首页> 外文期刊>Japan and the World Economy >Social welfare and cross-ownership in a vertical industry: When the mode of competition matters for antitrust policy
【24h】

Social welfare and cross-ownership in a vertical industry: When the mode of competition matters for antitrust policy

机译:垂直行业的社会福利和交叉所有权:当竞争模式对反托拉斯政策至关重要时

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The paper is motivated by the empirical observations of passive non-controlling partial ownership among competing firms in vertical markets with imperfect competition. The model encompasses a two-stage game. For given input prices, two downstream firms compete a la Bertrand in differentiated products. Each firm faces a firm-specific input supplier. The two input suppliers set publicly observable and linear input prices non-cooperatively in the first stage. All technologies have constant returns to scale. The effects of a one-sided increase in the non-controlling profit participation share of one firm in the other rival firm (i.e. cross-ownership) on social welfare are analysed. The main result is that under Bertrand, in contrast with the common wisdom (which, for instance, holds under Cournot), an increase in cross-ownership can increase total surplus. The reason is that despite the cross-ownership share makes the downstream quantity choice more "collusive", hence more socially inefficient, it also reduces input prices, and when the competition is in strategic complements and products are not too differentiated the "input price" effect outweighs the "collusive" effect in determining the social welfare outcome. This result suggests that antitrust policy in a vertical industry should also consider the mode of competition in the final product market in the case in which "more" collusion is achieved in the downstream sector through an increase in the one-sided non-controlling profit participation share. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:本文是基于对不完全竞争的垂直市场中竞争公司之间被动非控制性部分所有权的实证研究。该模型包括一个两阶段的游戏。对于给定的输入价格,两家下游公司在差异化产品方面竞争la Bertrand。每个公司都面对一个公司特定的输入供应商。两家投入品供应商在第一阶段非合作地设定了公开可观察的和线性的投入品价格。所有技术均具有规模不变的回报。分析了一个公司在另一竞争公司中非控制性利润参与份额的单方面增加(即交叉所有权)对社会福利的影响。主要结果是,在贝特朗(Bertrand)统治下,与通常的看法(例如,在古诺特(Cournot)统治下)相反,交叉所有权的增加可以增加总盈余。原因是尽管有交叉所有权份额,但下游数量选择更加“具有共通性”,因而社会效率更低,它也降低了投入价格,并且当竞争处于战略互补且产品差异不大时,“投入价格”在确定社会福利结果时,“效果”胜于“合作”效果。该结果表明,在垂直行业的反托拉斯政策中,如果通过增加单边非控制性利润参与而在下游部门实现“更多”合谋,则还应考虑最终产品市场的竞争模式。分享。 (C)2016 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号