nach oben

Erschienen in:

2016 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Models of Monopoly in the Quarter-Century Development of Russian Competition Policy: Understanding Competition Analysis in the Abuse of Dominance Investigations

verfasst von : Svetlana Avdasheva

Erschienen in: Competition Law Enforcement in the BRICS and in Developing Countries

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The article explains an approach to the economic analysis in antitrust enforcement in Russia during 25 years of development. Based on adoption of European-style competition rules it is worth seeing how the industrial organization and competition economic models are applied during transition from socialist to market economy. The most specific feature, among the standards of enforcement, is the prevalence of enforcement against unilateral exploitative conduct of a large company that is not directly related to the restrictions of competition. Not only harm but individual harm is central and often sufficient evidence of competition legislation violation. Both the intellectual and technological legacies of transition, industrial structure of the economy and supportive institutions explain the unique application of theoretical models as a background for the actions of Russian antitrust authority.

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

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Economic Evidence in Competition Law Enforcement in India

Nächstes Kapitel Economic Analysis in Competition Law Enforcement in Russia: Empirical Evidence Based on Data of Judicial Reviews

The LCAP dataset represents a general population of the claims submitted to the first instance commercial courts of the Russian Federation to annul the infringement decision of the Federal Antitrust Service under art. 10 and 11 of the law ‘On competition’ during the period 2008–2012. The claims cover more than 1/3 of all infringement decisions under these articles. The dataset enables the classification of the cases in different ways, including according to the legal status of the company that is found violating the law (natural monopoly or not), as well as according to the content of practice in question.

Avdasheva, S., Goreyko, N., & Pittman, R. (2012). Collective dominance and its abuse under the Competition Law of the Russian Federation. World Competition: Law and Economics Review, 35(2), 249–272.

Avdasheva, S., & Kryuchkova, P. (2015). The ‘reactive’ model of antitrust enforcement: When private interests dictate enforcement actions—The Russian case. International Review of Law and Economics, 43, 200–208.CrossRef

Berkowitz, D., Pistor, K., & Richard, J. F. (2003). The transplant effect. American Journal of Comparative Law, 51, 163–203.CrossRef

Blanchard, O., & Kremer, M. (1997). Disorganization. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1091–1126.CrossRef

Brown, A., Ickes, B., & Ryterman, R. (1993). The myth of monopoly: A new view of industrial structure in Russia (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1331).

Brüggemeier, G. (2011). European civil liability law outside Europe. The example of the big three: China, Brazil, Russia. Journal of European Tort Law, 2(1), 1–22.CrossRef

Buccirossi, P. (2015). Vertical restraints on e-commerce and selective distribution. Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 11(3), 747–773.CrossRef

Cheon, A., Urpelainen, J., & Lackner, M. (2013). Why do governments subsidize gasoline consumption? An empirical analysis of global gasoline prices (2002–2009). Energy Policy, 56, 382–390.CrossRef

Estrin, S., & Prevezer, M. A. (2010). Survey on institutions and new firm entry: How and why do entry rates differ in emerging markets. Economic Systems, 34(3), 289–308.CrossRef

Gal, M. S. (2010). When the going gets tight: Institutional solutions when antitrust enforcement resources are scarce. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 41(3), 417–441.

Golovanova, S. (2010). Evidence on imperfect competition: Prices of exported and imported goods in Russia (in Russian). Modern Competition (Journal), 22(4), 11–25.

Grossman, S. J., & Hart, O. D. (1986). The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy, 94(4), 691–719.CrossRef

Hanson, G. H. (2012). The rise of middle kingdoms: Emerging economies in global trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(2), 41–64.CrossRef

Harrington, J. E. (2008). Detecting cartels. In P. Buccirossi (Ed.), Handbook of antitrust economics (pp. 213–245). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hart, O. D., & Moore, J. (1990). Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1119–1158.CrossRef

Heimler, A., & Mehta, K. (2014). Monopolization in developing countries. The Oxford Handbook of International Antitrust Economics, 2, 234–252.

Hendley, K. (2014). Bargaining with strangers: Explaining the behavior of Russians in the aftermath of auto accidents. In Everyday law in Russia (forthcoming). https://media.law.wisc.edu/m/njd4m/hendley_auto_accidents.pdf. Accessed 27 Mar 2016.

Joskow, P. L. (2002). Transaction cost economics. Antitrust rules, and remedies. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 18(1), 95–116.CrossRef

Klein, B. R., Crawford, R. G., & Alchian, A. A. (1978). Vertical integration, appropriable rents and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics, 21(2), 297–326.CrossRef

Larouche, P., & Schinkel, M. P. (2013). Continental drift in the treatment of dominant firms: Article 102 TFEU in contrast to § 2 Sherman Act (TILEC Discussion Paper 2013-20).

Maggs, P. B., Schwartz, O., & Burnham, W. (2015). Law and legal system of the Russian Federation (6th ed.). Huntington, NY: Juris.

Motta, M. (2000). EC merger policy and the Airtours case. European Competition Law Review, 21(4), 199–207.

Motta, M., & de Streel, A. (2007). Excessive pricing in competition law: Never say never? In: The pros and cons of high prices (pp. 14–46). Konkurrensverket (Swedish Competition Authority).

Nicholson, M., & Cardell, S. (2003). Airtours v Commission: Collective dominance contained? In G. Drauz & M. Reynolds (Eds.), EC merger control. A major reform in progress (pp. 285–301). London: International Bar Association.

North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.CrossRef

North, D. C., Wallis, J. J., & Weingast, B. R. (2009). Violence and social orders: A conceptual framework for interpreting recorded human history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Overd, A. (2002). After the airtours appeal. European Competition Law Review, 23(8), 375–377.

Owen, B. M., Sun, S., & Zheng, W. (2008). China’s competition policy reform: The anti-monopoly law and beyond. Antitrust Law Journal, 75(1), 231–265.

Pursell, G., & Snape, R. H. (1973). Economies of scale, price discrimination and exporting. Journal of International Economics, 3(1), 85–91.CrossRef

Reich, N. (1996). Consumer protection in countries of emerging markets: The example of Russia. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(1), 1–43.CrossRef

Reynolds, S. (2004). Competition law and policy in Russia. OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy, 6(3), 7–86.

Roberts, S. (2012). Administrability and business certainty in abuse of dominance enforcement: An economist’s review of the South African record. World Competition: Law and Economics Review, 35(2), 273–300.

Vickers, J. (2008). Abuse of market power. In P. Buccirossi (Ed.), Handbook of antitrust economics (pp. 415–432). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wei, D. (2013). Antitrust in China: An overview of recent implementation of anti-monopoly law. European Business Organization Law Review, 14(1), 119–139.CrossRef

Williamson, O. E. (1971). The vertical integration of production: Market failure considerations. American Economic Review, 61(2), 112–123.

Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction cost economics: The governance of contractual relationships. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.CrossRef

Wu, C., & Liu, Z. (2012). A tiger without teeth? regulation of administrative monopoly under China’s anti-monopoly law. Review of Industrial Organization, 41(1–2), 133–155.CrossRef

Yakovlev, A. (1994). Anti‐monopoly policy in Russia: Basic stages and prospects. Communist Economies and Economic Transformation, 6(1), 33–44.CrossRef

Titel: Models of Monopoly in the Quarter-Century Development of Russian Competition Policy: Understanding Competition Analysis in the Abuse of Dominance Investigations
verfasst von: Svetlana Avdasheva
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Competition Law Enforcement in the BRICS and in Developing Countries
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30947-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-30948-4

Copyright-Jahr: 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30948-4_10