* InhibiitRestrain
EU comp policy
Tradegy of & > EU enforce anti-cong practices
Anti trust laws
).e g .
Cartels,
abuse
of dominant moret
Market 1.
-
Commons :
position restrictio
agreements
Failure Merger Control
&
Situation
·
whereby individuals) acting 2
region f
.
On their own interest ,
exploit a shared ->
EU hae nerge Control assesses impact of mayes on
Come in EU maket
Merges largely reduce Comp
Immobility
resaule
may
-
extent where that becomes
factor of production
To
subject scruting am to
·
resource
of
depleted to market failure CMA Enforcing
Comp low
:
>
+
-
·
Popularized by Garrett Hardin
leading UK Comp promoting come section of across various
Can
Exploitation of shared resource entry kit
policyeconomy
·
·
create burries to in market -
my
kind to
negative externalities Hindering Comp +
efficienz Investigates anti-competitive
-
Ce environmental
z
. concerns
·
Example Regulation restricting the mobility of labor ( y human Capital) regionally Practiceenquire
:
. e .
loss of diversity or conflict) ·
Can prevent firms from entering/exisiting firms from reallocating
new
Merger resources .
Luck of met structure that
are inefficient uncompetition
mobility perpetrating
· -
Occura
of (partial) market failme
Benefit of CMA Distruption firmsto -
Monopoly +
Monopoly power ·
Policy to reduc
monopsory power
>
-
Distruction to enterprise
leading to market failure : Higher Costs
closer
woke MPRL incurred,
higher leak of
·
puy
·
Inward benefits
i
quidinfue bureanaly
Can wate barrier to down
slowing technological
·
entry advacements
·
Link
N
·
Prevent new fire from entering market +
Competiting Joseph Schapter Invocation dynamic effieiy
,
·
Barrie (legal patents ,
EOS brand, logalty) - Exam :
Coca-Cola
Regulatory capture can Greate basier to + exit to
entry
Camp limit Consumer firm inhibit innovatio (by entranching market power
"
·
Can reduc ,
Choice from new + -
of incumbent player
·
Perpetrating an inefficient mondopoly -
to market failure ·
Therefore) regulatory agencies may
,
(openting X-efficacy in
arlopt regulations that erect (unnecessary) breanancy
-
Innovation
t
·
heading to stifled Come hindering technological process Joseopt
+
Schemster
May engage in
price discrimination
-
Changing different give to different consumer based on their willing res to
pay
Can result in allocative
ineffiency /resource are not allocated to their most valued uses) Regulatory Gathe Having Significant
Coverall) economic of government failure
heard to losses reduction value form Lobbying, power
Consumer
surplus
-
in
·
L
*
·
When
government agency operator in favor of producer
Price Machanism :
Way prices are determined through interactive of SED in an rather than consumer
economy
Operates vis
price Signalling
:
Price acts as
"Signals" Gonny info about -
Scarcity
·
preferences
·
production Costs
to Consumer + producer
EU comp policy
Tradegy of & > EU enforce anti-cong practices
Anti trust laws
).e g .
Cartels,
abuse
of dominant moret
Market 1.
-
Commons :
position restrictio
agreements
Failure Merger Control
&
Situation
·
whereby individuals) acting 2
region f
.
On their own interest ,
exploit a shared ->
EU hae nerge Control assesses impact of mayes on
Come in EU maket
Merges largely reduce Comp
Immobility
resaule
may
-
extent where that becomes
factor of production
To
subject scruting am to
·
resource
of
depleted to market failure CMA Enforcing
Comp low
:
>
+
-
·
Popularized by Garrett Hardin
leading UK Comp promoting come section of across various
Can
Exploitation of shared resource entry kit
policyeconomy
·
·
create burries to in market -
my
kind to
negative externalities Hindering Comp +
efficienz Investigates anti-competitive
-
Ce environmental
z
. concerns
·
Example Regulation restricting the mobility of labor ( y human Capital) regionally Practiceenquire
:
. e .
loss of diversity or conflict) ·
Can prevent firms from entering/exisiting firms from reallocating
new
Merger resources .
Luck of met structure that
are inefficient uncompetition
mobility perpetrating
· -
Occura
of (partial) market failme
Benefit of CMA Distruption firmsto -
Monopoly +
Monopoly power ·
Policy to reduc
monopsory power
>
-
Distruction to enterprise
leading to market failure : Higher Costs
closer
woke MPRL incurred,
higher leak of
·
puy
·
Inward benefits
i
quidinfue bureanaly
Can wate barrier to down
slowing technological
·
entry advacements
·
Link
N
·
Prevent new fire from entering market +
Competiting Joseph Schapter Invocation dynamic effieiy
,
·
Barrie (legal patents ,
EOS brand, logalty) - Exam :
Coca-Cola
Regulatory capture can Greate basier to + exit to
entry
Camp limit Consumer firm inhibit innovatio (by entranching market power
"
·
Can reduc ,
Choice from new + -
of incumbent player
·
Perpetrating an inefficient mondopoly -
to market failure ·
Therefore) regulatory agencies may
,
(openting X-efficacy in
arlopt regulations that erect (unnecessary) breanancy
-
Innovation
t
·
heading to stifled Come hindering technological process Joseopt
+
Schemster
May engage in
price discrimination
-
Changing different give to different consumer based on their willing res to
pay
Can result in allocative
ineffiency /resource are not allocated to their most valued uses) Regulatory Gathe Having Significant
Coverall) economic of government failure
heard to losses reduction value form Lobbying, power
Consumer
surplus
-
in
·
L
*
·
When
government agency operator in favor of producer
Price Machanism :
Way prices are determined through interactive of SED in an rather than consumer
economy
Operates vis
price Signalling
:
Price acts as
"Signals" Gonny info about -
Scarcity
·
preferences
·
production Costs
to Consumer + producer
