Interdependence of Competition Theories and Regulation of Competition : Historical Context and its Implications for the Institutional Change Illustrated by Two Examples

• Autorzy: Mikołaj Klimczak

Warianty tytułu

Współzależność teorii konkurencji i regulacji konkurencji : kontekst historyczny i jego implikacji dla zmiany instytucjonalnej w dwóch przykładach

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The following paper examines the connections between economic competition theories and the practice of antitrust law. The main objective of this paper is to analyse the historical sequence of the theoretical findings of economists and rulings of judges and jurors in antitrust cases. The main hypothesis is that the theory of economics neglects the current needs of antitrust authorities and usually analyses implemented mechanisms ex post. This hy-pothesis is substantiated with two examples: Sherman Act introduction and justification and relevant market analyses conducted in many antitrust cases. (original abstract)

Niniejszy artykuł analizuje związki pomiędzy ekonomicznymi teoriami konkurencji i praktyką prawa antymonopolowego. Głównym celem artykułu jest przeanalizowanie historycznego następstwa teoretycznych odkryć ekonomistów a decyzjami sędziów i jurorów w sprawach antymonopolowych. Główną hipotezą jest stwierdzenie, że ekonomia zaniedbuje potrzeby organów antymonopolowych i zazwyczaj analizuje wprowadzane mechanizmy ex post. Hipoteza ta jest uprawdopodobniona w dwóch przykładach: wprowadzenia i uzasadnienia Ustawy Shermana oraz analiz rynków właściwych, czynionych podczas wielu spraw antymonopolowych. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Anti-monopolistic law; Competition; Competition theory

PL

Prawo antymonopolowe; Konkurencja; Teoria konkurencji

• Czasopismo: Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu. Ekonomia
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: 15
• Numer: nr 208
• Strony: 104--112

Twórcy

autor

Mikołaj Klimczak

• Wrocław University of Economics, Poland

Bibliografia

• Adelman M.A., Economic aspects of the Bethlehem Opinion, Virginia Law Review 1959, Vol. 45, No. 5, pp. 684-696.
• Areeda P., Turner D.F., Antitrust Law, Little Brown, Boston 1978.
• Bork R.H., The Antitrust Paradox: A Policy At War With Itself, Free Press, New York 1993.
• Clark J.B., Giddings F.H., The Modern Distributive Process: Studies of Competition and Its Limits, Ginn & company, Boston 1888, http://www.archive.org/details/moderndistributi00clar.
• Coase R.H., The Firm, the Market and the Law, University of Chicago Press, Chicago/London 1988.
• DiLorenzo T.J., High J.C., Antitrust and competition, historically considered, Economic Inquiry 1988, Vol. XXVI, pp. 423-435.
• Ely R.T., Monopolies and Trusts, Citizen's library of economics, politics, and sociology, Macmillan Company, 1900, http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032441101.
• Fisher I., Elementary Principles of Economics, Macmillan Company, New York 1916, http://www.archive.org/details/elementaryprinc00fishgoog.
• Frey B.S., Pommerehne W.W., Schneider F., Gilbert G., Consensus and dissension among economists: An empirical inquiry, The American Economic Review 1984, Vol. 74, No. 5, pp. 986-994.
• Freyer T.A., Antitrust And Global Capitalism, 1930-2004, Cambridge historical studies in American law and society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2006.
• Jones A., Sufrin B., EC Competition Law: Text, Cases, And Materials, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2008.
• Knight F.H., Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston/New York 1921, http://www.archive.org/details/riskuncertaintyp00knig.
• Marshall A., Industry and Trade. A Study of Industrial Technique and Business Organization, Macmillan and Co., London 1919, http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924014549301.
• Mill J.S., Principles of Political Economy: With Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy, Vol. I, J.W. Parker and son, London 1857, http://books.google.pl/books?id=TTcVAAAAYAAJ.
• Seager H.R., Principles of Economics, H. Holt and company, New York 1917, http://www.archive.org/details/principlesecono00seaggoog.
• Smith A., An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Vol. I, printed by N. Kelly for P. Wogan, Dublin 1801, http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=9RsUAAAAYAAJ.
• Stigler G.J., The economists and the problem of monopoly, The American Economic Review 1982, Vol. 72, No. 2, pp. 1-11.
• Stocking G.W., Mueller W.F., The cellophane case and the new competition, The American Economic Review 1955, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 29-63.
• Sullivan L.A., Handbook of the Law of Antitrust, Hornbook series, West Pub. Co., 1977, http://books.google.pl/books?id=2_U_AAAAIAAJ.
• United States Department of Justice, Competition in the Coal Industry: Report of the United States Department of Justice Pursuant to Section 8 of the Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1975, Antitrust Division, 1978.
• United States Department of Justice, Merger guidelines, Trade Regulation Reporter 1982, Vol. 4.
• United States v. E.I. du Pont, U.S. 1956, Vol. 351, p. 477.
• Werden G.J., The 1982 merger guidelines and the ascent of the hypothetical monopolist paradigm, Antitrust Law Journal 2003, Vol. 71, pp. 253-269.
• Wilberforce R.O., Campbell A., Elles N.P.M., The Law of Restrictive Trade Practice and Monopolies, Sweet & Maxwell, London 1957, http://books.google.pl/books?id=Siw2AAAAIAAJ.