evaluating monopoly comparison with perfect competition

23
Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Upload: ilene-jennings

Post on 12-Jan-2016

228 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Evaluating Monopoly

Comparison with Perfect Competition

Page 2: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Market outcomes and efficiency1. Higher price and lower output compared

to the PC industry. Fig. 7.142. Impacts on surpluses (Fig. 7.15):

Consumer surplus smaller than in PC due to the higher price charged by the monopoly and the lower quantity produced.

Larger producer surplus, taking away a portion of CS.

Deadweight loss, i.e., the loss of total surplus due to a higher price and lower quantity.

Page 3: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

3. Allocative inefficiency At the profit maximizing level of output: P>MC,

which means that some consumers place a greater value on the production of the good than what it costs the monopolist to produce it → allocative inefficiency and misallocation of resources.

4. Productive inefficiency At the profit maximizing level of output, the

average cost is larger thanm in ATC → productive inefficiency.

5. Lack of competition may give rise to higher costs.

Entry barriers make monopolist less concerned about keeping costs as low as possible.

X-inefficiency takes place when producing at a higher than necessary ATC. Different from productive inefficiency.

Page 4: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Lack of productive efficienty means that the firm does not produce at the minATC, but it does produce at some point on the ATC curve. X-inefficiency indicates that the costs are higher than ATC.

Costs > ATC

(X-inefficiency)

ATC > minimum ATC

(prod. inefficiency)

minimum ATC

(prod. efficiency)

Q

costs

ATC

Page 5: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Why a Monopoly may be desirable1. Economies of scale.

If the monopolist succeeds in achieving significant economies of scale, so that its costs fall, shifting the MC curve downwards, then its price and output levels may approach those of PC.

Consumers can gain from ES: lower costs → lower prices and larger quantity of output.

Society also benefits: lower costs → resources used more efficiently.

Page 6: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

2. Product development and technological innovation. Some factors suggest that monopolies have good reasons to pursue innovation:

Economic profits allow financing large R&D projects.

Protection from competition allows the monopolist to enjoy the profits arising from their innovative activities (this is the rationale behind patent protection).

Firms may use product development and technological innovation as a means of creating barriers to entry for new potential rivals.

Page 7: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

3. Possibility of greater efficiency and lower prices due to technological innovations.

If monopolies successfully engage in R&D that leads to technological innovations, they may adopt production processes and new technologies that can make them more efficient. Lower costs may be passed to consumers in the form of lower prices.

Page 8: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Monopoly power and government regulation Economists agree in that the disadvantages of

monopolies (absence of competition, higher prices, lower quantity of output, productive and allocative inefficiencies, higher than necessary costs, negative impacts on income distribution) outweigh its advantages.

Most countries do not encourage private monopolies. In the event of natural monopolies, these are owned or regulated by the governments, so that the interests of society are protected.

Page 9: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

‘Monopoly power’ (the ability of a firm to set prices) applies not only to monopoly, but also to oligopoly. Oligopolistic firms sometimes act together (collude) in order to acquire greater monopoly power. If they succeed, they end up acting as a monopoly.

Legislation to reduce monopoly power applies also to firms that try to behave like monopolies.

Page 10: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Legislation to reduce monopoly power. Forms1. Legislation to protect competition Most countries have laws that try to

promote competition by preventing collusion between oligopolistic firms for the purpose of restricting competition between them, as well as preventing anti-competitive behaviour by a single firm that dominates a market.

Page 11: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

The objective is to achieve a greater degree of allocative efficiency, by preventing monopolistic behaviour by a firm or group of firms. Example: Microsoft.

Firms that are found guilty are usually asked to pay fines or may be broken up into smaller firms.

Page 12: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Difficulties with competition policies:1. Interpretation of the legislation in

connection with the behaviour of the firms. a) determine which actions constitute competitive behaviour (different views are possible); b) laws might be vague.

2. Some gov may be stricter than others when enforcing laws, depending on their priorities or their political and ideological views.

3. Difficulty in finding evidence of the collusion and proving it, as collusion occurs secretly, as it is illegal.

Page 13: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

2. Legislation in the case of mergers.A merger is an agreement between two

or more firms to join together and become a single firm. Reasons may be: capturing economies of scale, growing, acquiring monopoly power.

The single firm created from the merging may be very large and have too much monopoly power. Legislation involves limits on the size of the combined firms.

Page 14: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Difficulties: a. What firms should be allowed and what

firms should notb. Interpretation of the legislationc. Ideological differences among gov on the

desirability or not of a high degree of monopoly power.

Page 15: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Regulation of natural monopoly Not in the interest of society to

break up a natural monopoly into smaller firms, as this would result in higher average costs.

Gov usually regulate natural monopolies to ensure more socially desirable price and quantity outcomes.

Page 16: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

1. Marginal cost pricing. That is, forcing the monopoly to charge

a price equal to marginal cost and thus achieving allocative efficiency.

It always leads to losses for the natural monopolist, making it impractical. As long as the D curve cuts the ATC curve to the left of the min ATC, it is not possible for the MC curve to cut the D curve at a point above ATC.

Page 17: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

MR

D=AR

ATCMC

Qm Qac Qmc

P

Q

Pm

Pac

Pmc

Page 18: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

1. Average cost pricing (P=ATC). The price is determined by the

intersection of the D curve with the ATC curve.

Also known as fair return pricing because the monopolist is forced to earn normal profit.

Productive efficiency is not achieved. Advantages:

1. monopolist earns normal profit and is not in danger of shutting down.

2. more efficient than the market solution.

Page 19: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Disadvantages:1. monopolist loses incentive to keeps its

costs down as he is guaranteed a price equal to its average costs.

2. The regulated monopoly may stop being a natural monopoly (if technological improvements change cost conditons) and still survive as a monopoly. Continued regulation provides protection to the firm from new (more efficient) competitors.

Page 20: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

Monopoly compared with perfect competition

1. Price and output2. Efficiency3. R&D4. Economies of scale

Page 21: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

1. Price and Output: higher price and smaller quantity than perfect competition.

2. Efficiency.a) Monopolies fail to achieve both productive

and allocative efficiency. Also: it may lead to X-inefficiency. Firms in PC achieve efficiency and are less likely to display X-inefficiency due to continuous pressure to lower their costs.

b) However, innovations in new technology may lower costs of production, leading to increased efficiencies.

Page 22: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

3. R&D.a) Firms in PC unlikely to engage in R&D

due to lack of funds, lack of incentive to develop new products/differentiation and unable to create barriers to entry.

b) Monopolies have the needed resources to engage in R&D as well as the incentives. But high barriers to entry could make them less likely to innovate than smaller firms (in monopolistic competition) due to lack of competition.

Page 23: Evaluating Monopoly Comparison with Perfect Competition

4. Economies of scalea) No possibility for PC firms.b) Monopolies more likely to take

advantage of economies of scale and may use these to create a barrier to entry. However, they also offer the advantage of lower average costs and lower prices as well as greater quantities for consumers, and could approach those achieved in PC.