IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/18171.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Alternative Framework for Empirically Measuring the Size of Counterfeit Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Rosalie Liccardo Pacula
  • Srikanth Kadiyala
  • Priscillia Hunt
  • Alessandro Malchiodi

Abstract

This paper develops a new method for estimating trends in the size of counterfeit markets. The method draws on principles of microeconomic theory and uses aggregated product-level data to estimate counterfeiting activities in various geographic markets. Using confidential firm unit forecasts and actual sales information, a two stage approach is employed that first accounts for unexpected but observable factors that could lead to forecasting error and then, in the second stage, considers the influence of market susceptibility to IPR infringement. Data are analysed for 45 related products sold by a single firm operating in 16 countries during the period 2006-2011. Our models predict larger amounts of counterfeiting in countries with higher corruption norms, lower government control and effectiveness. Predictions of the level of counterfeiting obtained from the second stage are then compared to estimates of counterfeiting derived internally by the firm using shadow-shopping methods. While our two stage model generally under-predicts the level of counterfeiting in each year, it generates trends in counterfeiting that are broadly consistent with those obtained using more costly and intensive methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosalie Liccardo Pacula & Srikanth Kadiyala & Priscillia Hunt & Alessandro Malchiodi, 2012. "An Alternative Framework for Empirically Measuring the Size of Counterfeit Markets," NBER Working Papers 18171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18171
    Note: PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18171.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Harvey & W. David Walls, 2003. "Laboratory markets in counterfeit goods: Hong Kong versus Las Vegas," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(14), pages 883-887.
    2. Boldrin, Michele & Levine, David K., 2008. "Perfectly competitive innovation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 435-453, April.
    3. Bian, Xuemei & Moutinho, Luiz, 2009. "An investigation of determinants of counterfeit purchase consideration," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 368-378, March.
    4. Furnham, Adrian & Valgeirsson, Halldor, 2007. "The effect of life values and materialism on buying counterfeit products," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 677-685, October.
    5. Avner Shaked & John Sutton, 1982. "Relaxing Price Competition Through Product Differentiation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 49(1), pages 3-13.
    6. Steven D. Levitt & Sudhir Alladi Venkatesh, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of a Drug-Selling Gang's Finances," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(3), pages 755-789.
    7. Felix Oberholzer-Gee & Koleman Strumpf, 2007. "The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(1), pages 1-42.
    8. Rajeev Goel & Michael Nelson, 2009. "Determinants of software piracy: economics, institutions, and technology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 637-658, December.
    9. Swami, Viren & Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas & Furnham, Adrian, 2009. "Faking it: Personality and individual difference predictors of willingness to buy counterfeit goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 820-825, October.
    10. Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
    11. Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Copying and Copyright," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 121-138, Spring.
    12. Yi Qian & Hui Xie, 2011. "Investigating the Dynamic Effects of Counterfeits with a Random Changepoint Simultaneous Equation Model," NBER Working Papers 16692, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1983. "Natural Oligopolies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(5), pages 1469-1483, September.
    14. Saving, Thomas R, 1970. "Concentration Ratios and the Degree of Monopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 11(1), pages 139-146, February.
    15. Gene M. Grossman & Carl Shapiro, 1988. "Foreign Counterfeiting of Status Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(1), pages 79-100.
    16. Ms. Stefania Scandizzo, 2001. "Counterfeit Goods and Income Inequality," IMF Working Papers 2001/013, International Monetary Fund.
    17. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    18. Yi Qian, 2011. "Counterfeiters: Foes or Friends? How Do Counterfeits Affect Different Product Quality Tiers?," NBER Working Papers 16785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Nikolaus Thumm & Vincenzo Butticè & Federico Caviggioli & Chiara Franzoni & Giuseppe, Scellato, 2018. "Impact of counterfeiting on the performance of digital technology companies," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2018-03, Joint Research Centre.

    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. Nelson Borges Amaral, 2020. "What can be done to address luxury counterfeiting? An integrative review of tactics and strategies," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(6), pages 691-709, November.
    2. Kaufmann, Hans Ruediger & Petrovici, Dan Alex & Filho, Cid Gonçalves & Ayres, Adriano, 2016. "Identifying moderators of brand attachment for driving customer purchase intention of original vs counterfeits of luxury brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5735-5747.
    3. Catherine Viot & André Le Roux & Florence Kremer, 2014. "Attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits: Antecedents and effect on intention to purchase," Post-Print halshs-02530136, HAL.
    4. Bian, Xuemei & Wang, Kai-Yu & Smith, Andrew & Yannopoulou, Natalia, 2016. "New insights into unethical counterfeit consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4249-4258.
    5. Jie Zhang & L. Hong & Rachel Zhang, 2012. "Fighting strategies in a market with counterfeits," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 192(1), pages 49-66, January.
    6. Eric P. Chiang & Djeto Assane, 2009. "Estimating The Willingness To Pay For Digital Music," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 27(4), pages 512-522, October.
    7. Catherine Viot & André Le Roux & Florence Kremer, 2014. "Attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits: Antecedents and effect on intention to purchase," Post-Print hal-01803871, HAL.
    8. Tirelo Modise Moepswa, 2016. "The Threat of Counterfeit Devices: Complicity vs Vigilance," International Journal of Business Research and Management (IJBRM), Computer Science Journals (CSC Journals), vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, February.
    9. Thaichon, Park & Quach, Sara, 2016. "Dark motives-counterfeit purchase framework: Internal and external motives behind counterfeit purchase via digital platforms," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 82-91.
    10. Siham Mourad & Pierre Valette-Florence, 2011. "The Effects Of Counterfeit On Luxury Brand Buying Behavior, In Terms Of Consumption Experience," Post-Print halshs-00660417, HAL.
    11. Yoo, Boonghee & Lee, Seung-Hee, 2012. "Asymmetrical effects of past experiences with genuine fashion luxury brands and their counterfeits on purchase intention of each," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 1507-1515.
    12. Komal Nagar & Vishab Pratap Singh, 2021. "Modelling the Effects of Materialism, Ethics and Variety-Seeking Behaviour on Counterfeit Consumption of Young Consumers," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 22(4), pages 996-1009, August.
    13. Ngo Van Long & Zhuang Miao, 2020. "Multiple‐quality Cournot oligopoly and the role of market size," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 932-952, October.
    14. Selma Kalyoncuoglu & Begum Sahin, 2017. "Moderating Role of Materialism in the Effect of Perceived Value on Purchase Intention of Counterfeits of Luxury Brands," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(4), pages 76-88, August.
    15. Ling Jiang & Veronique Cova, 2012. "Love for Luxury, Preference for Counterfeits –A Qualitative Study in Counterfeit Luxury Consumption in China," Post-Print hal-02062369, HAL.
    16. Zhang, Jie & Zhang, Rachel Q., 2015. "Supply chain structure in a market with deceptive counterfeits," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 84-97.
    17. Alexander Davidson & Marcelo Vinhal Nepomuceno & Michel Laroche, 2019. "Shame on You: When Materialism Leads to Purchase Intentions Toward Counterfeit Products," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 479-494, March.
    18. Catherine Viot & André Le Roux & Florence Kremer, 2014. "Attitude towards the purchase of counterfeits: antecedents and effect on intention to purchase [Attitude envers l'achat de contrefaçons : déterminants et effet sur l'intention d'achat]," Post-Print hal-01803846, HAL.
    19. Sanz, Esteve, 2015. "Copyright indicators and the costs of symbolic production: The cultural dimension of telecommunications policy," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 208-217.
    20. Handke, Christian, 2012. "Digital copying and the supply of sound recordings," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 15-29.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    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:nbr:nberwo:18171. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.