IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bol/bodewp/wp970.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

To Adjust or not to Adjust after a Cost-Push Shock? A Simple Duopoly Model with (and without) Resilience

Author

Listed:
  • L. Lambertini
  • L. Marattin

Abstract

We characterize the equilibrium in a homogeneous good Cournot duopoly in which firms have the choice to react to a cost-push shock by paying a lump-sum adjustment cost in order to offset the initial rise in marginal cost. Our results show that the size of the shock and the size of the adjustment cost jointly determine the nature and the number of the equilibria generated in the game. In particular, if the adjustment cost is high enough, at least one firm decides not to adjust at the pure strategy equilibrium, and such a partial adjustment by the industry can be socially efficient as well. Some implications of this partial equilibrium analysis about an industry' resilience are outlined.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Lambertini & L. Marattin, 2014. "To Adjust or not to Adjust after a Cost-Push Shock? A Simple Duopoly Model with (and without) Resilience," Working Papers wp970, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    • Handle: RePEc:bol:bodewp:wp970
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://amsacta.unibo.it/4089/1/WP970.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2004. "Unionisation structures and innovation incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(494), pages 149-165, March.
    2. Delipalla, Sofia & Keen, Michael, 1992. "The comparison between ad valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 351-367, December.
    3. Henzel, Steffen & Hülsewig, Oliver & Mayer, Eric & Wollmershäuser, Timo, 2009. "The price puzzle revisited: Can the cost channel explain a rise in inflation after a monetary policy shock?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 268-289, June.
    4. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, April.
    5. Ravenna, Federico & Walsh, Carl E., 2006. "Optimal monetary policy with the cost channel," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 199-216, March.
    6. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    7. Chowdhury, Ibrahim & Hoffmann, Mathias & Schabert, Andreas, 2006. "Inflation dynamics and the cost channel of monetary transmission," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 995-1016, May.
    8. Hamilton, Stephen F., 1999. "Tax incidence under oligopoly: a comparison of policy approaches," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-245, February.
    9. Mukherjee, Arijit & Pennings, Enrico, 2011. "Unionization structure, licensing and innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 232-241, March.
    10. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    11. Calabuig, Vicente & Gonzalez-Maestre, Miguel, 2002. "Union structure and incentives for innovation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 177-192, March.
    12. repec:eee:labchp:v:2:y:1986:i:c:p:1039-1089 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Ulph, Alistair & Ulph, David, 1998. "Labour markets, bargaining and innovation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 931-939, May.
    14. Besley, Timothy, 1989. "Commodity taxation and imperfect competition : A note on the effects of entry," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 359-367, December.
    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. Han, Tien-Der & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2023. "Mergers of complements, endogenous product differentiation and welfare," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 30-41.
    2. Carbonnier, Clément, 2014. "The incidence of non-linear price-dependent consumption taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 111-119.
    3. Debasmita Basak & Andreas Hoefele & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Union Bargaining Power and Product Innovation: Relevance of the Preference Function," CESifo Working Paper Series 5007, CESifo.
    4. Debasmita Basak & Andreas Hoefele & Arijit Mukherjee, 2022. "Wage bargaining and product innovation: The role of market expansion effect," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(3), pages 319-340, June.
    5. Lagoa, Sérgio, 2014. "Inflation dynamics in open economies: Empirical evidence for G7 countries on the role of import prices and the cost channel," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 354-371.
    6. Basak, Debasmita & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2018. "Labour unionisation structure and product innovation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 98-110.
    7. Kjell Erik Lommerud & Odd Rune Straume, 2012. "Employment Protection Versus Flexicurity: On Technology Adoption in Unionised Firms," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 114(1), pages 177-199, March.
    8. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Kreider, Brent, 2001. "Tax incidence in differentiated product oligopoly," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 173-192, August.
    9. Chattopadhyay, Siddhartha & Ghosh, Taniya, 2016. "Cost Channel, Interest Rate Pass-Through and Optimal Policy under Zero Lower Bound," MPRA Paper 72762, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Flavio DelbonoBy & Luca Lambertini, 2022. "Innovation and product market concentration: Schumpeter, arrow, and the inverted U-shape curve [Lessons from schumpeterian growth theory]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(1), pages 297-311.
    11. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2002. "Tax incidence," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 26, pages 1787-1872, Elsevier.
    12. Renu Bansal & Dibyendu Maiti, 2024. "Capital Inflow, Strategic Subcontracting, and Formal Employment," Working papers 348, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    13. Boone, Jan & Müller, Wieland, 2012. "The distribution of harm in price-fixing cases," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 265-276.
    14. Henrik Vetter, 2016. "Tax Reform in Monopolistic Competition with Increasing Preferences for Variety," Public Finance Review, , vol. 44(2), pages 245-262, March.
    15. Zeynep Kantur & Gülserim Özcan, 2022. "Dissecting Turkish inflation: theory, fact, and illusion," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 1543-1553, August.
    16. Mahdiyeh Entezarkheir & Saeed Moshiri, 2021. "Innovation spillover and merger decisions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 2419-2448, November.
    17. Thomas J. Holmes & David K. Levine & James A. Schmitz, 2012. "Monopoly and the Incentive to Innovate When Adoption Involves Switchover Disruptions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 1-33, August.
    18. Garella, Paolo G., 2012. "Monopoly incentives for cost-reducing R&D," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 21-24.
    19. Ping Lin & Tianle Zhang & Wen Zhou, 2020. "Vertical integration and disruptive cross‐market R&D," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 51-73, January.
    20. Yongmin Chen & Marius Schwartz, 2013. "Product Innovation Incentives: Monopoly vs. Competition," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 513-528, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • E30 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bol:bodewp:wp970. 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: Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sebolit.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.