IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/epolin/v44y2017i2d10.1007_s40812-016-0049-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The market power requirement in antitrust enforcement and its usefulness

Author

Listed:
  • V. Bageri

    (NERA Economic Consulting)

  • Y. Katsoulacos

    (Athens University of Economics and Business)

Abstract

In competition law the concept of “significant existing market power” is often considered as a prerequisite to examining whether a business conduct gives rise to liability and, traditionally, the value of the Lerner index (the proportional price–cost margin) is used to measure the size of market power. In this paper we discuss in detail the role of the size of existing market power as a predictor of the size of the reduction in welfare generated by anticompetitive actions/conducts. We concentrate on monopolization or abuse of dominance conducts in which an exclusionary action by the dominant firm eliminates one of the rival firms. The main point which emerges from our analysis is that the source of market power is very important in understanding how changes in the size of extant market power affect the size of the reduction in welfare. We consider vertical and horizontal product differentiation and market structure as alternative sources of market power. We show that in contrast to Kaplow (Goals of competition law, Edward Elgar, pp 3–26, 2012), a significant extant market power requirement can be justified if either a Total Welfare Standard (TWS) or a Consumer Surplus Standard (CSS) is used and that this will be the case if the market power is the result of horizontal product differentiation or the result of a smaller initial number of competing firms. Further, we show, again in contrast to Kaplow (Goals of competition law, Edward Elgar, pp 3–26, 2012), that such a requirement may not be justified under either a CSS or a TWS—as when the market power is the result of vertical product differentiation. We also examine how extant market power and market share vary with the degree of product differentiation and market structure. We show that market shares vary inversely with the Lerner index as horizontal differentiation increases and directly as vertical differentiation increases and as the number of firms decreases, thus proving the irrelevance in many cases of market share as a predictor of market power.

Suggested Citation

  • V. Bageri & Y. Katsoulacos, 2017. "The market power requirement in antitrust enforcement and its usefulness," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 44(2), pages 145-159, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:epolin:v:44:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s40812-016-0049-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s40812-016-0049-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40812-016-0049-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40812-016-0049-2?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. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Law and Economics," Handbook of Law and Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    2. Kaplow, Louis, 2015. "Market definition, market power," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 148-161.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Michael Katz, 2006. "The Economics of Welfare Standards in Antitrust," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 2.
    4. Jonas Häckner, 2001. "Market Delineation and Product Differentiation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 81-99, March.
    5. Louis Kaplow, 2015. "Market Definition, Market Power," NBER Working Papers 21167, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Hackner, Jonas, 2000. "A Note on Price and Quantity Competition in Differentiated Oligopolies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 233-239, August.
    7. Judy Hsu & X. Wang, 2005. "On Welfare under Cournot and Bertrand Competition in Differentiated Oligopolies," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 27(2), pages 185-191, September.
    8. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Law and Economics," Handbook of Law and Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    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. Miguel González-Maestre & Lluís M. Granero, 2016. "Merger policy in innovative industries," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 15(3), pages 131-147, December.
    2. Andrzej Baniak & Peter Grajzl, 2017. "Optimal Liability when Consumers Mispredict Product Usage," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 202-243.
    3. Mostafa Beshkar & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2017. "Dispute Settlement with Second-Order Uncertainty: The Case of International Trade Disputes," CAEPR Working Papers 2017-010, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    4. Menusch Khadjavi, 2018. "Deterrence works for criminals," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 165-178, August.
    5. Sophie Bienenstock, 2019. "The Deterrent Effect of French Liability Law: the Example of Abusive Contract Terms," Post-Print hal-03222207, HAL.
    6. Alberto Galasso & Hong Luo, 2018. "Punishing Robots: Issues in the Economics of Tort Liability and Innovation in Artificial Intelligence," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 493-504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Battista Ramello, 2018. "The market of academic attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 113-133, January.
    8. Dennis, Richard & Kirsanova, Tatiana, 2016. "Computing Markov-Perfect Optimal Policies In Business-Cycle Models," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(7), pages 1850-1872, October.
    9. Fluet, Claude, 2020. "L'économie de la preuve judiciaire," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 96(4), pages 585-620, Décembre.
    10. Goerke, Laszlo & Neugart, Michael, 2015. "Lobbying and dismissal dispute resolution systems," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 50-62.
    11. Eric Sjöberg, 2014. "Settlement under the threat of conflict-The cost of asymmetric information," Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, University of Utah 2014_02, University of Utah, Department of Economics.
    12. Tuomas Takalo, 2012. "Rationales and Instruments for Public Innovation Policies," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 1, pages 157-167.
    13. Louis Kaplow, 2017. "Optimal Multistage Adjudication," NBER Working Papers 23364, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Mankart, Jochen & Rodano, Giacomo, 2015. "Personal bankruptcy law, debt portfolios, and entrepreneurship," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 157-172.
    15. Yahagi, Ken, 2021. "Law enforcement with motivated agents," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    16. Wang, Xiaojin, 2016. "The Value of Country-of-Origin and Wild-Caught Labels: A Hedonic Analysis of Shrimp Retail Prices in the United States," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230197, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    17. Marc Lipsitch & Nicholas G. Evans & Owen Cotton‐Barratt, 2017. "Underprotection of Unpredictable Statistical Lives Compared to Predictable Ones," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(5), pages 893-904, May.
    18. L. A. Franzoni, 2016. "Optimal liability design under risk and ambiguity," Working Papers wp1048, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Buehler, Stefan & Nicolas Eschenbaum, 2018. "Explaining Escalating Fines and Prices: The Curse of Positive Selection," Economics Working Paper Series 1807, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    20. Laszlo Goerke, 2014. "Tax Evasion by Individuals," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201409, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antitrust enforcement; Antitrust law; Screen tests; Market power requirement; Role of market share;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies
    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative 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:spr:epolin:v:44:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s40812-016-0049-2. 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.