Advertisement

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

  • Svetlana AvdashevaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Law and Economics book series (ILEC)

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.

Keywords

Competition enforcement Abuse of dominance Exclusion Exploitation Russia 

References

  1. 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.Google Scholar
  2. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkowitz, D., Pistor, K., & Richard, J. F. (2003). The transplant effect. American Journal of Comparative Law, 51, 163–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchard, O., & Kremer, M. (1997). Disorganization. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 1091–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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).Google Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buccirossi, P. (2015). Vertical restraints on e-commerce and selective distribution. Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 11(3), 747–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.Google Scholar
  11. Golovanova, S. (2010). Evidence on imperfect competition: Prices of exported and imported goods in Russia (in Russian). Modern Competition (Journal), 22(4), 11–25.Google Scholar
  12. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hanson, G. H. (2012). The rise of middle kingdoms: Emerging economies in global trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(2), 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harrington, J. E. (2008). Detecting cartels. In P. Buccirossi (Ed.), Handbook of antitrust economics (pp. 213–245). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hart, O. D., & Moore, J. (1990). Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1119–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heimler, A., & Mehta, K. (2014). Monopolization in developing countries. The Oxford Handbook of International Antitrust Economics, 2, 234–252.Google Scholar
  17. 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.
  18. Joskow, P. L. (2002). Transaction cost economics. Antitrust rules, and remedies. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 18(1), 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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).Google Scholar
  21. Maggs, P. B., Schwartz, O., & Burnham, W. (2015). Law and legal system of the Russian Federation (6th ed.). Huntington, NY: Juris.Google Scholar
  22. Motta, M. (2000). EC merger policy and the Airtours case. European Competition Law Review, 21(4), 199–207.Google Scholar
  23. 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).Google Scholar
  24. 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.Google Scholar
  25. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Overd, A. (2002). After the airtours appeal. European Competition Law Review, 23(8), 375–377.Google Scholar
  28. 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.Google Scholar
  29. Pursell, G., & Snape, R. H. (1973). Economies of scale, price discrimination and exporting. Journal of International Economics, 3(1), 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reich, N. (1996). Consumer protection in countries of emerging markets: The example of Russia. Journal of Consumer Policy, 19(1), 1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reynolds, S. (2004). Competition law and policy in Russia. OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy, 6(3), 7–86.Google Scholar
  32. 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.Google Scholar
  33. Vickers, J. (2008). Abuse of market power. In P. Buccirossi (Ed.), Handbook of antitrust economics (pp. 415–432). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Wei, D. (2013). Antitrust in China: An overview of recent implementation of anti-monopoly law. European Business Organization Law Review, 14(1), 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williamson, O. E. (1971). The vertical integration of production: Market failure considerations. American Economic Review, 61(2), 112–123.Google Scholar
  36. Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction cost economics: The governance of contractual relationships. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yakovlev, A. (1994). Anti‐monopoly policy in Russia: Basic stages and prospects. Communist Economies and Economic Transformation, 6(1), 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research UniversityHigher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations