Boom Before Bust? The Industrial Organization of Groundwater
|
|
- Herbert Elvin Lamb
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Boom Before Bust? The Industrial Organization of Groundwater Ujjayant Chakravorty and E. Somanathan May 9, 203 Abstract Recent decades have seen an explosion in the drilling of wells and extraction of groundwater in India and China. According to many experts, the rise of groundwater extraction has led to increased food production and food security in these two populous nations. However, this trend has occurred at the same time as water tables have declined in many regions in India and China. We develop a model of the industrial organization of groundwater markets. We show that increasing scarcity of water may lead to a boom in "well-drilling," contrary to what one may expect. In our framework, resource scarcity reduces competition among water sellers, hence increases profits. Higher profits induce greater entry. Keywords: water scarcity, transport cost, market structure, development, Salop circle, spatial competition, Bertrand pricing We are grateful to Kelsey Jack, Gilbert Metcalf, Lorenzo Planas and Alain Ayong le Kama for helpful comments as well as workshop participants in Shanghai, Annecy and Clermont-Ferrand for valuable feedback. Professor of Economics, Tufts University. ujjayant.chakravorty@tufts.edu Professor, Economics and Planning Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi. som@isid.ac.in
2 Introduction China and India are the largest countries in the world, with a heavy dependence on groundwater for agriculture. The share of groundwater in Chinese irrigation has gone up from near zero in the 950s to about 20 percent early in this century, according to the Chinese Ministry of Water Resources (Wang, et al 2007). 2 Wang, et al note that groundwater is "critical" for the expansion of agriculture and the regional economy. The same story can be repeated for India and other countries in South Asia. For example, 7 million Indian farmers cultivate farms that are smaller than an acre (0.4 hectare). In the large Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, 60 percent of small farmers buy water from "water extraction devices" different types of tubewells. The area covered by pump irrigation in South Asia is estimated to be higher than under surface water irrigation (Shah, 2009). 3 There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the future growth in food production is intimately tied to the development of groundwater both in South and East Asia, which is home to billions of people. Unlike in developed nations such as the United States, the availability of pump irrigation has prevented the consolidation of agriculture in this region, and millions of small farmers are able to afford pump irrigation. Thus groundwater irrigation is intimately tied to the survival of small farms (size less than one acre or 0.4 hectares), especially in South Asia. However, there seems to be incontrovertible evidence that this large- scale extraction of groundwater has led to a steady fall in the water table in many India is the world s largest user of groundwater, accounting for about a quarter of world consumption. Groundwater accounts for about 60 percent of irrigated agriculture and 85 percent of drinking water supplies (World Bank 200). 2 In Northern China, about half of the irrigation water comes from groundwater, less in the Southern part of the country. Unlike surface water irrigation, the decentralized nature of groundwater use means that it is often under-reported in official statistics. 3 There is significant evidence to suggest that crop yields are higher with groundwater than in surface water irrigation and farmers prefer planting higher valued crops such as fruits and vegetables and orchards to groundwater. 2
3 parts of India and China. For example, a 2004 National Assessment in India found 29 percent of all groundwater blocks to be in the "critical, semi-critical or over-exploited categories" (World Bank, 200). 4 The goal of this paper is to develop an analytical model that explains this somewhat paradoxical phenomenon - an expansion of well drilling concomitant occurring at the same time as depletion of the water table, at least in some major irrigation-intensive regions of South and East Asia. More specifically, we seek to understand who buys and who sells groundwater and how government policy may affect the static and dynamic efficiency of water use. This is important not only because a large number of small farmers depend on groundwater for their water needs, but both small and large farmers participate as buyers and sellers in this market. 5 Typically, a pump could run for about 3,000 plus hours a year. Thus, government tax and subsidy policies will affect the decision to buy or sell water, and have important efficiency and welfare effects, that we study in this paper. Most of the economic literature on groundwater pumping has focused on the dynamics of depletion and market failures arising from common property access to water aquifers (e.g., Gisser, 983; Gaudet, Salant and Moreaux, 2003). There have been no studies on the industrial organization of groundwater. This is important because groundwater markets have specific characteristics that do not allow for standard economic principles to be applied. 4 The report also points out that the "potential social and economic consequences of continued weak or nonexistent groundwater management are serious, as aquifer depletion is concentrated in many of the most populated and economically productive areas" (World Bank 200). 5 A typical small farmer needs a pump for about hours a year. (Shah, 2009). However, once the investment is made, a pump can supply water to other farmers as well. 3
4 A Sellers B Figure : Sellers on a Salop circle with unit circumference. 2 The Model We consider a situation where a continuum of identical farms are distributed uniformly along a Salop circle of unit circumference. For analytical convenience, we ignore intra-farm distances and assume all farms to be points in space. The demand for water at any farm is assumed to be a non-increasing function q(p) where p is the price of water. Suppose there are n wells spaced evenly on the circle (see Figure 2). Let the average cost of pumping a unit of water to the surface be a constant c > 0. Let the cost of transporting a unit of water over distance x on the surface be t(x) > 0 with t (x) > 0. Later, we will discuss how more general pumping and transport costs may affect our results. For now, we will suppose that t(x) is linear so that t(x) = tx. So the marginal cost of pumping groundwater to a farm at a distance x > 0 is given by c + tx. The presence of transport costs introduces differentiation among buyers because it costs more to deliver water to buyers located further away. To simplify our model, we abstain from dealing with a monopoly, and assume that the monopoly price is "high enough." The presence of monopoly 4
5 sellers in our model will not affect our results, as we will show later. However, for now, we focus on getting the main result in a setting where sellers of water participate in a purely oligopolistic market. Assumption The monopoly price of water at the wellhead is at least c+ t. n The above assumption may hold if the cost of pumping and transport costs of water are sufficiently low. Proposition Under Assumption, the price of water paid by a buyer located at distance x from the nearest well is decreasing in x. Proof : The nearest seller s marginal cost of delivering water is c + tx < c + t ( n x), the marginal cost of the second nearest seller, (except for a buyer equidistant from two sellers). Therefore, the nearest seller can capture the entire market at x by selling at just under the second-nearest seller s marginal cost. This will be profit-maximizing for the nearest seller provided the monopoly price at x is at least c + t ( x). However, this price is less n than or equal to c + t which is less than or equal to the monopoly price at n x = 0 (Assumption ). Since the monopoly price is increasing in the marginal cost, and the marginal cost is increasing in x, this means that the monopoly price at x is greater than c + t ( n x). Hence, ( ) p(x) = c + t n x, () which is decreasing in x. Even though it costs more to transport water to farms further away, the more distant farms pay a lower price than nearby farms. The reason is Bertrand competition between a seller and his immediate neighbor. The price is simply equal to the nearest neighbor s marginal cost of water in order to cut that neighbor out of the market. Although the market is completely 5
6 segmented, with each farm buying water exclusively from the nearest well, the market is a series of Bertrand duopolies, not a series of spatial monopolies. 6 Figure 2 shows the layout of the sellers for any given n. Each seller will split the market with his two neighbors on either side. On each side, he will supply to buyers located from zero to seller is given by. Thus the total profit to any water π(n) = 2 [p(x) (c + tx)] q(p(x))dx. 0 Substituting for p(x) from (), we see that π(n) = 2t [ 2x]q(p(x))dx. (2) 0 n Note that the mark-up is independent of the cost of pumping water to the surface (as long as c is not so high that Assumption fails). This is because the Bertrand competitors cost of pumping water to the surface is the same and the mark-up depends on the difference in marginal costs of the two sellers. We note a further consequence of. By, with c and t fixed, a decrease in n raises the price at every farm. Since, by, this price is less than the monopoly price at every farm, this must increase the profit at every farm. Since it also expands a seller s market (see (2)), it must result in an increase in every seller s profit. We record this as Remark π(n) is decreasing in n for fixed c and t. 6 This result - in which the more distant buyers pay a lower price, has been observed in generic models of spatial competition, see for e.g., Norman and Thisse (996) in which firms price discriminate among uniformly located buyers with inelastic demand. 6
7 t c n t c E C c D A M( x ) B Figure 2: Price and marginal cost paths for seller A. M is location of buyer midpoint between adjacent sellers A seller s profit must be as large as the fixed cost of digging the well and installing the pump, which we aggregate and denote by F > 0. 7 With free entry, the equilibrium well density n e must satisfy π(n e ) = F. (3) Is this equilibrium socially optimal? Since the transport cost t is unlikely to be amenable to policy intervention, we take it as given and ask whether taxes or subsidies on the unit pumping cost c and fixed cost of a well F may improve social welfare. Proposition 2 In Bertrand equilibrium with free entry, if q (p) is sufficiently small for all p, then the equilibrium well density and aggregate water use are 7 This may include the cost of obtaining a permit for the tubewell and an electricity connection, in areas where the farm is connected to the grid. 7
8 2 3 (a) small n Fig. 3. Saw-tooth price path with peak ks where (b) large n Figure 3: Saw-tooth price path with peaks where sellers are located greater than the well density and water use that a social planner who can tax and subsidize F would choose. Proof : The total net social surplus, assuming Bertrand pricing, is given by n [S(n) F ] = n [π(n) + C(n) F ] (4) where S(n) is the social surplus from the farms served by one seller when well density is n, and C(n) is the consumer surplus from one seller s farms. The social planner can choose n by adding a tax to the right-hand side of the free entry condition (3). The planner chooses n to maximize the net social surplus (4). Hence, the socially optimal well density n o satisfies the first-order condition S(n) + n o S (n o ) = F. 8
9 or π(n o ) = F [n o S (n o ) + C(n o )]. (5) Since, by Remark, π(n) is decreasing, it is enough to show that π(n e ) < π(n o ). Since π(n e ) = F, we need to show that the term in brackets on the right-hand side of (5) is negative. Let s(p(n, x)) denote the social surplus accruing from the farm at distance x from a seller. Now ( S (n) = d ) 2 s(p(n, x))dx dn 0 = s(p(n, ( ) )) n (6) s s(p(n, x))dx. (7) n The first term above is the fall in total social surplus accruing to farms in a seller s market owing to the shrinkage of that market when n increases. The second term is the increase in social surplus in a seller s market owing to the fall in the price, and consequent expansion in water consumed at all farms in that seller s market. Now s ds s(p(n, x)) = n dp p n = q (p) ( t n 2tx (8) ) ( ) t. (9) The third factor above follows from () while the first two are explained in the file "Figure for Prop 2.pdf". By assumption, q (p) is bounded by a small constant, so the second term in (7) can be ignored. So ns (n) = s ( ) n = k ( ) n where k(x) is the consumer surplus of the farm at x. At x =, price equals marginal cost, so social surplus equals consumer surplus. Now k(x) < k ( ) n 2 9
10 for all x [ ) ( 0, because p(x) > p ). So C(n) = 2 k(x)dx < ( ) k dx = k ( ) n. Hence So ns (n) < C(n). C(n) + ns (n) < 0. Therefore, π(n o ) > F. Since π(n) is decreasing in n (because the price at every farm is decreasing in n, and the measure of farms that constitute a seller s market is decreasing in n), and π(n e ) = F by free entry, therefore n e > n o. Since the price of water at every farm is decreasing in n, therefore water use in equilibrium is socially excessive. 3 Depletion Consider a Bertrand equilibrium. Suppose the available water supply falls as a result of last period s extraction. Note that in the short run (keeping n fixed), at x =, p(x) must rise. For if it did not, then by the no-arbitrage condition, prices would remain unchanged at every x. But then water demand would exceed water supply. It follows (by the no-arbitrage condition) that the new short-run equilibrium involves a rise in the price at every x by a uniform amount that is just sufficient for the resulting decrease in demand to match the shortfall in supply. Figure 3 shows the rise in price as a result of water scarcity in the basin. Prices must rise until aggregate demand equals supply. Now this must increase profit, because the unit cost of delivering water 0
11 t c n c D A M( x ) B Figure 4: Bertrand Equilibrium with Scarce Water. Price rises uniformly to equate Aggregate Demand and Supply to any location has not changed, but prices have gone up. Hence, in the long run, there must be entry sufficient to bring profits back down to F. However, the average price will remain high enough to just exhaust the available water supply. We see that a decline in water availability has led to a boom in well density. Suppose there is further decline in water supply in the subsequent period. Perhaps, in this last period, the only available water is the natural recharge. Now if the water supply has declined enough, then the process described above will lead to a large increase in prices, so large that Bertrand pricing disappears because prices are constrained by the monopoly price. Note that, if we consider a hypothetical continuous decline in the water supply W, the monopoly price would first be reached at the wellhead since the marginal cost of extraction is lowest there. Further increases in W would result in a
12 monopoly price that increases in x upto some level of x and then declines with slope t along the Bertrand price line to. For this range of W, since prices continue to increase at some farms, profits increase and so entry increases. This case is shown in Figure 3. The boom continues. Eventually, for a low enough W, Bertrand pricing must be completely eliminated with monopoly pricing prevailing all the way till. Further declines in W cannot result in further price increases. Instead, sellers will stop selling to the least profitable customers, which are the ones located farthest from them. Profits will decline and there will be exit. Not all farms will get positive water supply. The boom turns into a bust. this result can be stated as follows. Proposition 3 If pumping costs remain constant but aggregate water available shrinks with use, firm profits increase, leading to increased entry followed by an instantaneous collapse of the industry. In Fig.6, we plot equilibrium firm entry as a function of available stock of water. If the stock of water is higher than W then the number of firms in the market is constant. Any new entrant will be unable to cover the fixed cost of entry F. However when the stock of water falls below additional entry wi W firms must reduce the total quantity of water they sell, so that prices must rise at each location (while unit costs of water delivery at each location remain unchanged), to equate aggregate demand to supply. However, firm profits must go up because now prices are closer to monopoly prices, even though quantity sold has gone down at each location. This induces more entry, which in turn increases aggregate water withdrawals, further raising prices. This must continue until monopoly prices are reached first at the wellhead, then in either direction. The number of firms reaches a maximum when water prices are monopolistic at each location. Further entry must increase prices and reduce profits, resulting in a gap in water delivery between any two tubewells. Finally all firms must exit when there is not enough water to 2
13 t c n P m c D A M( x ) B Figure 5: Increased Water Scarcity leads to Monopoly Pricing starting at the Well-head. Monopoly Prices rise with Distance cover a sufficiently large service area under monopoly pricing. This level of the stock of water is denoted in the figure by W 0. Below this level, no firm will supply water. Note that we have assumed that c remains constant as W falls. More realistically, there may first be a rise in c as the water table falls. Consider first the case when depletion implies a fall in the water table, but no change in the aggregate amount of water that is available. Then depletion leads to a rise in the pumping cost c, which drives up prices at each location. Quantity supplied at each location falls, leading to lower profits. This will result in a gradual exit from the industry. Thus in the case in which depletion results in a pure increase in the cost of pumping, we do not get a boom in well drilling. Well density will fall. However, if water demand is very inelastic, this effect may be small. When the bottom of the aquifer is reached, then W will start to fall and the process described above may set in. 3
14 n max n * W 0 W Figure 6: Firm Entry as a function of the Stock of Water However in reality, over extraction may manifest itself both through a reduction in the amount of available water W and an increase in the cost of extraction. The unit pumping cost is likely to be linear in the depth of the water table, since the potential energy expended will be the gravitational force times the depth. If the aquifer is rectangular in shape, then the volume of the water will also be linear in the depth of the water table. It is not clear how aquifer depletion will impact the pumping cost and the stock of water. If for example, the stock of water declines faster than the change in the depth of the water table, such as in a triangular aquifer, we may see a boom in well drilling followed by a bust. However, if the pumping cost changed faster than the stock of water, the boom will not exist and there will be a steady exit of firms from the industry as costs rise. The cost of pumping is directly a function of energy prices. Most tubewells at least in South Asia, use electricity where it is available, and diesel 4
15 otherwise, for running their tubewells. Farmers pay a flat fee for electricity use, which is not correlated with the quantity they consume. Thus in regions where electricity is used, we may observe the boom and bust cycle with depletion of groundwater. On the other hand, in regions where electricity is not available, and farmers use diesel, they pay per unit costs, even if they are subsidized. The costs of pumping should rise with increased depletion and we should observe a reduction in tubewell pumping over time. 3. Zero Transport Costs Let us now consider the case in which the unit transport cost t is zero. This may happen if evapotranspiration losses are low, for instance, or the cost of piping the water is low, such as in parts of Gujarat where portable plastic pipes can be installed at relatively low cost to move water between farms. In this case, the price charged to each consumer must be constant since there is no spatial heterogeneity due to space. However, there can not be any Bertrand equilibrium because then price must be at marginal cost, which implies zero profits and firms will be unable to cover their fixed cost F. The area serviced by firms will be limited by the capacity of the pump. If a new entrant comes in, prices will fall to c under Bertrand competition. So the entrant will not be able to recover his fixed cost. Entry will, therefore, be deterred. We will thus get a series of local monopolies. Less water will be used at each location - which is good from the point of view of depletion. But there will be no boom before the bust. The choice of capacity can be made endogenous. Assume that for an fixed investment of F, we can get a pump that services an area of radius R. Then each tubewell owner will maximize the expression 2π m R(F ) F where π m is the monopoly profit at any location x and the function R(F ) 5
16 gives the radius of the pump as a function of fixed costs. The solution to this problem is given by 2π m R (F ) =. If unit transport cost t > 0, and there is Bertrand pricing, then our last result (we should state it formally) says that a decline in the water supply will be accompanied by an increase in prices, and in the stage when c is increasing, a fall in well density, followed by an increase in well density when W falls faster than c (the boom), followed by a bust when there is a transition to monopoly pricing and some farms fail to get water. On the other hand, if t = 0, then there is no Bertrand regime. It is always local monopoly, and there will be no boom phase before the bust. Empirically, the interesting question is whether t = 0 and there is a capacity constraint that determines the size of the local monopoly, or whether t > 0 and we have Bertrand duopoly. In the latter case, the boom-and-bust phenomenon is predicted and in the former, only bust. Also, of course, we only get the price decreasing with distance only with Bertrand pricing. 3.2 Policies to address depletion Taxes on the pumping cost c or on the fixed cost F will reduce depletion. A tax on the pumping cost c will raise the price line vertically by the amount of the tax which in turn will lead to a reduction in water use at each location. However, beyond a certain level of tax, there will be monopoly pricing beginning at the well-head. A tax will reduce aggregate water use and by reducing profits, will lead to a fewer number of wells. Similarly, a tax on F will lead to reduced entry and higher pries and lower water use. 4 Concluding Remarks This paper addresses the issue of groundwater depletion, which is increasingly becoming a serious problem in the developing world. The dramatic 6
17 increase in groundwater extraction is responsible for the steady increase in grain production in the most populous countries in the world, especially India and China. At the same time, because of subsidies in the price of electricity and diesel, a large number of small farmers have continued to engage in farming by drilling tubewells, with significant impact on the water table in many regions. We develop a model that shows that at least under some conditions, depletion of the water stock may actually reduce competition and increase profits, leading to a boom in tubewell drilling and an inevitable bust when the water supply is near exhaustion. These conditions are likely to arise when energy costs are heavily subsidized, so that the fall in the water table is not matched by a concomitant rise in pumping costs. However, if energy costs rise as the water table subsides, it may lead to reduced profits and a slow exit from the industry. From a policy point of view, our framework, although highly stylized and simple, provides a range of predictions, that can be tested empirically. Low fixed costs in well drilling and low energy costs of pumping will lead to a higher well density. Higher costs of water transport and losses in conveyance will increase well density. However, in the limit when the cost of transportation goes to zero, we obtain a series of spatial monopolies which serve an area constrained by their pump capacity. In regions with significant recharge of water (e.g, from rainfall), there may be enough water each period to thwart the anti-competitive effects of scarcity - hence one may see a lower tubewell density. The reverse may hold for arid and water scarce regions. Future research can focus on a more explicit dynamic formulation of scarcity and its effects on pricing. We have restricted ourselves to developing a static model of competition between tubewells, which generates interesting insights on the effect of water depletion. However, we have abstained from explicit consideration of discount rates and other parameters that may impact dynamic extraction. 7
The Basic Spatial Model with a Single Monopolist
Economics 335 March 3, 999 Notes 8: Models of Spatial Competition I. Product differentiation A. Definition Products are said to be differentiated if consumers consider them to be imperfect substitutes.
More informationEconomics of Industrial Organization. Lecture 12: Mergers
Economics of Industrial Organization Lecture 12: Mergers Mergers Thus far we have talked about industry dynamics in terms of firms entering and exiting the industry, and have assumed that all these firms
More informationBusiness Economics BUSINESS ECONOMICS. PAPER No. 1: MICROECONOMIC ANALYSIS MODULE No. 24: NON-COLLUSIVE OLIGOPOLY I
Subject Business Economics Paper No and Title Module No and Title Module Tag 1, Microeconomic Analysis 4, Non-Collusive Oligopoly I BSE_P1_M4 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Learning Outcomes. Introduction 3. Cournot
More informationEcon Microeconomic Analysis and Policy
ECON 500 Microeconomic Theory Econ 500 - Microeconomic Analysis and Policy Monopoly Monopoly A monopoly is a single firm that serves an entire market and faces the market demand curve for its output. Unlike
More informationSustainability of groundwater resources in India: challenges and scope for economic instruments and policy
Sustainable Irrigation Management, Technologies and Policies II 73 Sustainability of groundwater resources in India: challenges and scope for economic instruments and policy S. Msangi International Food
More informationWater-Food-Energy Nexus in the context of groundwater use in India: Experience from three Indian States
Photo: :Tom David van Brazier/IWMI Cakenberghe/IWMI Water-Food-Energy Nexus in the context of groundwater use in India: Experience from three Indian States Aditi Mukherji, IWMI Water for a food-secure
More informationNB: STUDENTS ARE REQUESTED IN THEIR OWN INTEREST TO WRITE LEGIBLY AND IN INK.
1 INFORMATION & INSTRUCTIONS: DURATION: THREE (3) HOURS TOTAL MARKS: 300 INTERNAL EXAMINER : PROFESSOR D. MAHADEA EXTERNAL EXAMINER: MR R. SIMSON NB: STUDENTS ARE REQUESTED IN THEIR OWN INTEREST TO WRITE
More informationOligopoly and Monopolistic Competition
Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition Introduction Managerial Problem Airbus and Boeing are the only two manufacturers of large commercial aircrafts. If only one receives a government subsidy, how can
More informationPart IV. Pricing strategies and market segmentation
Part IV. Pricing strategies and market segmentation Chapter 8. Group pricing and personalized pricing Slides Industrial Organization: Markets and Strategies Paul Belleflamme and Martin Peitz Cambridge
More informationVolume 29, Issue 4. Mixed oligopoly and spatial agglomeration in quasi-linear city
Volume 29, Issue 4 Mixed oligopoly and spatial agglomeration in quasi-linear city Takeshi Ebina Department of Social Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology Toshihiro Matsumura Institute of Social Science,
More informationVolume 31, Issue 4. Free entry and welfare with price discrimination
Volume 31, Issue 4 Free entry and welfare with price discrimination Francisco Galera Universidad de Navarra Pedro Mendi Universidad de Navarra Abstract We show that if firms in an industry engage in third-degree
More informationChapter 1- Introduction
Chapter 1- Introduction A SIMPLE ECONOMY Central PROBLEMS OF AN ECONOMY: scarcity of resources problem of choice Every society has to decide on how to use its scarce resources. Production, exchange and
More informationChapter 25: Monopoly Behavior
Econ 401 Price Theory Chapter 25: Monopoly Behavior Instructor: Hiroki Watanabe Summer 2009 1 / 46 1 Introduction 2 First-degree Price Discrimination Optimal Pricing Welfare Property 3 Third-Degree Price
More informationAll but which of the following are true in the long-run for a competitive firm that maximizes profits?
Microeconomics, Module 11: Monopoly (Chapter 10) Illustrative Test Questions (The attached PDF file has better formatting.) Question 11.1: Profit Maximization: Monopoly Which of the following is true in
More information1.. There are two firms that produce a homogeneous product. Let p i
University of California, Davis Department of Economics Time: 3 hours Reading time: 20 minutes PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION FOR THE Ph.D. DEGREE Industrial Organization June 30, 2005 Answer four of the six
More informationAt P = $120, Q = 1,000, and marginal revenue is ,000 = $100
Microeconomics, monopoly, final exam practice problems (The attached PDF file has better formatting.) *Question 1.1: Marginal Revenue Assume the demand curve is linear.! At P = $100, total revenue is $200,000.!
More informationUniform and Targeted Advertising with Shoppers and. Asymmetric Loyal Market Shares
Uniform and Targeted dvertising with Shoppers and symmetric Loyal Market Shares Michael rnold, Chenguang Li and Lan Zhang October 9, 2012 Preliminary and Incomplete Keywords: informative advertising, targeted
More informationINTRODUCTORY ECONOMICS
4265 FIRST PUBLIC EXAMINATION Preliminary Examination for Philosophy, Politics and Economics Preliminary Examination for Economics and Management Preliminary Examination for History and Economics INTRODUCTORY
More informationMonopoly CHAPTER. Goals. Outcomes
CHAPTER 15 Monopoly Goals in this chapter you will Learn why some markets have only one seller Analyze how a monopoly determines the quantity to produce and the price to charge See how the monopoly s decisions
More informationNBER WORKING PAPER SERIES SPATIAL PRICE DISCRIMINATION WITH HETEROGENEOUS FIRMS. Jonathan Vogel. Working Paper
NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES SPATIAL PRICE DISCRIMINATION WITH HETEROGENEOUS FIRMS Jonathan Vogel Working Paper 14978 http://www.nber.org/papers/w14978 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts
More informationLesson-28. Perfect Competition. Economists in general recognize four major types of market structures (plus a larger number of subtypes):
Lesson-28 Perfect Competition Economists in general recognize four major types of market structures (plus a larger number of subtypes): Perfect Competition Monopoly Oligopoly Monopolistic competition Market
More informationProf. Wolfram Elsner Faculty of Business Studies and Economics iino Institute of Institutional and Innovation Economics. Real-World Markets
Prof. Wolfram Elsner Faculty of Business Studies and Economics iino Institute of Institutional and Innovation Economics Real-World Markets Readings for this lecture Required reading this time: Real-World
More informationUC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A)
UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Monopoly and oligopoly (PR 11.1-11.4 and 12.2-12.5) Advanced pricing with market power and equilibrium oligopolistic
More informationSHORT QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FOR ECO402
SHORT QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS FOR ECO402 Question: How does opportunity cost relate to problem of scarcity? Answer: The problem of scarcity exists because of limited production. Thus, each society must make
More informationEconomics 448W, Notes on the Classical Supply Side Professor Steven Fazzari
Economics 448W, Notes on the Classical Supply Side Professor Steven Fazzari These notes cover the basics of the first part of our classical model discussion. Review them in detail prior to the second class
More informationSolutions to Final Exam
Solutions to Final Exam AEC 504 - Summer 2007 Fundamentals of Economics c 2007 Alexander Barinov 1 Veni, vidi, vici (30 points) Two firms with constant marginal costs serve two markets for two different
More informationCountervailing Power and Product Diversity
Countervailing Power and Product Diversity by Zhiqi Chen Carleton University Work in Progress December 6, 2003 Abstract To analyse the effects of countervailing power on product variety, I construct a
More informationThis lesson was made possible with the assistance of the following organisations:
6 MODULE 2: Fundamentals of Economics in Agriculture LESSON 1: Introduction to Economics of the Firm TIME: 1 hour 15 minutes AUTHOR: Prof. Francis Wambalaba This lesson was made possible with the assistance
More informationStrategic Competition and Optimal Parallel Import Policy
Strategic Competition and Optimal Parallel Import Policy Santanu Roy Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX. Kamal Saggi Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. Forthcoming in the Canadian Journal of
More informationChapter 14 TRADITIONAL MODELS OF IMPERFECT COMPETITION. Copyright 2005 by South-Western, a division of Thomson Learning. All rights reserved.
Chapter 14 TRADITIONAL MODELS OF IMPERFECT COMPETITION Copyright 2005 by South-Western, a division of Thomson Learning. All rights reserved. 1 Pricing Under Homogeneous Oligopoly We will assume that the
More informationMonopoly. The single seller or firm referred to as a monopolist or monopolistic firm. Characteristics of a monopolistic industry
Monopoly Monopoly: a market structure in which there is only one seller of a good or service that has no close substitutes and entry to the market is completely blocked. The single seller or firm referred
More informationDoes it Pay to be First? Sequential Locational Choice and Foreclosure*
Does it Pay to be First? Sequential Locational Choice and Foreclosure* by Nicholas Economides,** Jamie Howell, and Sergio Meza** This version: August 2002 Abstract We analyze the sequential choices of
More informationCh. 9 LECTURE NOTES 9-1
Ch. 9 LECTURE NOTES I. Four market models will be addressed in Chapters 9-11; characteristics of the models are summarized in Table 9.1. A. Pure competition entails a large number of firms, standardized
More informationPrice Discrimination: Exercises Part 2
Price Discrimination: Exercises Part Sotiris Georganas Royal Holloway University of London Problem 1 An economics journal is considering offering a new service which will send articles to readers by email.
More informationEvaluating the Gains and Losses from Government Policies Consumer and Producer Surplus
C H A P T E R 9 The Analysis of Competitive Markets CHAPTER OUTLINE 9.1 Evaluating the Gains and Losses from Government Policies Consumer and Producer Surplus 9.2 The Efficiency of Competitive Markets
More information14.01 Principles of Microeconomics, Fall 2007 Chia-Hui Chen November 7, Lecture 22
Monopoly. Principles of Microeconomics, Fall Chia-Hui Chen November, Lecture Monopoly Outline. Chap : Monopoly. Chap : Shift in Demand and Effect of Tax Monopoly The monopolist is the single supply-side
More informationIndustrial Organization- micro : Price discrimination in oligopoly
Industrial Organization- micro 3 2018: Price discrimination in oligopoly Price discrimination is a mechanism whereby a monopolist can effectively shift surplus from the consumer sector. With perfect price
More informationMonopoly. Monopoly 4: Durable Goods. Allan Collard-Wexler Econ 465 Market Power and Public Policy September 16, / 14
Monopoly Monopoly 4: Durable Goods Allan Collard-Wexler Econ 465 Market Power and Public Policy September 16, 2016 1 / 14 Monopoly Overview Definition: A firm is a monopoly if it is the only supplier of
More informationIndustrial Organization 04
Industrial Organization 04 Product differentiation Marc Bourreau Telecom ParisTech Marc Bourreau (TPT) Lecture 04: Product differentiation 1 / 43 Outline 1 Introduction: forms of product differentiation
More informationEcon Microeconomics Notes
Econ 120 - Microeconomics Notes Daniel Bramucci December 1, 2016 1 Section 1 - Thinking like an economist 1.1 Definitions Cost-Benefit Principle An action should be taken only when its benefit exceeds
More informationBonanno, G. (1987), Location Choice, Product Proliferation and Entry Deterrence, Review of
References Bonanno, G. (1987), Location Choice, Product Proliferation and Entry Deterrence, Review of Economic Studies, 54, pp.37-46. Besanko, D., S. Donnenfeld and L. White (1987), Monopoly and Quality
More informationFirm Supply. Market demand. Demand curve facing firm
Firm Supply 84 Firm Supply A. Firms face two sorts of constraints 1. technological constraints summarize in cost function 2. market constraints how will consumers and other firms react to a given firm
More informationECON 4100: Industrial Organization. Lecture 1- Introduction and a review of perfect competition versus monopoly
ECON 4100: Industrial Organization Lecture 1- Introduction and a review of perfect competition versus monopoly 1 Introductory Remarks Overview study of firms and markets strategic competition Different
More informationJournal of Industrial Organization Education. Third-Degree Price Discrimination
An Article Submitted to Journal of Industrial Organization Education Manuscript 1030 Third-Degree Price Discrimination Qihong Liu Konstantinos Serfes University of Oklahoma, qliu@ou.edu Drexel University,
More informationAS/ECON AF Answers to Assignment 1 October 2007
AS/ECON 4070 3.0AF Answers to Assignment 1 October 2007 Q1. Find all the efficient allocations in the following 2 person, 2 good, 2 input economy. The 2 goods, food and clothing, are produced using labour
More informationManagerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S. J. M School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay. Lecture - 27 Monopoly
Managerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S. J. M School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Lecture - 27 Monopoly So, we will continue our discussion on theory of perfect competition.
More informationnot to be republished NCERT Chapter 6 Non-competitive Markets 6.1 SIMPLE MONOPOLY IN THE COMMODITY MARKET
Chapter 6 We recall that perfect competition was theorised as a market structure where both consumers and firms were price takers. The behaviour of the firm in such circumstances was described in the Chapter
More informationUnit 6 Perfect Competition and Monopoly - Practice Problems
Unit 6 Perfect Competition and Monopoly - Practice Problems Multiple Choice Identify the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question. 1. One characteristic of a perfectly competitive
More informationMonopoly. 3 Microeconomics LESSON 5. Introduction and Description. Time Required. Materials
LESSON 5 Monopoly Introduction and Description Lesson 5 extends the theory of the firm to the model of a Students will see that the profit-maximization rules for the monopoly are the same as they were
More informationImperfect Price Information and Competition
mperfect Price nformation and Competition Sneha Bakshi April 14, 2016 Abstract Price competition depends on prospective buyers information regarding market prices. This paper illustrates that if buyers
More informationECON 115. Industrial Organization
ECON 115 Industrial Organization 1. Review the Quiz 2. Reprise 3 rd Degree Price Discrimination 3. A problem and its implications 4. Introduction to non-linear (1 st & 2 nd Degree) Price Discrimination
More informationIn Chapter 3 we pointed out that there are two reasons why countries
Economies of Scale, Imperfect Competition, and International Trade 6 Chapter In Chapter 3 we pointed out that there are two reasons why countries specialize and trade. First, countries differ either in
More informationManagerial Economics, 01/12/2003. A Glossary of Terms
A Glossary of Terms The Digital Economist -A- Abundance--A physical or economic condition where the quantity available of a resource exceeds the quantity desired in the absence of a rationing system. Arbitrage
More informationECONOMICS. Paper 3 : Fundamentals of Microeconomic Theory Module 28 : Non collusive and Collusive model
Subject Paper No and Title Module No and Title Module Tag 3 : Fundamentals of Microeconomic Theory 28 : Non collusive and Collusive model ECO_P3_M28 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Learning Outcomes 2. Introduction
More informationMarket Concentration and Power
Market Concentration and Power What can the data tell us about θ? If we had data on marginal costs, we should be able to estimated θ easily. Because then we could get L, and having estimated H (easy),
More informationJacob: W hat if Framer Jacob has 10% percent of the U.S. wheat production? Is he still a competitive producer?
Microeconomics, Module 7: Competition in the Short Run (Chapter 7) Additional Illustrative Test Questions (The attached PDF file has better formatting.) Updated: June 9, 2005 Question 7.1: Pricing in a
More informationProfessor Christina Romer SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO PROBLEM SET 1
Economics 2 Spring 2018 rofessor Christina Romer rofessor David Romer SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO ROBLEM SET 1 1.a. Opportunity cost is defined as the value of what must be forgone to undertake an activity, where
More informationPrinciples of Economics. January 2018
Principles of Economics January 2018 Monopoly Contents Market structures 14 Monopoly 15 Monopolistic competition 16 Oligopoly Principles of Economics January 2018 2 / 39 Monopoly Market power In a competitive
More informationChapter 5. Market Equilibrium 5.1 EQUILIBRIUM, EXCESS DEMAND, EXCESS SUPPLY
Chapter 5 Price SS p f This chapter will be built on the foundation laid down in Chapters 2 and 4 where we studied the consumer and firm behaviour when they are price takers. In Chapter 2, we have seen
More informationSeminar 3 Monopoly. Simona Montagnana. Week 25 March 20, 2017
Seminar 3 Monopoly Simona Montagnana Week 25 March 20, 2017 2/41 Question 2 2. Explain carefully why a natural monopoly might occur. a Discuss the problem of using marginal cost pricing to regulate a natural
More informationUniversidade de Aveiro Departamento de Economia, Gestão e Engenharia Industrial. Documentos de Trabalho em Economia Working Papers in Economics
Universidade de veiro Departamento de Economia, Gestão e Engenharia Industrial Documentos de Trabalho em Economia Working Papers in Economics Área Científica de Economia E/nº 41/007 Entry Decision and
More informationFinal Exam - Answers
Page 1 of 8 December 20, 2000 Answer all questions. Write your answers in a blue book. Be sure to look ahead and budget your time. Don t waste time on parts of questions that you can t answer. Leave space
More informationEcn Intermediate Microeconomic Theory University of California - Davis December 10, 2008 Professor John Parman.
Ecn 100 - Intermediate Microeconomic Theory University of California - Davis December 10, 2008 Professor John Parman Final Examination You have until 12:30pm to complete the exam, be certain to use your
More information14.27 Economics and E-Commerce Fall 14. Lecture 2 - Review
14.27 Economics and E-Commerce Fall 14 Lecture 2 - Review Prof. Sara Ellison MIT OpenCourseWare 4 basic things I want to get across in this review: Monopoly pricing function of demand, elasticity, & marginal
More informationECON 230D2-002 Mid-term 1. Student Number MULTIPLE CHOICE. Choose the one alternative that best completes the statement or answers the question.
ECON 230D2-002 Mid-term 1 Name Student Number MULTIPLE CHOICE. Choose the one alternative that best completes the statement or answers the question. Scenario 12.3: Suppose a stream is discovered whose
More informationPricing with Market Power
Chapter 7 Pricing with Market Power 7.1 Motives and objectives Broadly The model of perfect competition is extreme (and hence wonderfully powerful and simple) because of its assumption that each firm believes
More informationRationing Poor Consumers to Reduce Prices
Rationing Poor Consumers to Reduce Prices Simona Grassi Ching-to Albert Ma Max Weber Fellow Department of Economics European University Institute Boston University Villa La Fonte, Via Delle Fontanelle,
More informationUC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2013
UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2013 Pricing with market power and oligopolistic markets (PR 11.1-11.4 and 12.2-12.5) Module 4 Sep. 28, 2013
More informationEcon 2113: Principles of Microeconomics. Spring 2009 ECU
Econ 2113: Principles of Microeconomics Spring 2009 ECU Chapter 12 Monopoly Market Power Market power is the ability to influence the market, and in particular the market price, by influencing the total
More informationShort-Run Costs and Output Decisions
Semester-I Course: 01 (Introductory Microeconomics) Unit IV - The Firm and Perfect Market Structure Lesson: Short-Run Costs and Output Decisions Lesson Developer: Jasmin Jawaharlal Nehru University Institute
More informationEcon 101A Solutions for Final exam - Fall 2006
Econ 101A Solutions for Final exam - Fall 2006 Problem 1. Shorter problems. (35 points) Solve the following shorter problems. 1. Consider the following (simultaneous) game of chicken. This is a game in
More informationStrategic segmentation: when two monopolies are better than one
Strategic segmentation: when two monopolies are better than one Barna Bakó András Kálecz-Simon July 28, 2014 Abstract In this article we show that the price and the profit of an incumbent firm may increase
More informationEcon 121b: Intermediate Microeconomics
Econ 11b: Intermediate Microeconomics Dirk Bergemann, Spring 01 Week of 3/6-4/3 1 Lecture 16: Imperfectly Competitive Market 1.1 Price Discrimination In the previous section we saw that the monopolist
More informationSpatial Discrimination, Nations' Size and Transportation Costs
Spatial Discrimination, Nations' Size and Transportation Costs Kai Andree Abstract In this paper we develop a spatial Cournot trade model with two unequally sized countries, using the geographical interpretation
More informationLecture notes development
Lecture notes development Kalle Moene April 23, 2018 Remarks on land and land distribution Unequal land holdings give rise to land rental markets Land rental markets can be inefficient Two sources of inefficiency:
More informationBasic Monopoly Pricing and Product Strategies
Chapter 3 Basic Monopoly Pricing and Product Strategies Industrial 1 Introduction A monopolist has the power to set prices Consider how the monopolist exercises this power Focus in this section on a single-product
More informationFINAL EXAMINATION VERSION A
William M. Boal Signature: Printed name: FINAL EXAMINATION VERSION A INSTRUCTIONS: This exam is closed-book, closed-notes. Simple calculators are permitted, but graphing calculators or calculators with
More informationUmbrella Branding Can Leverage Reputation, but only with Market Power. May 19, Eric B. Rasmusen
Umbrella Branding Can Leverage Reputation, but only with Market Power May 19, 2012 Eric B. Rasmusen Dan R. and Catherine M. Dalton Professor, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Kelley
More informationLocation and Welfare Effects of Spatial Price. Discrimination Under Non-Uniform Distributions. and Endogenous Market Boundaries
Location and Welfare Effects of Spatial Price Discrimination Under Non-Uniform Distributions and Endogenous Market Boundaries Ziying Yang * Félix Muñoz-García School of Economic Sciences Washington State
More informationCommerce 295 Midterm Answers
Commerce 295 Midterm Answers October 27, 2010 PART I MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS Each question has one correct response. Please circle the letter in front of the correct response for each question. There
More informationChapter 13. Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition
Chapter 13 Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition Chapter Outline Some Specific Oligopoly Models : Cournot, Bertrand and Stackelberg Competition When There are Increasing Returns to Scale Monopolistic
More informationChapter 13. Chapter Outline. Some Specific Oligopoly Models : Cournot, Bertrand and Stackelberg Competition When There are Increasing Returns to Scale
Chapter 13 Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition Chapter Outline Some Specific Oligopoly Models : Cournot, Bertrand and Stackelberg Competition When There are Increasing Returns to Scale Monopolistic
More informationMONOPOLY LINEAR AND NONLINEAR PRICING
MONOPOLY LINEAR AND NONLINEAR PRICING Babu Nahata Department of Economics University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky 40292 email nahata@louisville.edu January, 2005 ABSTRACT This pedagogical note explains
More informationLecture 6: Profit reducing price discrimination, and product differentiation Tom Holden
Lecture 6: Profit reducing price discrimination, and product differentiation Tom Holden http://io.tholden.org/ Tests are still being marked I m afraid. Performance seems good overall so far. It is important
More informationREDEEMER S UNIVERSITY
REDEEMER S UNIVERSITY Km 46/48 Lagos Ibadan Expressway, Redemption City, Ogun State COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STUDIES COURSE CODE /TITLE ECO 202/Microeconomics
More informationHomogeneous Platform Competition with Heterogeneous Consumers
Homogeneous Platform Competition with Heterogeneous Consumers Thomas D. Jeitschko and Mark J. Tremblay Prepared for IIOC 2014: Not Intended for Circulation March 27, 2014 Abstract In this paper we investigate
More informationPrice ceilings and quality competition. Abstract
Price ceilings and quality competition Alexander Kemnitz University of Mannheim Cyrus Hemmasi University of Mannheim Abstract This paper investigates the quality implications of an upper limit on product
More informationIndustrial Organization Entry Costs, Market Structure and Welfare
ECON 312: Determinants of irm & Market Size 1 Industrial Organization Entry Costs, Market Structure and Welfare Your economics courses has thus far examined how firms behave under differing market structures,
More information4 Effects of a change in marginal cost (Extra) α β q * 1. The reason is that this is the first-order condition for the firm's choice of quantity.
4 Effects of a change in marginal cost (Extra) Consider the same market as in the previous question. Notice that firm 1 s equilibrium profit can be written as: ( ) = π 1 q 1 * c 1 π 1 * c 1 ( ( ),q * 2
More informationThird degree price discrimination. Welfare Analysis
Third degree price discrimination Welfare Analysis Third-degree rice discrimination and welfare Does third-degree price discrimination reduce welfare? not the same as being fair relates solely to efficiency
More informationMODELING THE INTERDEPENDENCE OF ENERGY, AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT. by Ujjayant Chakravorty, Bertrand Magné and Michel Moreaux
MODELING THE INTERDEPENDENCE OF ENERGY, AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT by Ujjayant Chakravorty, Bertrand Magné and Michel Moreaux INTRODUCTION THE ROLE OF BIOFUELS MUST BE SEEN IN THE CONTEXT OF SCARCE ENERGY
More informationFARM COSTS AND EXPORTS
FARM COSTS AND EXPORTS Otto Doering, Workshop Organizer Purdue University Andrew Schmitz, University of California and John Miranowski, Iowa State University The basic question is do costs at the farm
More informationPRICE DISCRIMINATION IN STACKELBERG COMPETITION
THE JOURNAL O INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS 00-181 Volume LVII June 009 No. Notes on the Journal of Industrial Economics Website www.essex.ac.uk/jindec/ PRICE DISCRIMINATION IN STACKELBERG COMPETITION LEVENT KUTLU
More informationLecture 7: More on product differentiation Introduction to the economics of advertising Tom Holden
Lecture 7: More on product differentiation Introduction to the economics of advertising Tom Holden http://io.tholden.org/ Endogenous differentiation: Horizontal (different consumers prefer different products)
More informationMonopoly Monopoly occurs when there is a single seller of a good or service. Despite this simple definition that is usually given in textbooks, we
Monopoly Monopoly occurs when there is a single seller of a good or service. Despite this simple definition that is usually given in textbooks, we must criticize it a bit. Monopoly occurs when there is
More informationCompetition and Discrimination: a not so Obvious Relationship
Competition and Discrimination: a not so Obvious Relationship Clémence Berson Paris School of Economics, CES, University of Paris 1 106-112 bd de l Hôpital 75647 Paris cedex 13 FRANCE Ecole Polytechnique,
More informationChapter 15: Monopoly. Notes. Watanabe Econ Monopoly 1 / 83. Notes. Watanabe Econ Monopoly 2 / 83. Notes
Econ 3 Introduction to Economics: Micro Chapter : Monopoly Instructor: Hiroki Watanabe Spring 3 Watanabe Econ 93 Monopoly / 83 Monopolistic Market Monopolistic Pricing 3 Inefficiency of Monopoly Price
More informationNow suppose a price ceiling of 15 is set by the government.
1. The demand function is Q d = 1 2, and the supply function is = 10 + Q s. a. What is the market equilibrium price and quantity? b. What is the consumer surplus, producer surplus, dead weight loss (WL)
More informationThe Optimal Licensing Strategy of an Outside Patentee in Vertically-Related Markets
International Journal of Economics and Finance; Vol. 5, No. 3; 013 ISSN 191-971X E-ISSN 191-978 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education The Optimal Licensing Strategy of an Outside Patentee
More informationChapter 10 Pure Monopoly
Chapter 10 Pure Monopoly Multiple Choice Questions 1. Pure monopoly means: A. any market in which the demand curve to the firm is downsloping. B. a standardized product being produced by many firms. C.
More information