Abstract
This analysis of the cement industry in various countries shows clearly and properly what Chamberlin fixed in ‘oligopoly is not one problem, but several’.1 In fact a relatively simple industry, such as the cement one seems to be, assumes so many different aspects, in terms of structure, conduct and performance, that it seems to me quite difficult to draw a general conclusion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
E.H. Chamberlin, The Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Harvard UP., Eighth Edition, 1962, p. 53.
See G.J. Stigler, The Kinky Oligopoly Demand-Curve and Rigid Prices, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 55, 1947.
G.J. Stigler, Perfect Competition, Historically Contemplated, Journal of Political Economy, LXVI (Feb 1957), reprinted in Readings in Industrial Economics, edited by C.K. Rowley, London 1972.
R. Sherman, Industrial Economics: Toward a Theoretical Formulation, Paper for the Meeting of Nijenrode (Holland), August 9, 1976.
T. Scitovsky, Asymmetries in Economics, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, vol. 25, 3 1978.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1982 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bianchi, P. (1982). Conclusions. In: Public and Private Control in Mass Product Industry: The Cement Industry Cases. Studies in Industrial Organization, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7505-7_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7505-7_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-7507-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-7505-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive