5.6 Cartels and game theory
3 min read•august 16, 2024
Cartels are groups of firms that team up to control prices and output. They aim to boost profits by acting like a , but this hurts consumers and messes with the market. It's a risky game, though, as members might cheat for quick gains.
Game theory helps explain why cartels are shaky. The shows why firms might betray the group, even if working together is better overall. Repeated interactions can help cartels last, but they're always at risk of falling apart.
Cartels and Market Outcomes
Definition and Structure of Cartels
Top images from around the web for Definition and Structure of Cartels
Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
8.2 Fixing Monopoly – Principles of Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Definition and Structure of Cartels
Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
8.2 Fixing Monopoly – Principles of Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Cartels involve formal agreements between competing firms to coordinate actions
- Typically restrict output and raise prices above competitive levels
- Can take various forms ( agreements, market allocation schemes, production quotas)
- Primary goal increases collective profits by behaving as a monopoly
- Cartels reduce consumer surplus and create deadweight loss in the market
- Often found in industries with homogeneous products and high fixed costs (oil, pharmaceuticals)
Economic Impact of Cartels
- Higher prices and reduced output in affected markets
- Decreased consumer welfare due to artificially inflated prices
- Potential barriers to entry for new competitors
- Inefficient resource allocation across the economy
- Reduced innovation as firms have less incentive to improve products or processes
- Artificial scarcity created by controlling market supply
- Increased stability and reduced uncertainty for member firms
Incentives for Cartel Formation
Economic Motivations
- Increased collective beyond individual competitive capabilities
- Significantly higher profits act as strong incentive for cooperation
- Better planning of operations and investments due to market stability
- Potential cost savings and increased efficiency through information sharing
- Ability to deter new market entrants by controlling supply and prices
- Reduced competitive pressures allow for higher profit margins
Industry Characteristics Favoring Cartels
- Homogeneous products make price coordination easier (commodities, raw materials)
- High fixed costs incentivize output restrictions to maintain profitability
- Small number of competitors simplifies coordination and monitoring
- Inelastic demand allows for greater price increases without losing customers
- Mature industries with stable technology reduce incentives for innovation-based competition
- Geographic concentration of firms facilitates communication and agreement enforcement
Game Theory and Cartel Stability
Prisoner's Dilemma and Nash Equilibrium
- Prisoner's dilemma models strategic interactions between cartel members
- Each firm faces choice between cooperating with cartel or
- explains cartel instability
- Individual incentive to cheat for higher short-term profits
- Collectively beneficial to cooperate, but individually rational to defect
- Factors affecting stability (number of firms, interaction frequency, action transparency)
- Repeated games can sustain cooperation through future punishment threats
- Tit-for-tat strategies respond to perceived cheating to maintain cooperation
Game Theory Concepts in Cartel Analysis
- Folk theorem suggests cooperation can persist in repeated games
- Explains how some cartels endure despite cheating incentives
- Trigger strategies maintain cooperation through credible punishment threats
- Example: OPEC members agreeing to cut production if any member exceeds quota
- Information asymmetry impacts cartel stability
- Difficulty in detecting cheating can lead to breakdown of cooperation
- Reputation effects in repeated games influence long-term cartel viability
- Firms with history of honoring agreements more likely to maintain cooperation
Antitrust Policies for Cartels
Legal Frameworks and Enforcement
- provide basis for prosecuting cartel behavior (Sherman Act in US)
- Leniency programs offer reduced penalties for cooperating cartel members
- Encourages whistle-blowing and destabilizes existing cartels
- International cooperation crucial for combating global cartels
- Example: EU and US antitrust authorities sharing information on suspected cartels
- Economic analysis identifies suspicious market patterns and quantifies harm
- Use of econometric techniques to detect price fixing (parallel pricing behavior)
Effectiveness and Challenges
- Measure effectiveness by ability to deter formation, detect existing cartels, and prosecute violators
- Challenges in enforcement include:
- Difficulty proving collusion without direct evidence
- Sophisticated concealment tactics by cartels (coded language, secret meetings)
- Resource-intensive investigations and prosecutions
- Balance between punitive measures and cooperation incentives crucial
- Fines must be sufficiently high to deter, but leniency attractive enough to encourage defection
- Ongoing debate over optimal antitrust policy design
- Criminal vs. civil penalties for individuals involved in cartel activity
- Role of private enforcement through civil lawsuits
Key Terms to Review (18)
Antitrust Laws: Antitrust laws are regulations designed to promote competition and prevent monopolistic practices in the marketplace. They aim to protect consumers from anti-competitive behavior by ensuring that no single entity can dominate a market, which connects directly to profit maximization strategies employed by monopolies, the inefficiencies and deadweight losses they create, their unique characteristics, and the behavior of cartels as described through game theory.
Bertrand Model: The Bertrand Model is an economic theory that describes how firms in an oligopoly compete on price rather than quantity. It suggests that when two or more firms produce identical products, they will undercut each other's prices to gain market share, leading to a situation where prices can drop to marginal cost, resulting in zero economic profit for the firms involved. This model highlights the intense competition present in oligopolistic markets and connects to various concepts including market power and pricing strategies.
Cheating: In economic contexts, cheating refers to the act of a firm violating the agreed-upon terms of cooperation within a cartel by secretly undercutting prices or increasing output to gain a larger market share. This behavior undermines the collective strategy of the cartel, which relies on members maintaining certain prices and outputs to maximize joint profits. Cheating disrupts the delicate balance established by the cartel, often leading to market instability and potential collapse of the cooperative agreement.
Coase Theorem: The Coase Theorem is an economic theory that suggests that if property rights are well-defined and transaction costs are low, parties will negotiate to resolve conflicts over externalities efficiently, regardless of the initial allocation of rights. This idea connects various concepts such as market efficiency, the resolution of externalities, and the role of private negotiations in achieving socially optimal outcomes.
Cournot Model: The Cournot Model is an economic theory that describes how firms in an oligopoly compete on the quantity of output they produce, assuming that each firm's output decision influences the market price. It demonstrates how firms make decisions based on their rivals' production levels, leading to a Nash equilibrium where no firm can benefit by changing its output unilaterally.
Dominant Strategy: A dominant strategy is a course of action that is the best choice for a player to make, regardless of what the other players choose. It implies that the chosen strategy yields a higher payoff than any other strategy, no matter what strategies the other players adopt. This concept is crucial in analyzing strategic interactions among players, helping to understand how decisions are made in competitive situations.
Focal points: Focal points are solutions or outcomes in a strategic interaction that players tend to choose because they seem natural, special, or relevant to them. They emerge in situations where individuals must coordinate their actions and have incomplete information about the preferences of others. These focal points help simplify decision-making processes and provide a reference point for players in various scenarios, including negotiations or competitive settings.
George Stigler: George Stigler was an influential American economist known for his work on industrial organization, market structure, and the economics of information. His research laid the groundwork for understanding how firms operate within markets and the dynamics of competition, particularly in the context of cartels and game theory. Stigler's insights into market behavior have had a lasting impact on economic theory and policy.
John Nash: John Nash was an influential mathematician and economist best known for his contributions to game theory, particularly the concept of Nash equilibrium. His work revolutionized the understanding of strategic interactions among rational decision-makers, impacting various fields including economics, political science, and biology. Nash's theories provide a framework for analyzing how individuals or firms can optimize their decisions in competitive environments, such as cartels and bargaining scenarios.
Marginal Cost Pricing: Marginal cost pricing is a pricing strategy where a firm sets the price of its product equal to the marginal cost of producing one more unit. This method aims to ensure efficient resource allocation and is often used in situations like natural monopolies and regulatory environments. By aligning prices with marginal costs, firms can encourage consumption up to the point where the benefit to consumers matches the cost of production, optimizing overall economic welfare.
Market Power: Market power refers to the ability of a firm or group of firms to influence the price of a good or service in the market. This power can lead to higher prices, reduced output, and decreased competition, impacting consumer choices and market efficiency. Firms with market power can engage in various strategies such as price discrimination, product differentiation, or forming cartels to maximize profits and exert control over market conditions.
Monopoly: A monopoly is a market structure where a single seller or producer dominates the entire market for a particular good or service, with significant barriers preventing other firms from entering. This leads to a lack of competition, allowing the monopolist to set prices above marginal cost and maximize profits, often resulting in reduced consumer welfare and inefficiencies in the market.
Nash Equilibrium: Nash Equilibrium is a concept in game theory where players in a strategic interaction choose their optimal strategy, given the strategies of others, resulting in no player having an incentive to deviate from their chosen strategy. This concept is crucial in understanding how firms operate in competitive markets, particularly where their decisions are interdependent.
Oligopoly: An oligopoly is a market structure characterized by a small number of firms that dominate the market, leading to limited competition and interdependent decision-making. These firms have significant market power, which allows them to influence prices and output levels. The behavior of one firm in an oligopoly affects the others, making strategic decision-making crucial for success, especially when it comes to pricing, product offerings, and potential collusion.
Output Restriction: Output restriction refers to a strategic decision made by firms, particularly those in a cartel, to limit the quantity of goods produced in order to raise market prices and maximize profits. This practice often occurs in oligopolistic markets where a small number of firms dominate, allowing them to coordinate their output levels to avoid competition and maintain higher prices. By controlling output, firms aim to achieve greater market power and influence over prices.
Price-fixing: Price-fixing is an agreement among competitors to set prices at a certain level, which can lead to market manipulation and decreased competition. This practice undermines the principles of a free market by eliminating price competition, resulting in higher prices for consumers. The impact of price-fixing can extend beyond immediate financial effects, influencing overall market dynamics and consumer trust.
Prisoner's dilemma: The prisoner's dilemma is a fundamental concept in game theory that illustrates a situation where two individuals, acting in their own self-interest, end up with a worse outcome than if they had cooperated. This scenario often highlights the conflict between individual incentives and collective benefits, revealing how rational decision-making can lead to suboptimal results in competitive situations. It connects deeply with concepts of strategic interactions, where players must consider the choices of others to determine their own best action.
Punishment strategies: Punishment strategies refer to actions taken by players in a game to deter non-cooperative behavior among competitors, especially in the context of collusion or cartel formation. These strategies are essential for maintaining cooperation, as they impose costs on those who deviate from agreed-upon actions, thereby reinforcing the benefits of sticking to the cooperative path. The effectiveness of these strategies can influence the sustainability of cartels and the overall dynamics within oligopolistic markets.