Pant, Manoj and Pattanayak, Manoranjan (2005): Does Openness Promote Competition? A Case Study of Indian Manufacturing. Published in: Economic and Political Weekly No. Sept, 24 (24. September 2005): pp. 4226-4231.
Download (39Kb) | Preview
This paper uses firm level data for the period 1989-2001 to analyse the working of competition in India’s manufacturing sector. It examines the impact of greater competition on profit mark-up over the last decade. The econometric analysis of the factors determining markup indicates that, contrary to received wisdom, trade openness by itself does not act to reduce the profit mark-up. The paper also investigates the degree of competitiveness defined as the Lerner price-cost margin. The analysis indicates that the estimated margins are in general high over the 1990s across all industries and in most of the industries considered these margins have been increasing over the second-half of the 1990s. The market by itself does not bring about competitive outcomes. The regulatory agencies probably have a crucial role to ensure a level playing field.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Institution:||Jawaharlal Nehru University|
|Original Title:||Does Openness Promote Competition? A Case Study of Indian Manufacturing|
|Keywords:||Competition; Indian Manufacturing|
|Subjects:||L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance > L11 - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
|Depositing User:||Manoranjan Pattanayak|
|Date Deposited:||23. Apr 2007|
|Last Modified:||13. Feb 2013 22:31|
Central Electricity Authority (2003): The Electricity Act, Government of India. Competition Commission of India (2002): The Competition Act, New Delhi. Curry, B and K D George (1983): ‘Industrial Concentration: A Survey’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 31(3), March: 203-55. Hall, Robert E (1988): ‘The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in US Industry’, Journal of Political Economy, 96(5), 921-47. Harrison, Ann (1994): ‘Productivity, Imperfect Competition and Trade Reform: Theory and Evidence’, Journal of International Economics, 36, 53-73. Hoekman, B (2002): ‘Competition Policy and the Global Trading System’ in B Hoekman and K Anderson (eds), The Global Trading System, I B Tauris and Co, New York, NY. Jayanthakumaran, K (1999): ‘Trade Reforms and Manufacturing Performance: Australia 1989-97’, Working Paper – WP 99-13, Department of Economics, University of Wollongong. Krishna, P and D Mitra (1998): ‘Trade Liberalisation, Market Discipline and Productivity Growth: New Evidence from India’, Journal of Development Economics, Vol 56. Levinsohn, J (1993): ‘Testing the Imports-as-Market Discipline Hypothesis’, Journal of International Economics, North Holland. Metin-Ozcan, K, E Voyvoda, E Yeldan (2000): ‘On The Pattern of Trade Liberalisation, Oligopolistic Concentration and Profitability: Reflection From Post-1980 Turkish Manufacturing’, Department of Economics, Bilkent University. Nouroz, Hasheem (2001): Protection in Indian Manufacturing: An Empirical Study, Macmillan India, India. Pant, Manoj and S K Das (2004): ‘Structure of Competition in the Indian Manufacturing Sector’, presented at seminar on ‘WTO: India’s Post Cancun Concerns’, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, October 6-7. Roberts, B M (1998): ‘Transition and Changes in Industrial Concentration in Poland’, paper presented for the Congress of the European Economic Association, Berlin, September. Tybout, James R (2000): ‘Manufacturing Firms in Developing Economies: How Well Do They Do and, Why?’ Journal of Economic Literature, 38(1), 11-44.