An optimal tax/subsidy for output and pollution control under asymmetric information in oligopoly markets

This paper constructs an optimal incentive tax/subsidy scheme in an oligopoly market with pollution, as a generalization of the Loeb-Magat scheme, which is nondiscriminatory and requires less information for implementation than the conventional ones. Some interesting properties of the scheme are discussed.     

Conjectural-variation models and supergames with price competition in a differentiated product oligopoly

Conjectural-variation models (CV models) are popular in empirical research as they infer the degree of market power from real data. Theorists of industrial organization, however, disapprove of them for lack of theoretical foundation arguing that dynamic reactions are forced into a static model with the strategy space and time horizon only loosely defined. The presented model follows an idea put forward by Cabral (1995) and demonstrates that the CV model can be interpreted as the joint-profit-maximizing steady-state reduced form of a price-setting supergame in a differentiated product market under optimal punishment strategies. For the symmetric two-firm case the CV parameter is shown to cover the full range of possible outcomes — from Bertrand competition to joint unconstrained monopoly — depending on the degree of product differentiation, market growth, bankruptcy risk, and the discount rate. For the asymmetric-cost case numerical calculations are provided.     

Bertrand versus Cournot competition in a downstream mixed oligopoly with foreign ownership

Focusing on foreign ownership in the private firm, we examine the Cournot-Bertrand comparison in a mixed oligopolistic market with vertical market structure. We have found that if public and private firms were charged with uniform price for their inputs, then Cournot-Bertrand ranking in market outcomes confirms those obtained by Ghosh and Mitra (2010). This implies that under uniform pricing in the upstream sector, the vertical market structure does not have substantial influences on Cournot-Bertrand ranking. However, if discriminatory pricing is adopted, firm's profits, output, and social welfare are often reversed to those obtained from uniform pricing in the upstream sector. Given the closeness of products, if the share of foreign ownership is sufficiently low, social welfare in Cournot competition can exceed that of Bertrand competition, contrasting with the standard welfare ranking that Bertrand welfare is strictly higher than Cournot. This implies that Cournot competition can be more socially desirable than Bertrand in mixed oligopoly with vertical market structure if discriminatory pricing scheme is adopted by foreign upstream monopolists.     

Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly under demand uncertainty

This paper analyzes a Hotelling-type game in a mixed oligopoly, where firms can either enter the market in period 1, facing demand uncertainty, or postpone their entry, in order to acquire complete information. It is shown that, for a high (low) level of uncertainty, there is a pure (mixed)-strategy equilibrium. Moreover, the standard result in the literature—that uncertainty is a differentiation force, is only possible when the degree of uncertainty is small. An increase in the degree of uncertainty could force firms to delay their entry and lead to a socially optimal outcome.     

Cournot competition in a differentiated oligopoly

This paper studies product-quantity equilibria in an oligopoly. Products are interpreted as “qualities” and each firm chooses a quality-quantity pair, simultaneously. It is well known that a pure-strategy equilibrium in product-price pairs does not exist in this model, but a pure-strategy equilibrium in product-quantity pairs exists. Furthermore, in an example widely studied in the literature, the equilibrium has nice asymptotic properties.     

Strategic delegation in consumer cooperatives under mixed oligopoly

The main aim of this paper is to study the propensity of consumer cooperatives (Coops) to use incentive schemes in situations of strategic interaction with profit-maximizing firms (PMFs). Our model provides a reason why Coops are less prone than PMFs to pay variable bonuses to their managers. We show that this occurs under price competition when in equilibrium the Coop prefers to pay a flat wage to its manager relying instead on her intrinsic motivation, whereas the profit-maximizing rival adopts a variable, high-powered incentive scheme. The main rationale is that, by recruiting a manager whose preferences are aligned with the company goals (e.g., a consumer-owner), the Coop is per se highly expansionary in term of output. Therefore, the Coop does not need to rely on an externally hired manager who sets prices aggressively to expand market share and quantity. Furthermore, adopting a monetary reward based on sales and profits leads to distorted incentives with respect to the Coop’s goal, which after all is the welfare of its members.     

Cross-border mergers in a mixed oligopoly

This paper identifies the unique strategic issues of cross-border mergers in a mixed oligopoly showing that the presence of a welfare maximizing public firm increases the incentive for such mergers. The well-known merger paradox that two-firm mergers are rarely profitable is substantially relaxed in the cases of both linear and convex production costs. The ability to identify profitable two-firm mergers in this context takes on added importance as the recent cross-border merger wave often involved industries with public firms.     

Innovation,licensing, and price vs. quantity competition

In this paper, we develop a differentiated duopoly model with endogenous cost-reducing R&D and review the argument on welfare effect of price and quantity competition in the presence of technology licensing. We show that, with licensing, the standard conclusion on duopoly (Singh and Vives, 1984) is completely reversed. Cournot competition induces lower R&D investment than Bertrand competition does. Moreover, Cournot competition leads to lower prices, lower industry profit, higher consumer surplus and higher social welfare than Bertrand competition.     

On hierarchical competition in oligopoly

In this paper, we consider a hierarchical oligopoly model, in which firms compete on quantities of an homogeneous product. We provide a proof and an interpretation that under the three necessary and sufficient conditions of linear aggregate demand, constant and identical marginal costs, the strategy of leaders at any stage depends neither on the number of leaders who play after nor on the number of remaining stages. So, all firms behave as Cournotian oligopolists on the residual demand. We show that these three assumptions are not only sufficient but also necessary. Any departure from any of these assumptions rules out this property.     

Optimal manipulation rules in a mixed oligopoly

We study the optimal manipulation rules of a public firm’s objective function in a mixed oligopoly with imperfect product substitutability. We start with a baseline duopoly model and compare the solutions under quantity and price competition, and the way they are affected by product substitutability. This allows us to show that partial privatization, strategic delegation and other specific government’s commitments on the objective function of the public management can be looked at as special cases of these optimal rules, and to evaluate the viability of these policies under the two modes of competition. In this framework, we also discuss the equivalence between manipulation of the objective function and Stackelberg leadership. Since optimal manipulation rules change as new dimensions are added, we also derive the optimal rules under oligopoly, quadratic costs, and competition of international firms. This fairly general unified framework allows to discuss the impact of these factors on the government’s implementation policies of the optimal manipulation rules.     

The merger paradox in a mixed oligopoly

This paper examines the set of surplus maximizing mergers in a model of mixed oligopoly. The presence of a welfare maximizing public firm reduces the set of mergers for which two private firms can profitably merge. When a public firm and private firm merge, the changes in welfare and profit depend on the resulting extent of private ownership in the newly merged firm. When the government sets that share to maximize post merger welfare as assumed in the privatization literature, the merger paradox will often remain and the merger will not take place. Yet, we show there always exists scope for mergers that increase profit and increase (if not maximize) welfare. Interestingly, these mergers often include complete privatization.     

Domestic and international mixed models with price competition

This article examines domestic (respectively, international) mixed competition in which a state-owned welfare-maximizing public firm competes on price with a domestic (respectively, foreign) profit-maximizing private firm. The article presents and compares the equilibrium outcomes of the two mixed models.     

The effects of taxation,price control and government contracts in oligopoly and monopolistic competition

Many government contracts with or policies towards oligopolistic sectors essentially involve private firms selling a given proportion (ϑ), or quantity, of output to the government at a fixed price (P_R) with the remainder being sold on the open-market. Often this is combined with consumer rationing. Examples include cement and sugar in India, and health, housing and defence in many countries. The paper investigates the effects of these schemes (including sales and excise taxation) on prices, output and household welfare under oligopoly and monopolistic competition. Less government control (reduced ϑ) may raise prices and tax shifting can be above or below 100 percent.     

Strategic incentive in mixed oligopoly

This paper develops a two stage game model with two competing firms in a mixed oligopolistic market, a public firm and a private firm, and only the public firm giving its manager an incentive contract. The paper presents three types of public firm owner’s objective function and each objective function corresponds to three types of delegation, either of a profit-revenue type, or of a relative performance, or, finally, of a market share one. In an equilibrium, the public firm owner has a dominant strategy to reward his manager with an incentive contract combining own profits and competitor’s profits. Different from Manasakis et al. (2007), this paper suggests that the dominant strategy of the public firm owner is to reward his manager with a profit-revenue type of contract or a market-share type of contract, that is to say profit-revenue is identical with market-share. Using relative-performance type of contract will move the manager away from the owner’s true objective function when the public firm owner only pursues maximizing the social welfare. The private firm will be crowded out and the public firm is the only producer of the market. Under profits-revenues type of contract, the owner’s objective of maximizing the summation of the profit and consumer surplus leads the manager more aggressive. Different combinations give us different results. By comparing the results, each type of incentive contract is an owner’s best response to his decision.     

Merger profitability in mixed oligopoly

We analyse merger profitability in a mixed-oligopoy Cournot model. The “merger paradox” is qualified by showing that there are profitable gains for the firms participating in a horizontal merger that is not a merger to a monopoly. In particular, it is shown that merger sustainability depends on both, the privatization degree of the mixed firm and the number of non-merging firms.      

Partial privatization in mixed duopoly with price and quality competition

We analyze price and quality competition in a mixed duopoly in which a profit-maximizing private firm competes against a state-owned public firm. We first show that the welfare-maximizing public firm provides a lower quality product than the private firm when they are equally efficient. In order to maximize social welfare, government manipulates the objective of the public firm that is given by a convex combination of profits and social welfare. It is demonstrated that an optimal incentive of the public firm is welfare maximization under the absence of quality competition, but it is neither welfare maximization nor profit maximization under the presence of quality competition. The result supports a completely mixed objective between welfare and profit maximizations or partial privatization of the public firm.      

A price competition game under free entry

This study builds a game of Bertrand-like price competition in a market with free entry. Under the assumption of a standard U-shaped average cost curve, it demonstrates that even if the number of sellers is small, a long-run competitive outcome can be supported as a Nash equilibrium. This game provides unifying treatments to the standard Bertrand equilibrium, the long-run competitive outcome, Demsetz’s equilibrium as well as other types of equilibria that have not been known in the existing literature.This paper is dedicated to Professor Mukul Majumdar to celebrate his sixtieth birthday. I am deeply indebted to Mukul for his generosity and kindness towards me throughout my career. I am also grateful to Tapan Mitra and anonymous referees for their very useful comments and suggestions in the revision and to Fumio Dei, Jim Friedman, Koji Ishibashi, Atsushi Kajii, Takashi Kamihigashi, Kunio Kawamata, Kei-ichi Koda, Takashi Negishi, Michihiro Ohyama, Santanu Roy, and Yoshimasa Shirai for useful conversations and correspondence and, in particular, Motonari Kurasawa, who drew to my attention Demsetz’s work.     

Endogenous timing in a mixed oligopoly with semipublic firms

An endogenous order of moves is analyzed in a mixed market where a firm jointly owned by the public sector and private domestic shareholders (a semipublic firm) competes with n private firms. We show that there is an equilibrium in which firms take production decisions simultaneously. This result is strikingly different from that obtained by Pal (Econ Lett 61:181–185, 1998), who shows that when a public firm competes with n private firms all firms producing simultaneously in the same period cannot be sustained as a Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium outcome. Our result differs from that of Pal (Econ Lett 61:181–185, 1998) for two reasons: firstly, we consider that there is a semipublic firm rather than a public firm. Secondly, Pal (Econ Lett 61:181–185, 1998) considers that the public firm is less efficient than private firms while in our paper all firms are equally efficient.     

Privatization and efficiency: a mixed oligopoly approach

While models of mixed oligopoly have been analyzed within a rapidly growing literature, little is known about the mechanism of efficiency improvement relating to partial privatization. In this paper, we endogenize efficiency improvement in relation to the level of privatization. We show that in the short run, an improvement in efficiency associated with a state-owned firm reduces the output substitution among firms, and that the reduction in output substitution effect is proportional to the strength of the improvement in efficiency. Specifically, if the effect of efficiency improvement is sufficiently small, the magnitude of the improvement of social welfare is reduced. In the literature, the optimal policy in the long run is full nationalization. However, we argue that the optimal policy for a state-owned firm is partial privatization. Moreover, efficiency improvement provides the impetus for indirect entry regulation of private entrants.