Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Review of Industrial Organization 1/2018

03.02.2017

A Welfare Analysis of Location Space Constraints with Vertically Separated Sellers

verfasst von: Youping Li, Jie Shuai

Erschienen in: Review of Industrial Organization | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This paper studies the welfare effects of location space constraints when the duopoly sellers are vertically separated. As the downstream firms respond to higher input prices by locating further away from the center of the market, constraining them to locate within the linear city allows the upstream manufacturers better to exploit the downstream industry. This leads to higher final good prices and lower consumer welfare (despite the savings on transportation). This result – which is robust to the inclusion of R&D decisions – is in sharp contrast to the case in which the sellers are vertically integrated. Also different, the incentive to invest in cost-reducing R&D is always insufficient compared with the social optimum. Our results thus suggest the importance of taking into account the vertical market structure in formulating zoning (product standard) and R&D policies.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
Product positioning can be the selection of geographic locations or the choice of product characteristics. In the latter case, constraining the location space could be interpreted as setting a stricter product standard (to conform to consumer preferences).
 
2
In addition to mandatory measures, such goals are usually achieved by a combination of economic incentives (e.g., reduced rates of land use) and non-economic incentives (e.g., simplified project approval procedures).
 
3
In location-price games with unit consumer demand, total surplus is determined solely by transportation costs, so the comparison is trivial. On the other hand, helping consumers is usually the objective of government policies with respect to firm locations (see, e.g., Matsumura and Matsushima 2012a; Bárcena-Ruiz and Casado-Izaga 2014). In the antitrust literature, consumer welfare is often the focus, instead of total welfare. Besides, sellers of consumer goods may be owned by foreign investors, and their profits are excluded from the regulator’s objective (Cowan 2012).
 
4
After all, we often observe shopping centers locating beyond residential areas. For motivating examples on product characteristics being out of the range that consumers most prefer, see for example Tyagi (1999).
 
5
See, for example, McGuire and Staelin (1983), Bonanno and Vickers (1988), Rey and Stiglitz (1995), Chen (2001) and Pagnozzi and Piccolo (2012).
 
6
For example, mobile food vendors are free to change their locations. In the context of product characteristics, the downstream retailers of a similar product may offer certain add-on services that are differentiated. It is plausible that such services, which are easily varied, are chosen after the input prices are set so that the profitability of the product is fully known.
 
7
In Sect. 5, we relax this assumption by allowing firms to invest in cost-reducing R&D.
 
8
It is worth noting that the baseline scenario also fits situations in which the input is purchased but from an upstream market that is either perfectly competitive or under price regulation.
 
9
This vertical scenario also characterizes situations in which the manufacturers do not sell the products directly to consumers but through their respective retailers. Correspondingly, in the baseline scenario, the manufacturers sell directly to final consumers.
 
10
Such an arrangement, which is described as exclusive dealing in the antitrust literature, is a common practice in businesses such as car dealerships, fast food chains, and similar franchise arrangements.
 
11
We focus on linear pricing, which is also called a wholesale-price contract in the marketing literature.
 
12
These results hold even if \(w_j\ne c\), provided that \(w_j\) is constant.
 
13
Since the market is covered, the loss of sales is solely to the other downstream firm.
 
14
With location-price competition, a higher cost makes a firm less competitive; and to buffer competition it chooses to locate further away from the center of the market (Tyagi 2001).
 
15
If the upstream manufacturers use two-part tariffs in selling the input, the double marginalization problem is eliminated and this result will not be obtained.
 
16
According to Porter (1980), low cost and differentiated product are two of the three “generic” competitive strategies of a firm.
 
17
Matsumura and Matsushima (2012b) have focused on the comparison of the R&D level only.
 
18
The difference in price, as shown in the proof, is equal to the difference in R&D intensities in the two models minus half of t.
 
19
The socially optimum R&D level is defined by \(I'(d^{*})=1/2\).
 
20
This equilibrium outcome is due to the fact that the market is covered. In the conclusion we briefly discuss what may happen when consumer demand for the final product is elastic.
 
21
Flexibility in product positioning or location is even more desired when the downstream firms in the separated structure are local firms but the upstream firms are foreign.
 
22
Nonetheless, the magnitude of the price decrease that is due to location flexibility may be changed with elastic consumer demand, and must be weighed against the increase in transportation cost when determining the welfare impact on consumers.
 
23
For example, investment in R&D may be targeted to reduce congestion (Matsumura and Matsushima 2007) or transportation cost (von Ungern-Sternberg 1988; Matsumura and Shimizu 2011). In other contexts, there may be spillover effects from R&D (d’Aspremont and Jacquemin 1988), and initial asymmetries between firms can change the R&D results that are obtained under the assumption of symmetric firms (Lahiri and Ono 1999; Kitahara and Matsumura 2006; Ishida et al. 2011).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C., & Casado-Izaga, F. J. (2014). Zoning under spatial price discrimination. Economic Inquiry, 52(2), 659–665.CrossRef Bárcena-Ruiz, J. C., & Casado-Izaga, F. J. (2014). Zoning under spatial price discrimination. Economic Inquiry, 52(2), 659–665.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bassi, M., Pagnozzi, M., & Piccolo, S. (2015). Product differentiation by competing vertical hierarchies. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 24(4), 904–933.CrossRef Bassi, M., Pagnozzi, M., & Piccolo, S. (2015). Product differentiation by competing vertical hierarchies. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 24(4), 904–933.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Bonanno, G., & Vickers, J. (1988). Vertical separation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 36(3), 257–265.CrossRef Bonanno, G., & Vickers, J. (1988). Vertical separation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 36(3), 257–265.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Brekke, K., & Straume, O. (2004). Bilateral monopolies and location choice. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(3), 275–288.CrossRef Brekke, K., & Straume, O. (2004). Bilateral monopolies and location choice. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34(3), 275–288.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Chen, Y. (2001). On vertical mergers and their competitive effects. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(4), 667–685.CrossRef Chen, Y. (2001). On vertical mergers and their competitive effects. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(4), 667–685.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Cowan, S. (2012). Third-degree price discrimination and consumer surplus. Journal of Industrial Economics, 60(2), 333–345.CrossRef Cowan, S. (2012). Third-degree price discrimination and consumer surplus. Journal of Industrial Economics, 60(2), 333–345.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat d’Aspremont, C., Gabszewicz, J. J., & Thisse, J.-F. (1979). On Hotelling’s ‘stability in competition’. Econometrica, 47(5), 1145–1150.CrossRef d’Aspremont, C., Gabszewicz, J. J., & Thisse, J.-F. (1979). On Hotelling’s ‘stability in competition’. Econometrica, 47(5), 1145–1150.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat d’Aspremont, C., & Jacquemin, A. (1988). Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers. American Economic Review, 78(5), 1133–1137. d’Aspremont, C., & Jacquemin, A. (1988). Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly with spillovers. American Economic Review, 78(5), 1133–1137.
Zurück zum Zitat Gu, Y., & Wenzel, T. (2009). A note on the excess entry theorem in spatial models with elastic demand. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27(5), 567–571.CrossRef Gu, Y., & Wenzel, T. (2009). A note on the excess entry theorem in spatial models with elastic demand. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27(5), 567–571.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gupta, S., & Loulou, R. (1998). Process innovation, product differentiation, and channel structure: strategic incentives in a duopoly. Marketing Science, 17(4), 301–316.CrossRef Gupta, S., & Loulou, R. (1998). Process innovation, product differentiation, and channel structure: strategic incentives in a duopoly. Marketing Science, 17(4), 301–316.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in competition. Economic Journal, 39(153), 41–57.CrossRef Hotelling, H. (1929). Stability in competition. Economic Journal, 39(153), 41–57.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ishida, J., Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2011). Market competition, R&D and firm profits in asymmetric oligopoly. Journal Industrial Economics, 59(3), 484–505.CrossRef Ishida, J., Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2011). Market competition, R&D and firm profits in asymmetric oligopoly. Journal Industrial Economics, 59(3), 484–505.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kitahara, M., & Matsumura, T. (2006). Realized cost-based subsidies for strategic R&D investments with ex ante and ex post asymmetries. Japanese Economic Review, 57(3), 438–448.CrossRef Kitahara, M., & Matsumura, T. (2006). Realized cost-based subsidies for strategic R&D investments with ex ante and ex post asymmetries. Japanese Economic Review, 57(3), 438–448.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kitahara, M., & Matsumura, T. (2013). Mixed duopoly, product differentiation and competition. Manchester School, 81(5), 730–744.CrossRef Kitahara, M., & Matsumura, T. (2013). Mixed duopoly, product differentiation and competition. Manchester School, 81(5), 730–744.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lahiri, S., & Ono, Y. (1999). R&D subsidies under asymmetric duopoly: A note. Japanese Economic Review, 50(1), 104–111.CrossRef Lahiri, S., & Ono, Y. (1999). R&D subsidies under asymmetric duopoly: A note. Japanese Economic Review, 50(1), 104–111.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lambertini, L. (1997). Unicity of the equilibrium in the unconstrained Hotelling model. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 27(6), 785–798.CrossRef Lambertini, L. (1997). Unicity of the equilibrium in the unconstrained Hotelling model. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 27(6), 785–798.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2007). Congestion-reducing investments and economic welfare in a Hotelling model. Economics Letters, 96(2), 161–167.CrossRef Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2007). Congestion-reducing investments and economic welfare in a Hotelling model. Economics Letters, 96(2), 161–167.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2012a). Locating outside a linear city can benefit consumers. Journal of Regional Science, 52(3), 420–432.CrossRef Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2012a). Locating outside a linear city can benefit consumers. Journal of Regional Science, 52(3), 420–432.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2012b). Welfare properties of strategic R&D investments in Hotelling models. Economics Letters, 115(3), 465–468.CrossRef Matsumura, T., & Matsushima, N. (2012b). Welfare properties of strategic R&D investments in Hotelling models. Economics Letters, 115(3), 465–468.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsumura, T., & Shimizu, D. (2011). Endogenous flexibility in the flexible manufacturing system. Bulletin of Economic Research, 67(1), 1–13.CrossRef Matsumura, T., & Shimizu, D. (2011). Endogenous flexibility in the flexible manufacturing system. Bulletin of Economic Research, 67(1), 1–13.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsushima, N. (2004). Technology of upstream firms and equilibrium product differentiation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 22(8–9), 1091–1114.CrossRef Matsushima, N. (2004). Technology of upstream firms and equilibrium product differentiation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 22(8–9), 1091–1114.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Matsushima, N. (2009). Vertical mergers and product differentiation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 57(4), 812–834.CrossRef Matsushima, N. (2009). Vertical mergers and product differentiation. Journal of Industrial Economics, 57(4), 812–834.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat McGuire, T. W., & Staelin, R. (1983). An industry equilibrium analysis of downstream vertical integration. Marketing Science, 2(2), 161–191.CrossRef McGuire, T. W., & Staelin, R. (1983). An industry equilibrium analysis of downstream vertical integration. Marketing Science, 2(2), 161–191.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Meza, S., & Tombak, M. (2009). Endogenous location leadership. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27(6), 687–707.CrossRef Meza, S., & Tombak, M. (2009). Endogenous location leadership. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 27(6), 687–707.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pagnozzi, M., & Piccolo, S. (2012). Vertical separation with private contracts. Economic Journal, 122(559), 173–207.CrossRef Pagnozzi, M., & Piccolo, S. (2012). Vertical separation with private contracts. Economic Journal, 122(559), 173–207.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: The Free Press. Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: The Free Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Rey, P., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1995). The role of exclusive territories in producers’ competition. RAND Journal of Economics, 26(3), 431–451.CrossRef Rey, P., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1995). The role of exclusive territories in producers’ competition. RAND Journal of Economics, 26(3), 431–451.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tabuchi, T., & Thisse, J.-F. (1995). Asymmetric equilibria in spatial competition. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(2), 213–227.CrossRef Tabuchi, T., & Thisse, J.-F. (1995). Asymmetric equilibria in spatial competition. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13(2), 213–227.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tyagi, R. K. (1999). Pricing patterns as outcomes of product positions. Journal of Business, 72(1), 135–157.CrossRef Tyagi, R. K. (1999). Pricing patterns as outcomes of product positions. Journal of Business, 72(1), 135–157.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tyagi, R. K. (2000). Sequential product positioning under differential costs. Management Science, 46(7), 928–940.CrossRef Tyagi, R. K. (2000). Sequential product positioning under differential costs. Management Science, 46(7), 928–940.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tyagi, R. K. (2001). Cost leadership and pricing. Economics Letters, 72(2), 189–193.CrossRef Tyagi, R. K. (2001). Cost leadership and pricing. Economics Letters, 72(2), 189–193.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat von Ungern-Sternberg, T. (1988). Monopolistic competition and general purpose products. Review of Economic Studies, 55(2), 231–246.CrossRef von Ungern-Sternberg, T. (1988). Monopolistic competition and general purpose products. Review of Economic Studies, 55(2), 231–246.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A Welfare Analysis of Location Space Constraints with Vertically Separated Sellers
verfasst von
Youping Li
Jie Shuai
Publikationsdatum
03.02.2017
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Review of Industrial Organization / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0889-938X
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7160
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-017-9568-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

Review of Industrial Organization 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner