IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/phs/dpaper/201505.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

N-Poly Viability and Conglopolistic Competition in Small Emerging Market

Author

Listed:
  • Raul V. Fabella

    (School of Economics, University of the Philippines Diliman)

Abstract

The economic catch-up of the East Asian region went hand-in-hand with the emergence and even dominance of large quasi-state or private conglomerates. Such for example were the Zaibatsus in the pre-WWII and the Keiretsus of the post-WWII Japan and the Chaebols of South Korea which enjoyed extensive state sponsorship and the Taipan-led business empires of South and South East Asia which were largely autonomic. The trend continues to this day especially in the People’s Republic of China. This dominance was not just an accidental fixture but the natural result of the economic and social environments prevalent in emerging markets. After reviewing the literature on why a few large private conglomerates tended to dominate the landscape of less developed economies in a rapid catch-up mode, we attempt a game theoretic account for the spread of these firms across different markets. We first define the concept of “n-poly viability” or the number of firms that can profitably Cournot compete in a market of a given the size and fixed capital requirement. We then show that conglopolistic competition (conglomerates competing in many markets) is a subgame perfect equilibrium of an entry game among initial monopolists and that this evolution is consumer welfare-improving. We identify the conditions under which only one firm or no firm benefits from the evolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Raul V. Fabella, 2015. "N-Poly Viability and Conglopolistic Competition in Small Emerging Market," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201505, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:phs:dpaper:201505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.upd.edu.ph/dp/index.php/dp/article/view/1473
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    2. Bresnahan, Timothy F & Reiss, Peter C, 1991. "Entry and Competition in Concentrated Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(5), pages 977-1009, October.
    3. Neumann, Manfred & Weigand, Jurgen & Gross, Alexandra & Munter, Markus Thomas, 2001. "Market size, fixed costs and horizontal concentration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 823-840, April.
    4. Marcus Asplund & Rickard Sandin, 1999. "The Number of Firms and Production Capacity in Relation to Market Size," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 69-85, March.
    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. Neumann, Manfred & Weigand, Jurgen & Gross, Alexandra & Munter, Markus Thomas, 2001. "Market size, fixed costs and horizontal concentration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 823-840, April.
    2. Elberfeld Walter & Götz Georg, 2002. "Market Size, Technology Choice, and Market Structure," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 25-41, February.
    3. Kesternich, Iris & Schumacher, Heiner & Van Biesebroeck, Johannes & Grant, Iris, 2020. "Market size and competition: A “hump-shaped” result," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Martin Lábaj & Karol Morvay & Peter Silaniè & Christoph Weiss, 2014. "Market Structure in Transition: Entry and Competition in Slovakia," Department of Economic Policy Working Paper Series 005, Department of Economic Policy, Faculty of National Economy, University of Economics in Bratislava.
    5. Martin Carree & Marcus Dejardin, 2007. "‘Entry Thresholds and Actual Entry and Exit in Local Markets’," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 203-212, June.
    6. Markus Thomas Münter, 2023. "Endogenous Entry and Growth of Firms with Heterogeneous Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 63(1), pages 21-39, August.
    7. Catherine Schaumans & Frank Verboven, 2015. "Entry and Competition in Differentiated Products Markets," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(1), pages 195-209, March.
    8. Hackl, Franz & Kummer, Michael E. & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf & Zulehner, Christine, 2014. "Market structure and market performance in E-commerce," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 199-218.
    9. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    10. E. Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser & M. Walzl, 2008. "Unfair contests," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 267-291, April.
      • Feess, E. & Muehlheusser, G. & Walzl, M., 2004. "Unfair contests," Research Memorandum 048, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    11. Marcus Asplund & Volker Nocke, 2003. "Firm Turnover in Imperfectly Competitive Markets," PIER Working Paper Archive 03-010, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    12. Martin Lábaj & Peter Silaniè & Christoph Weiss, 2013. "Entry and Competition in a Transition Economy: The Case of Slovakia," Department of Economic Policy Working Paper Series 003, Department of Economic Policy, Faculty of National Economy, University of Economics in Bratislava.
    13. Noailly, Joëlle & Nahuis, Richard, 2010. "Entry and competition in the Dutch notary profession," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 178-185, June.
    14. Raul V. Fabella, 2016. "Conglopolistic Competition in Small Emerging Economies: When Large and Diversified is Beautiful," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201605, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    15. Asplund, Marcus, 1998. "On the size distributions of firms and markets," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 288, Stockholm School of Economics.
    16. Bonanno, Alessandro & Chenarides, Lauren & Goetz, Stephan J., 2012. "Limited Food Access as an Equilibrium Outcome: An Empirical Analysis," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123196, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Timothy Dunne & Shawn D. Klimek & Mark J. Roberts & Daniel Yi Xu, 2009. "The Dynamics of Market Structure and Market Size in Two Health Service Industries," NBER Chapters, in: Producer Dynamics: New Evidence from Micro Data, pages 303-327, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Kathleen Cleeren & Frank Verboven & Marnik G. Dekimpe & Katrijn Gielens, 2010. "Intra- and Interformat Competition Among Discounters and Supermarkets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 456-473, 05-06.
    19. Paolo Coccorese & Alfonso Pellecchia, 2022. "Deregulation, Entry, and Competition in Local Banking Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 61(2), pages 171-197, September.
    20. Cleeren, K. & Dekimpe, M.G. & Verboven, F., 2005. "Intra- and Inter-Channel Competition in Local-Service Sectors," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-018-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    behavioral; polymorphism; Bayesian; cooperation; groups;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C79 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Other
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    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:phs:dpaper:201505. 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: RT Campos (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seupdph.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.