IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/edn/sirdps/98.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Public Inefficiencies in a Mixed Duopoly

Author

Listed:
  • Capuano, Carlo
  • De Feo, Giuseppe

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to investigate the welfare effect of a change in the public firms objective function in oligopoly when the government takes into account the distortionary effect of rising funds by taxation (shadow cost of public funds). We analyze the impact of a shift from welfare- to profit-maximizing behaviour of the public firm on the timing of competition by endogenizing the determination of simultaneous (Nash-Cournot) versus sequential (Stackelberg) games using the game with observable delay proposed by Hamilton and Slutsky (1990). Differently from previous work that assumed the timing of competition, we show that, absent efficiency gains, instructing the public firm to play as a private one never increases welfare. Moreover, even when large efficiency gains result from the shift in public firm's objective, an inefficient public firm that maximizes welfare may be preferred.

Suggested Citation

  • Capuano, Carlo & De Feo, Giuseppe, 2009. "On Public Inefficiencies in a Mixed Duopoly," SIRE Discussion Papers 2009-35, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    • Handle: RePEc:edn:sirdps:98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10943/98
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amir, Rabah & Stepanova, Anna, 2006. "Second-mover advantage and price leadership in Bertrand duopoly," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-20, April.
    2. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    3. Hamilton, Jonathan H. & Slutsky, Steven M., 1990. "Endogenous timing in duopoly games: Stackelberg or cournot equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 29-46, March.
    4. Ellison, Glenn, 1993. "Learning, Local Interaction, and Coordination," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1047-1071, September.
    5. van Damme, Eric & Hurkens, Sjaak, 2004. "Endogenous price leadership," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 404-420, May.
    6. Van Huyck, John B & Battalio, Raymond C & Beil, Richard O, 1990. "Tacit Coordination Games, Strategic Uncertainty, and Coordination Failure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 234-248, March.
    7. David M. Newbery, 2002. "Privatization, Restructuring, and Regulation of Network Utilities," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262640481, December.
    8. Cooper, Russell, et al, 1990. "Selection Criteria in Coordination Games: Some Experimental Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 218-233, March.
    9. J Hindriks & D Claude, 2006. "Strategic Privatization and Regulation Policy in Mixed Markets," The IUP Journal of Managerial Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(1), pages 7-26, February.
    10. Cremer, Helmuth & Marchand, Maurice & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1989. "The Public Firm as an Instrument for Regulating an Oligopolistic Market," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 283-301, April.
    11. Mehrdad Sepahvand, 2004. "Public Enterprise Strategies in a Market Open to Domestic and International Competition," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 75-76, pages 135-153.
    12. Kandori, Michihiro & Mailath, George J & Rob, Rafael, 1993. "Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 29-56, January.
    13. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Using Cost Observation to Regulate Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 614-641, June.
    14. Willner, Johan, 2001. "Ownership, efficiency, and political interference," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 723-748, November.
    15. Amir, Rabah & Grilo, Isabel, 1999. "Stackelberg versus Cournot Equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-21, January.
    16. Matsumura, Toshihiro, 1998. "Partial privatization in mixed duopoly," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 473-483, December.
    17. Kenneth Fjell & Debashis Pal, 1996. "A Mixed Oligopoly in the Presence of Foreign Private Firms," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 737-743, August.
    18. Debashis Pal & Mark D. White, 1998. "Mixed Oligopoly, Privatization, and Strategic Trade Policy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(2), pages 264-281, October.
    19. Pal, Debashis, 1998. "Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 181-185, November.
    20. repec:adr:anecst:y:2004:i:75-76:p:07 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. de Fraja, Giovanni & Delbono, Flavio, 1989. "Alternative Strategies of a Public Enterprise in Oligopoly," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(2), pages 302-311, April.
    22. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
    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. Toshihiro Matsumura & Akira Ogawa, 2017. "Inefficient but Robust Public Leadership," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 387-398, December.
    2. Oscar Amerighi & Giuseppe De Feo, 2000. "On the FDI-Attracting Property of Privatization," Working Papers 3_214, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    3. Rabah Amir & Giuseppe Feo, 2014. "Endogenous timing in a mixed duopoly," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(3), pages 629-658, August.
    4. Toshihiro Matsumura & Akira Ogawa, 2010. "On The Robustness Of Private Leadership In Mixed Duopoly," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(2), pages 149-160, June.
    5. Amir, Rabah & Stepanova, Anna, 2006. "Second-mover advantage and price leadership in Bertrand duopoly," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-20, April.
    6. Sato, Susumu & Matsumura, Toshihiro, 2019. "Shadow cost of public funds and privatization policies," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    7. Toshihiro Matsumura & Yoshihiro Tomaru, 2013. "Mixed duopoly, privatization, and subsidization with excess burden of taxation," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(2), pages 526-554, May.
    8. Niu, Baozhuang & Wang, Yulan & Guo, Pengfei, 2015. "Equilibrium pricing sequence in a co-opetitive supply chain with the ODM as a downstream rival of its OEM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 249-270.
    9. Toshihiro Matsumura, 2003. "Endogenous Role in Mixed Markets: A Two‐Production‐Period Model," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(2), pages 403-413, October.
    10. Leonard F. S. Wang & Ya‐Chin Wang & Lihong Zhao, 2009. "Privatization And Efficiency Gain In An International Mixed Oligopoly With Asymmetric Costs," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 60(4), pages 539-559, December.
    11. John S. Heywood & Guangliang Ye, 2009. "Privatisation And Timing In A Mixed Oligopoly With Both Foreign And Domestic Firms," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 320-332, December.
    12. Hsu, Su-Ying & Lo, Chu-Ping & Wu, Shih-Jye, 2014. "The nexus of market concentration and privatization policy in mixed oligopoly," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 196-203.
    13. Akio Kawasaki & Takao Ohkawa & Makoto Okamura, 2022. "Optimal partial privatization in an endogenous timing game: a mixed oligopoly approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 227-250, August.
    14. O. Amerighi & G. De Feo, 2007. "Competition for FDI in the Presence of a Public Firm and the Effects of Privatization," Working Papers 605, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    15. Ngo Van Long & Frank Stähler, 2009. "Trade policy and mixed enterprises," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 590-614, May.
    16. Ishida, Junichiro & Matsushima, Noriaki, 2009. "Should civil servants be restricted in wage bargaining? A mixed-duopoly approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 634-646, April.
    17. Inoue, Tomohiro & Kamijo, Yoshio & Tomaru, Yoshihiro, 2009. "Interregional mixed duopoly," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 233-242, March.
    18. Liu, Yi & Lahiri, Sajal & Liu, Tianqi, 2018. "Optimal Partial Privatization in the Presence of Foreign Competition: The Role of Efficiency Differentials and Unemployment," MPRA Paper 91471, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 Jan 2019.
    19. Guangliang Ye, 2016. "Leadership and Privatisation in a Mixed Multi-product Oligopoly: An Endogenous Timing Model," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 170-180, June.
    20. Sumi Cho & Sang-Ho Lee, 2017. "Subsidization Policy on the Social Enterprise for the Underprivileged," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 33, pages 153-178.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mixed oligopoly; Nash equilibria; Endogenous Timing; Distortionary taxes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L32 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Public Enterprises; Public-Private Enterprises
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out

    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:edn:sirdps:98. 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: Research Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sireeuk.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.