IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/17010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

In many emerging economies corruption, poor quality of information and poor governance lead to restricted entry. In this paper we analyze the determinants of the .height.of entry barrier in a developing economy where established .rms often use dubious means to deter entry of other .rms. We analyse this scenario in a three-stage game of entry deterrence. The incumbent has incomplete information about the entrant.s costs but can increase this cost by resorting to unfair means (for example, bribing a politician who harms the entrant). Higher is the bribe, higher will be the entry cost and hence lower will be the incentive to enter. In our set-up bribe serves as a proxy for .height.of entry barrier. The entrant observes its cost and decides whether or not to enter. We completely characterise the optimal bribe and show that this depends on the market size, the .di¤erentiation.parameter (whether goods are substitutes or complement) and the extent of uncertainty. Uncertainty seems to increase bribe and decrease market quality. We also show that zero bribe need not maximise total surplus and market quality. Our results seem to be compatible with anecdotal evidences from an emerging economy like India

Author

Listed:
  • Krishnendu Ghosh DASTIDAR
  • YANO Makoto

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Krishnendu Ghosh DASTIDAR & YANO Makoto, 2017. "In many emerging economies corruption, poor quality of information and poor governance lead to restricted entry. In this paper we analyze the determinants of the .height.of entry barrier in a developi," Discussion papers 17010, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:17010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/17e010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anonymous, 2014. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-2, May.
    2. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    3. Makoto Yano, 2009. "The Foundation Of Market Quality Economics," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 60(1), pages 1-32, March.
    4. Ariane Lambert‐Mogiliansky & Mukul Majumdar & Roy Radner, 2008. "Petty corruption: A game‐theoretic approach," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 4(2), pages 273-297, June.
    5. Makoto Yano, 2008. "Competitive fairness and the concept of a fair price under Delaware law on M&A," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 4(2), pages 175-190, June.
    6. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, April.
    7. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1987. "Cost-Raising Strategies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 19-34, September.
    8. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar & Fumio Dei, 2014. "Introduction to the Special Issue of Pacific Economic Review on Market Quality Economics," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 531-536, December.
    9. Makoto Yano, 2006. "A price competition game under free entry," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 29(2), pages 395-414, October.
    10. Avinash Dixit, 1979. "A Model of Duopoly Suggesting a Theory of Entry Barriers," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 20-32, Spring.
    11. Alipranti, Maria & Milliou, Chrysovalantou & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 2014. "Price vs. quantity competition in a vertically related market," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 122-126.
    12. Emran, M. Shahe & Shilpi , Forhad J., 2000. "Corruption and Entry Deterrence," Bangladesh Development Studies, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), vol. 26(4), pages 69-87, December.
    13. Piercarlo Zanchettin, 2006. "Differentiated Duopoly with Asymmetric Costs," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 999-1015, December.
    14. Martin, Stephen, 2010. "Industrial Organization in Context," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199291199.
    15. Harstad, Bård & Svensson, Jakob, 2011. "Bribes, Lobbying, and Development," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 46-63, February.
    16. Takuma Kunieda & Akihisa Shibata, 2014. "Credit Market Imperfections and Macroeconomic Instability," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 592-611, December.
    17. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1983. "Raising Rivals' Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 267-271, May.
    18. Sequeira, Sandra & Djankov, Simeon, 2013. "Corruption and firm behavior," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 54321, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Anonymous, 2014. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 109-110, August.
    20. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    21. Broadman, Harry G. & Recanatini, Francesca, 2000. "Seeds of corruption - Do market institutions matter?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2368, The World Bank.
    22. Yuichi Furukawa & Makoto Yano, 2014. "Market quality and market infrastructure in the South and technology diffusion," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 139-146, March.
    23. Krishna B. Athreya & Mukul Majumdar, 2005. "A note on closing the windows: Some lessons from queuing theory," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 1(1), pages 73-81, March.
    24. 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.
    25. Eric S. Maskin, 1999. "Uncertainty and entry deterrence," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 14(2), pages 429-437.
    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. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar & Makoto Yano, 2021. "Corruption, market quality, and entry deterrence in emerging economies," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 17(1), pages 101-117, March.
    2. Krishnendu Ghosh DASTIDAR & YANO Makoto, 2020. "FCPA and Market Quality in Emerging Economies," Discussion papers 20087, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    3. Makoto Yano & Takashi Komatsubara, 2014. "Participation of Ordinary Investors and Stock Market Quality: A Comparison between Japanese and US Markets," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 537-558, December.
    4. Ming Chung Chang & Hsiao‐Ping Peng, 2009. "Structure Regulation, Price Structure, Cross‐Subsidization And Marginal Cost Of Public Funds," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 77(6), pages 675-698, December.
    5. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899.
    6. Kuno J.M. Huisman & Peter M. Kort, 2015. "Strategic capacity investment under uncertainty," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(2), pages 376-408, June.
    7. Choné, Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent, 2020. "Linear demand systems for differentiated goods: Overview and user’s guide," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    8. Philippe Choné & Laurent Linnemer, 2019. "The quasilinear quadratic utility model: An overview," Working Papers hal-02318633, HAL.
    9. Anthony Creane & Kaz Miyagiwa, 2007. "The Profitable Suppression of Inventions: Technology Choice and Entry Deterrence," ISER Discussion Paper 0702, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    10. J. Anthony Cookson, 2018. "Anticipated Entry and Entry Deterrence: Evidence from the American Casino Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2325-2344, May.
    11. Krishnendu Ghosh Dastidar, 2015. "Nature of Competition and New Technology Adoption," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 696-732, December.
    12. Luciano Fanti & Nicola Meccheri, 2015. "On the Cournot–Bertrand Profit Differential and the Structure of Unionisation in a Managerial Duopoly," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 266-287, December.
    13. Ming Chang, 2010. "An Asymmetric Oligopolist can Improve Welfare by Raising Price," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(1), pages 75-96, February.
    14. Ristić Bojan & Trifunović Dejan & Herceg Tomislav, 2021. "Capacity Competition in Differentiated Oligopolies: Entry Deterrence with Alternative Objective Functions," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 84-92, June.
    15. Lisa Planer-Friedrich & Marco Sahm, 2020. "Strategic corporate social responsibility, imperfect competition, and market concentration," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 129(1), pages 79-101, January.
    16. Joachim Heinzel & Simon Hoof, 2020. "Oligopolistic Upstream Competition with Differentiated Inputs," Working Papers CIE 129, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    17. Donna, Javier D. & Pereira, Pedro & Trindade, Andre & Yoshida, Renan C., 2020. "Direct-to-Consumer Sales by Manufacturers and Bargaining," MPRA Paper 105773, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Xavier Martinez-Giralt & Barros Pedro Pita, 2005. "Bargaining and idle public sector capacity in health care," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 9(5), pages 1-8.
    19. Fanti, Luciano, 2013. "Cross-ownership and unions in a Cournot duopoly: When profits reduce with horizontal product differentiation," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-40.
    20. Jean J. Gabszewicz & Skerdilajda Zanaj, 2008. "Upstream Market Foreclosure," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 13-26, January.

    More about this item

    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:eti:dpaper:17010. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.