IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/trr/wpaper/202305.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Imperfect Collusion On Surveilled Markets With Free Entry

Author

Listed:
  • Ludwig von Auer
  • Tu Anh Pham

Abstract

Surveys of cartel proceedings reveal that illegal cartels usually (1) attempt to minimize the risk of detection, (2) achieve merely imperfect levels of collusion, (3) compete against some fringe firms, and (4) adjust to market entries and exits. By contrast, existing oligopoly models of collusive behavior consider only some of the four listed stylized facts and, thus, run the risk of missing important interdependencies between them. Therefore, the present paper develops a general quantity leadership model that simultaneously accommodates all four stylized facts. Within this model, an imperfectly colluding group of firms competes against independent fringe rivals. The market is surveilled by an antitrust authority that has three different policy instruments at its disposal: Ensuring free market access, obstructing collusion, and discouraging collusion through law enforcement. The results of the model indicate that the latter two instruments are rather ineffective.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludwig von Auer & Tu Anh Pham, 2023. "Imperfect Collusion On Surveilled Markets With Free Entry," Research Papers in Economics 2023-05, University of Trier, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:trr:wpaper:202305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uni-trier.de/fileadmin/fb4/prof/VWL/EWF/Research_Papers/2023-05.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James W. Friedman, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    2. Martin, Stephen, 2006. "Competition policy, collusion, and tacit collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 1299-1332, November.
    3. Iwan Bos & Joseph E. Harrington, 2015. "Competition Policy And Cartel Size," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56, pages 133-153, February.
    4. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2006. "How Do Cartels Operate?," Economics Working Paper Archive 531, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics.
    5. Marc Escrihuela-Villar, 2008. "On endogenous cartel size under tacit collusion," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 32(3), pages 325-338, September.
    6. Iwan Bos & Joseph E. Harrington, 2015. "Competition Policy And Cartel Size," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(1), pages 133-153, February.
    7. Marc Escrihuela-Villar, 2009. "A note on cartel stability and endogenous sequencing with tacit collusion," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 96(2), pages 137-147, March.
    8. Prokop, Jacek, 1999. "Process of dominant-cartel formation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 241-257, February.
    9. Andrea Lofaro, 1999. "When imperfect collusion is profitable," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 235-259, October.
    10. Cyert, Richard M & DeGroot, Morris H, 1973. "An Analysis of Cooperation and Learning in a Duopoly Context," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(1), pages 24-37, March.
    11. Matsumura, Toshihiro & Matsushima, Noriaki & Cato, Susumu, 2013. "Competitiveness and R&D competition revisited," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 541-547.
    12. Iwan Bos & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2010. "Endogenous cartel formation with heterogeneous firms," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 92-117, March.
    13. Harrington, Joseph E., 2006. "How Do Cartels Operate?," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 2(1), pages 1-105, August.
    14. Escrihuela-Villar Marc, 2015. "A Note on the Equivalence of the Conjectural Variations Solution and the Coefficient of Cooperation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 473-480, July.
    15. Toshihiro Matsumura & Noriaki Matsushima, 2012. "Competitiveness And Stability Of Collusive Behavior," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(Supplemen), pages 22-31, December.
    16. repec:bla:buecrs:v:64:y:2012:i::p:s22-s31 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Brito Duarte & Catalão-Lopes Margarida, 2011. "Small Fish Become Big Fish: Mergers in Stackelberg Markets Revisited," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Donsimoni, Marie-Paule, 1985. "Stable heterogeneous cartels," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 451-467, December.
    19. Steffen Huck & Kai A. Konrad & Wieland Müller & Hans-Theo Normann, 2007. "The Merger Paradox and why Aspiration Levels Let it Fail in the Laboratory," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(522), pages 1073-1095, July.
    20. Ludwig Auer & Tu Anh Pham, 2021. "Optimal destabilization of cartels," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 175-192, April.
    21. Zu, Lei & Zhang, Jin & Wang, Shouyang, 2012. "The size of stable cartels: An analytical approach," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 217-222.
    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. Ludwig Auer & Tu Anh Pham, 2023. "Imperfect collusion in monitored markets with free entry," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 181-207, December.
    2. von Auer, Ludwig & Pham, Tu Anh, 2020. "Optimal Destabilization of Cartels," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224521, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Ludwig von Auer & Tu Anh Pham, 2019. "Optimal Destabilization of Cartels," Research Papers in Economics 2019-07, University of Trier, Department of Economics.
    4. Ludwig Auer & Tu Anh Pham, 2021. "Optimal destabilization of cartels," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 175-192, April.
    5. Bartolini David & Zazzaro Alberto, 2011. "The Impact of Antitrust Fines on the Formation of Collusive Cartels," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, September.
    6. Mariana Cunha & Paula Sarmento, 2014. "Does Vertical Integration Promote Downstream Incomplete Collusion? An Evaluation of Static and Dynamic Stability," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 1-38, March.
    7. Bovin, Andreas & Bos, Iwan, 2023. "Market Shares as Collusive Marker: Evidence from the European Truck Industry," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    8. Odenkirchen, Johannes, 2017. "Pricing Behavior of Cartel Outsiders in Incomplete Cartels," VfS Annual Conference 2017 (Vienna): Alternative Structures for Money and Banking 168309, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Napel, Stefan & Welter, Dominik, 2023. "Umbrella pricing and cartel size," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Garrod, Luke & Olczak, Matthew, 2018. "Explicit vs tacit collusion: The effects of firm numbers and asymmetries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-25.
    11. Johannes Paha, 2013. "The Impact of Persistent Shocks and Concave Objective Functions on Collusive Behavior," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201328, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    12. Iwan Bos & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr, 2010. "Endogenous cartel formation with heterogeneous firms," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 92-117, March.
    13. Luke Garrod & Matthew Olczak, 2016. "Collusion, Firm Numbers and Asymmetries Revisited," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2016-11, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    14. António Brandão & Joana Pinho & Hélder Vasconcelos, 2014. "Asymmetric Collusion with Growing Demand," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 429-472, December.
    15. Tanja Artiga González & Markus Schmid & David Yermack, 2019. "Does Price Fixing Benefit Corporate Managers?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(10), pages 4813-4840, October.
    16. Hinloopen, Jeroen & Onderstal, Sander, 2014. "Going once, going twice, reported! Cartel activity and the effectiveness of antitrust policies in experimental auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 317-336.
    17. Luke Garrod & Matthew Olczak, 2017. "Collusion Under Imperfect Monitoring with Asymmetric Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(3), pages 654-682, September.
    18. Tomaso Duso & Lars-Hendrik Röller & Jo Seldeslachts, 2014. "Collusion Through Joint R&D: An Empirical Assessment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(2), pages 349-370, May.
    19. Marc Escrihuela-Villar, 2016. "On the price effects of collusion and the number of firms," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(3), pages 1694-1704.
    20. Iwan Bos & Marco A. Marini, 2022. "Collusion in quality‐segmented markets," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(2), pages 293-323, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    antitrust; fringe; oligopoly; stability; sustainability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    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:trr:wpaper:202305. 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: Matthias Neuenkirch (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/petride.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.