The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Spatial Competition

  • Dennis R. Capozza
  • Robert Van Order
Reference work entry


Imperfect competition has been an important branch of economic theory, at least since Cournot’s (1838) model of duopoly. A more recent development is spatial competition, which serves as a foundation for models of imperfect competition. The concept of space as the groundwork for imperfect competition provides many useful insights into price determination and resource allocation. Our goal is to illustrate these insights. In pursuing this track, we ignore many traditional issues in location theory including issues revolving around the shape of market ares. We also bypass questions about the existence of equilibrium in spatial models, which are discussed along with many of the locational issues in a recent lengthy survey by Gabszewicz and Thisse (1984).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Beckmann, M. 1968. Location theory. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  2. Beckmann, M. 1976. Spatial price policies revisited. Bell Journal of Economics 7: 619–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertrand, J. 1883. Théorie mathématique de la richesse sociale. Journal des savants 48: 499–508.Google Scholar
  4. Bresnahan, T. 1981. Duopoly models with consistent conjectures. American Economic Review 71: 934–945.Google Scholar
  5. Capozza, D.R., and K. Attaran. 1976. Pricing in urban areas under free entry. Journal of Regional Science 16: 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Capozza, D.R., and R. Van Order. 1978. A generalized model of spatial competition. American Economic Review 68: 896–908.Google Scholar
  7. Capozza, D.R., and R. Van Order. 1980a. Unique equilibria, pure profits, and efficiency in location models. American Economic Review 70: 1046–1053.Google Scholar
  8. Capozza, D.R., and R. Van Order. 1980b. On competitive reactions in spatial monopolistic competition. Working paper no. 6, Urban land economics division, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  9. Chamberlin, E.H. 1933. The theory of monopolistic competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cournot, A. 1838. Researches into the mathematical principles of wealth. Trans. N.T. Bacon. London: Macmillan, 1897.Google Scholar
  11. Decanio, S. 1985. Delivered pricing and multiple basing point equilibria: A reevaluation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 99: 329–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Palma, A., V. Ginsburgh, Y.Y. Papageorgiou, and J. Thisse. 1985. The principle of minimum differentiation holds under sufficient heterogeneity. Econometrica 53: 767–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eaton, B.C., and R. Lipsey. 1975. The principle of minimum differentiation reconsidered: Some new developments in the theory of spatial competition. Review of Economic Studies 42: 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eaton, B.C., and R. Lipsey. 1977. The introduction of space into the neo-classical model of value theory. In Studies in modern economic analysis; the proceedings of the association of University Teachers of Economics Edinburgh 1976, ed. M.J. Artis and A.R. Nobay, 59–96. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Eaton, B.C., and R. Lipsey. 1978. Freedom of entry and the existence of pure profit. Economic Journal 88: 455–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eaton, B.C., and M.H. Wooders. 1985. Sophisticated entry in a model of spatial competition. Bell Journal of Economics 16: 282–297.Google Scholar
  17. Gabszewicz, J., and J. Thisse. 1984. Spatial competition and the location of firms. Encyclopedia of Economics.Google Scholar
  18. Greenhut, M. 1981. Spatial pricing in the US, West Germany and Japan. Economica 48: 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenhut, M., and H. Ohta. 1973. Spatial configurations and competitive equilibrium. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 109: 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greenhut, J., M. Greenhut, and S. Li. 1980. Spatial pricing patterns in the United States. Quarterly Journal of Economics 95: 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holahan, W. 1975. The welfare effects of spatial price discrimination. American Economic Review 65: 498–503.Google Scholar
  22. Hotelling, H. 1929. Stability in competition. Economic Journal 339: 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hwang, M. 1979. A model of spatial price discrimination for the pricing schedule of coal. Journal of Regional Science 19: 231–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaldor, N. 1935. Market imperfection and excess capacity. Economica 2: 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lancaster, K. 1979. Variety, equity, and efficiency. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Lösch, A. 1954. The economics of location. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Mills, E.S., and M. Lav. 1964. A model of market areas with free entry. Journal of Political Economy 72: 278–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Norman, G. 1981. Spatial competition and spatial price discrimination. Review of Economic Studies 48: 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ohta, H. 1981. The price effects of spatial competition. Review of Economic Studies 48: 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Perry, M. 1982. Oligopoly and consistent conjectural variation. Bell Journal of Economics 13: 197–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Salop, S. 1979. Monopolistic competition with outside goods. Bell Journal of Economics 10: 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Singer, H. 1937. A note on spatial price discrimination. Review of Economic Studies 5: 75–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smithies, A. 1941. Optimum location in spatial competition. Journal of Political Economy 49: 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dennis R. Capozza
    • 1
  • Robert Van Order
    • 1
  1. 1.