Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Core Concepts of Industrial Economics

  • Chapter
Mainstreams in Industrial Organization

Part of the book series: Studies in Industrial Organization ((SIOR,volume 6))

Abstract

Industrial economics is the study of competitive and monopoly conditions as they may affect market outcomes. An assessment of the field now is timely. For a century, it has been developing a variety of concepts, research methods, and estimates of functional relationships. Recently ‘new’ models of increasing rigor have been offered. The field continues to be rich in alternative concepts and methods.

I am grateful to William J. Adams, Mark Bagnoli, Joe S. Bain, William J. Baumol, Donald J. Dewey, John Heywood, Henry de Jong, Bart Lipman, and Takeo Nakao for discussions of the various ideas in this paper. I am also indebted to seminar participants at the Universities of Massachusetts, Montreal and Michigan, Michigan State University, Doshisha University and the University of Chicago.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adams, Henry C., Relation of the State to Industrial Action and the Economics of Jurisprudence, ed., Jospeh Dorfman, New York: Columbia University Press (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  • Areeda, Phillip and Turner, Donald F., `Predatory Pricing and Related Practices Under Section 2 of the Sherman Act’, Harvard Law Review, 88 (February 1975), pp. 697–733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, Elizabeth E. and Baumol, William J., `Deregulation and the Theory of Contestable Markets’, Yale Journal on Regulation (Spring 1984 ), pp. 111–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, Joe S., Barriers to New Competition, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1956).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain Joe S., Industrial Organization, rev. ed., New York: Wiley (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, William J., `Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure’, American Economic Review, 72 (March 1982), pp. 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, William J., Panzar, John, and Willig, Robert D., Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure, New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berle, Adolf A. and Means, Gardner C., The Modern Corporation and Private Property, New York: Harper & Row (1932).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, William A., `Contestable Markets and Theory of Industry Structure: A Review Article’, Journal of Political Economy, 91 (December 1983), pp. 1055–1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, Charles J., `Trust Literature: A Survey and Criticism’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 15 (February 1901), pp. 167–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caves, Richard E., `International Trade and Industrial Organization: Problems, Solved and Unsolved’, Discussion Paper 1131, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Institute of Economic Research (January 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, Richard E. and Porter, Michael E., `Barriers to Exit’, chapters in R. T. Masson and P. D. Qualls, eds., Essays on Industrial Organization in Honor of Joe S. Bain, Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, Richard E. and Porter, Michael E., `From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers: Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 91 (1977) pp. 241–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caves, Richard E., Fortunato, Michael, and Ghemawat, Pankaj, `The Decline of Dominant Firms, 1905–1929, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99 (August 1984), pp. 523–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamberlin, Edward H., The Theory of Monopolistic Competition, 8th ed., Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John B., `The Limits of Competition’, Political Science Quarterly, 2 (March 1887), pp. 42–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John M., Studies in the Economics of Overhead Costs, New York: Macmillan (1922).

    Google Scholar 

  • Comanor, William S. and Smiley, Robert H., `Monopoly and the Distribution of Wealth’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 89 (May 1975), pp. 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comanor, William S. and Wilson, Thomas, Advertising and Market Power, Cambridge: Harvard University Press (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  • Comanor, William S. and Wilson, Thomas, `The Effect of Advertising on Competition: A Survey’, Journal of Economic Literature, XVII (June 1979), pp. 453–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirlam, Joel B. and Kahn, Alfred E., Fair Competition, Ithaca: Cornell University Press (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, Avinash, `The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence’, Economic Journal, 90 (March 1980), pp. 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, Avinash, `Recent Developments in Oligopoly Theory’ American Economic Review, 72 (May 1982), pp. 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, Avaniash and Norman, Victor, `Advertising and Welfare’, Bell Journal, 9 (Spring 1978 ), pp. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elzinga, Kenneth G. and Rogowsky, Robert A., Relevant Markets in Antitrust, Vol. 19, No. 2 of The Journal of Reprints for Antitrust Law and Economics, New York (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  • Encaoua, David, Geroski, Paul, and Jacquemin, Alexis, `Strategic Competition and the Persistence of Dominant Firms: A Survey’, in F. Matthewson and J. Stiglitz, eds., New Developments in the Analysis of Market Structure, Boston: MIT Press (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellner, William J., Competition Among the Few, New York: Knopf (1949).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, Franklin M., `On the Misuse of Accounting Rates of Return to Infer Monopoly Profits’, American Economic Review, 73 (March 1983), pp. 82–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, Franklin M., McGowan, John J., and Greenwood, Joen E., Folded, Spindled, and Mutilated: Economic Analysis and U.S. vs. IBM, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale, Bradley T. and Branch, Ben S., `Concentration and Market Share: Which Determines Market Share and Why Does it Matter?’, Antitrust Bulletin, 27 (Spring 1982 ), pp. 83–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaskins, Darius, `Dynamic Limit Pricing: Optimal Pricing Under Threat of Entry’, Journal of Economic Theory, 3 (September 1971), pp. 306–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, Paul, `Do Dominant Firms Decline?’ Discussion Paper 8509, University of Southampton (August 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, Paul and Jacquemin, Alexis, `Dominant Firms and Their Alleged Decline’, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2 (1984), pp. 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iulo, William, Electic Utilities — Cost and Performance, Pullman, Washington: Washington State University Press (1961).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanien, Morton I. and Schwartz, Nancy L., `Market Structure and Innovation: A Survey’, Journal of Economic Literature, 13 (March 1975), pp. 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanien, Morton I. and Schwartz, Nancy L., Market Structure and Innovation, New York: Cambridge University Press (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, Frank H., Risk Uncertainty and Profit, New York: Harper & Row, (1921). Leibenstein, Harvey J., Beyond Economic Man, ( Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1966).

    Google Scholar 

  • Letwin, William, Law and Economic Policy in America, New York: Random House (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, W. Arthur, Overhead Costs, London: Allen & Unwin (1948).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, H. Michael, `Seller Concentration, Barriers to Entry, and Rates of Return in 30 Industries, 1950–1960’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 48 (August 1966), pp. 296–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, Edwin et al., Research and Innovation in the Modern Corporation,New York: Norton (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Alfred, Principles of Economics, 8th ed., London: Macmillan, (1920). Martin, Steven, Market, Firm and Economic Performance, Monograph Series in Economics and Finance, New York University (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, Edward S., Economic Concentration and the Monopoly Problem, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1957).

    Google Scholar 

  • Masson, Robert T. and Qualls, P. David, eds., Essays on Industrial Organization in Honor of Joe S. Bain, Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, Paul and Roberts, John, `Predation, Reputation and Entry Deterrence’, Journal of Economic Theory (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Modigliani, Franco, `New Developments on the Oligopoly Front’, Journal of Political Economy, 66 (June 1958), pp. 215–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, John, The Truth About the Trusts, Chicago: Moody Publishing (1904).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C., ed., The Determinants and Effects of Mergers: An International Comparison, Cambridge, Mass.: Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C., The Determinants of Persistent Profits, Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, Dennis C., `Mergers and Market Share’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 67 (May 1985), pp. 259–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, John von and Morgenstern, Oskar, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press (1944).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltzman, Sam, `The Gains and Losses from Industrial Concentration’, Journal of Law and Economics, 20 (October 1977), pp. 229–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philips, Almarin and Stevenson, Rodney E., `The Historical Development of Industrial Organization’, History of Political Economy, 6 (Fall 1974 ), pp. 324–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, Michael E., Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, New York: Free Press (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, Michael E., Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, New York: Free Press (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoades, Stephen A., `Market Share as a Source of Market Power: Implications and Some Evidence’, Journal of Economics and Business (forthcoming, 1985 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Joan, The Economics of Imperfect Competition, London: Macmillan (1933).

    Google Scholar 

  • Salop, Steven, ed., Strategy, Predation and Antitrust Analysis, ( Washington, D.C.: Federal Trade Commission, 1981 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Salop, Steven, `Practices That (Credibly) Facilitate Oligopoly Coordination’, Federal Trade Commission Working Paper No. 73, August 1982, pp. 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M., `Firm Size, Market Structure, Opportunity and the Output of Patented Investigations’, American Economic Review, 55 (December 1955), pp. 1104–1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M., `Research and Development Allocation Under Rivalry’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 71 (August 1967), pp. 359–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M., Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 2nd ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. M., Beckenstein, Alan, Kaufer, Erich, and Murphy, R. Dennis, The Economics of Multiplant Operations: An International Comparisons Study, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, Richard, The Economics of Advertising, Amsterdam: North Holland (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, Richard, `Economics of Scale and Barriers to Entry’, Journal of Political Economy, 89 (1981) pp. 1228–1238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, Richard, Do Markets Differ Much?’ American Economic Review, 75 (June 1985), pp. 341–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Marius and Reynolds, Robert J, Robert J., `On the Limited Relevance of Contestability Theory’, Antitrust Division, Discussion Paper, EPO 84–10, Washington, D.C. (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, New York: Harper (1942).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., `Change in Concentration of U.S. Manufacturing Industries, 1947–58’, Review of Economics and Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., `The Elements of Market Structure’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 54 (February 1972), pp. 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G, `The Yields from Abating Market Power’, Industrial Organization Review, 1 (1973), pp. 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., The Treatment of Market Power, New York: Columbia University Press (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., The Economics of Industrial Organization, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., `Causes of Increased Competition in the U.S. Economy, 1939–1980’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 64 (November 1982), pp. 614–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G, `Monopoly Profits and Economies of Scale’, chapters in John V. Graven, ed., Industrial Organization, Antitrust and Public Policy, Boston.: Kluwer Nijhoff ( 1982, 1982b ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., “’Contestability” versus Competition’, American Economic Review, 74 (September 1984), pp. 572–587.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., The Economics of Industrial Organization, rev. ed., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall ( 1985, 1985a ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G., `Tobin’s q and the Structure-Performance Relationship: A Comment’, Working Paper, University of Massachusetts, May 1985 (1985b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, William G, `Assessing Predatory Actions by Market Shares and Selectivity’, Antitrust Bulletin (1986) (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubik, Martin and Levitan, R., Market Structure and Behavior, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smirlock, Michael et al.,`Tobin’s q and the Structure-Performance Relationship’, American Economic Review,74 (December 1984), pp. 1051–1060.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A. Michael, `Entry, Investment and Oligopolostic Pricing’, Bell Journal of Economics, 8 (Autumn 1977 ), pp. 534–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, A. Michael, `The Learning Curve and Competition’, Bell Journal of Economics, 12 (1981), pp. 49–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, Peter O., `Markets and Industries’, International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, New York: Crowell, Collier and Macmillan (1968), pp. 575–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, Peter O., Mergers: Motives, Effects, Policies, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, George J., `The Theory of Oligopoly’, Journal of Political Economy, 72 (February 1964), pp. 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesler, Lester G., `Advertising and Competition’, Journal of Political Economy, 72 (December 1964), pp. 537–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorelli, Hans B, The Federal Antitrust Policy, Stockholm: Stockholms Hogskola (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Antitrust Division, Merger Guidelines, Washington D.C.: Department of Justice (1982, amended 1984 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Leonard W. and Pascoe, George, `The Extent and Permanence of Market Dominance’, manuscript, University of Wisconsin (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • von Weizsacker, Christian C., Barriers to Entry: A Theoretical Treatment, Berlin: Springer Verlag (1980).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Phillip L, Phillip L., `The Influence of the Economics Profession on the Sherman Act’, manuscript, University of Melbourne (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, Oliver E., Corporate Control and Business Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, Oliver E., Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, New York: Free Press (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Worcester, Dean A., `Why “Dominant Firms” Decline’, Journal of Political Economy, 65 (August 1957), pp. 338–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamey Basil S., `Predatory Price Cutting: Notes and Comments’, Journal of Law and Economics, 15 (April 1972), pp. 137–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. W. G. Shepherd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    H. W. de Jong

  2. University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, USA

    W. G. Shepherd

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1986 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shepherd, W.G. (1986). On the Core Concepts of Industrial Economics. In: de Jong, H.W., Shepherd, W.G. (eds) Mainstreams in Industrial Organization. Studies in Industrial Organization, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0493-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0493-9_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-017-0495-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0493-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation