The Freiburg School, And The Early Years Of European Competition Policy," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 747-786.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:5:y:2009:i:4:p:747-786.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhp003
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6ssct5c4v093a9sfpao3qpcgr6 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mary S. Morgan, 1993. "Competing Notions of “Competition” in Late Nineteenth-Century American Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 25(4), pages 563-604, Winter.
    3. Reder, Melvin W, 1982. "Chicago Economics: Permanence and Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-38, March.
    4. Hazlett, Thomas W, 1992. "The Legislative History of the Sherman Act Re-examined," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(2), pages 263-276, April.
    5. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2004. "The Freiburg School: Walter Eucken and Ordoliberalism," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 04/11, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    6. Robert L. Bradley, Jr., 1990. "On the Origins of the Sherman Antitrust Act," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 9(3), pages 737-742, Winter.
    7. J. Bradford De Long, 1990. "In Defense of Henry Simon's Standing as a Classical Liberal," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 9(3), pages 601-618, Winter.
    8. Barber,William J., 1989. "From New Era to New Deal," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521367370, October.
    9. Marie-Laure Salles-Djelic, 2002. "Does Europe mean americanization? The case of competition," Post-Print hal-01892017, HAL.
    10. Fiorito, Luca & Henry, John F., 2007. "John Bates Clark on Trusts: New Light from the Columbia Archives," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 229-250, June.
    11. William E. Kovacic & Carl Shapiro, 2000. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    12. Stigler, George J, 1982. "The Economists and the Problem of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(2), pages 1-11, May.
    13. Kovacic, William E, 1992. "The Influence of Economics on Antitrust Law," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(2), pages 294-306, April.
    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. Bougette, Patrice & Deschamps, Marc & Marty, Frédéric, 2015. "When Economics Met Antitrust: The Second Chicago School and the Economization of Antitrust Law," Enterprise & Society, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 313-353, June.
    2. Patrice Bougette & Oliver Budzinski & Frédéric Marty, 2019. "Exploitative Abuse and Abuse of Economic Dependence: What Can We Learn From an Industrial Organization Approach?," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 129(2), pages 261-286.
    3. Thierry Kirat & Frédéric Marty, 2021. "The late emerging consensus among American economists on antitrust laws in the 2nd New Deal (1935-1941)," Post-Print halshs-03261721, HAL.
    4. Marc Deschamps, 2013. "L'articulation économie, droit et politique dans la pensée ordolibérale," GREDEG Working Papers 2013-31, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    5. Dzmitry Bartalevich, 2016. "The Influence of the Chicago School on the Commission's Guidelines, Notices and Block Exemption Regulations in EU Competition Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 267-283, March.
    6. Anna Gerbrandy, 2019. "Rethinking Competition Law within the European Economic Constitution," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 127-142, January.
    7. Agamirova, Maria (Агамирова, Мария) & Dzagurova, Natalia (Дзагурова, Наталия), 2014. "Incentives for cooperative-specific investments from court decisions to the theoretical analysis [Стимулы Для Осуществления Кооперативных Специфических Инвестиций: От Судебных Решений К Теоретическ," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 4, pages 79-97.
    8. Stephen Martin, 2010. "Economic Arguments in U.S. Antitrust and EU Competition Policy: Two Roads Diverged," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1257, Purdue University, Department of Economics.

    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. Giocoli, Nicola, 2008. "Competition vs. property rights: American antitrust law, the Freiburg School and the early years of European competition policy," MPRA Paper 33807, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Giocoli, Nicola, 2008. "Three alternative (?) stories on the late 20th-century rise of game theory," MPRA Paper 33808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Thierry Kirat & Frédéric Marty, 2019. "The Late Emerging Consensus Among American Economists on Antitrust Laws in the Second New Deal," CIRANO Working Papers 2019s-12, CIRANO.
    4. Patrick Newman, 2018. "Revenge: John Sherman, Russell Alger and the origins of the Sherman Act," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 257-275, March.
    5. Thierry Kirat & Frédéric Marty, 2021. "The late emerging consensus among American economists on antitrust laws in the 2nd New Deal (1935-1941)," Post-Print halshs-03261721, HAL.
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5oi5d12qn3983q921gleelod94 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Panhans, Matthew T., 2023. "The Rise, Fall, and Legacy of the Structure-Conduct-Performance Paradigm," SocArXiv dvm3e, Center for Open Science.
    8. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5oi5d12qn3983q921gleelod94 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Luca Fiorito, 2012. "When Economics Faces the Economy: John Bates Clark and the 1914 Antitrust Legislation," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2012_01, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    10. Javier Campos Méndez & Juan Luis Jiménez González, 2003. "Old and new ideas in Competition Policy," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2003-06, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    11. Patrick Mellacher, 2021. "Growth, Inequality and Declining Business Dynamism in a Unified Schumpeter Mark I + II Model," Papers 2111.09407, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    12. Christian Johnson & George G Kaufman, 2007. "Un banco, con cualquier otro nombre…," Boletín, CEMLA, vol. 0(4), pages 185-199, Octubre-d.
    13. Wolfgang Kerber & Oliver Budzinski, "undated". "Towards a Differentiated Analysis of Competition of Competition Laws," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2004-1-1090, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    14. Neri Salvadori & Rodolfo Signorino, 2016. "Competition," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 6, pages 70-81, Edward Elgar Publishing.
      • Salvadori, Neri & Signorino, Rodolfo, 2011. "Competition," MPRA Paper 38387, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Richard Adelstein, 2018. "Border Crossings," Wesleyan Economics Working Papers 2018-006, Wesleyan University, Department of Economics.
    16. Altman, Morris, 2001. "When green isn't mean: economic theory and the heuristics of the impact of environmental regulations on competitiveness and opportunity cost," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 31-44, January.
    17. Octavian-Dragomir Jora & Gheorghe Hurduzeu & Mihaela Iacob & Georgiana-Camelia Cre?an, 2017. "“Dialectical Contradictions” in the Neoclassical Theory and Policy Regarding Market Competition: The Consumer and His Continuos Burden of Crisis," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(45), pages 544-544, May.
    18. Paul H. Rubin & Mark A. Cohen, 1992. "Politically Imposed Entry Barriers," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 333-344, Summer.
    19. Cassey Lee, 2007. "Legal Traditions and Competition Policy," Chapters, in: Paul Cook & Raul Fabella & Cassey Lee (ed.), Competitive Advantage and Competition Policy in Developing Countries, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Mark Blaug, 2001. "Is Competition Such a Good Thing? Static Efficiency versus Dynamic Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(1), pages 37-48, August.
    21. Nicolai J. Foss, 2002. "The Strategy and Transaction Cost Nexus Past Debates, Central Questions, and Future Research Possibilities," DRUID Working Papers 02-04, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    22. Krieger, Tim & Nientiedt, Daniel, 2022. "The renaissance of ordoliberalism in the 1970s and 1980s," Discussion Paper Series 2022-05, University of Freiburg, Wilfried Guth Endowed Chair for Constitutional Political Economy and Competition Policy.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B13 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Neoclassical through 1925 (Austrian, Marshallian, Walrasian, Wicksellian)
    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law

    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:5:y:2009:i:4:p:747-786.. 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: 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.