4.1 Economic applications: oligopoly and market competition

Nash equilibrium in oligopoly shows how firms make strategic decisions in markets with few competitors. This concept reveals the interdependence of firms' choices and how they affect market outcomes, prices, and efficiency.

Oligopolistic competition often leads to outcomes between perfect competition and monopoly. Understanding these dynamics helps explain real-world market behavior and informs policy decisions aimed at promoting competition and consumer welfare.

Nash Equilibrium in Oligopoly

Concept and Application

Top images from around the web for Concept and Application

• 

  Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Oligopoly | OS Microeconomics 2e View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Concept and Application

• 

  Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Oligopoly | OS Microeconomics 2e View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Collusion or Competition? | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Reading: The Collusion Model | Microeconomics View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Nash equilibrium is a game theory concept where each player's strategy is optimal given the strategies of all other players
• In the context of oligopolistic markets, firms are the players and their strategies are price or output decisions
• To find the Nash equilibrium in an oligopoly, each firm chooses its strategy assuming its competitors will not change their strategies in response
• The equilibrium occurs when no firm has an incentive to unilaterally deviate from its chosen strategy

Implications and Limitations

• Firms in an oligopoly are interdependent, meaning each firm's optimal strategy depends on the strategies of its competitors
  • This strategic interaction distinguishes oligopoly from perfect competition (where firms are price takers) and monopoly (where a single firm dominates the market)
• The Nash equilibrium in an oligopoly may not be Pareto optimal, as firms may engage in strategic behavior that reduces total market surplus
  • This contrasts with the socially optimal outcome in perfect competition, where price equals marginal cost and total surplus is maximized
• Repeated interactions in oligopolistic markets can lead to tacit collusion, where firms implicitly agree to maintain high prices or restrict output without explicit communication
  • The sustainability of collusion depends on factors such as the number of firms, the discount rate, and the ability to detect and punish deviations (e.g., through price wars or retaliation)

Strategic Interactions and Market Outcomes

Impact on Efficiency

• Strategic interactions in oligopolistic markets can lead to outcomes that differ from those in perfectly competitive markets
  • Firms may engage in price wars, limit pricing, or other strategic behavior to gain market share or deter entry
• The presence of strategic interactions can result in market inefficiencies, such as prices above marginal cost, deadweight loss, and suboptimal levels of output
  • The extent of inefficiency depends on the specific market structure and the nature of competition (e.g., price vs. quantity competition)
• Game theory models, such as the prisoner's dilemma, can illustrate how individually rational decisions by firms can lead to collectively suboptimal outcomes
  • For example, firms may engage in excessive advertising or R&D spending to gain a competitive advantage, reducing overall market efficiency

Policy Implications

• Strategic behavior by incumbent firms, such as predatory pricing or exclusive dealing, can create barriers to entry and limit potential competition
  • This can result in higher prices, reduced innovation, and lower consumer welfare in the long run
• Government policies, such as antitrust laws and regulation, can be designed to mitigate the negative effects of strategic interactions and promote market efficiency
  • Examples include prohibiting price fixing, breaking up monopolies, or regulating natural monopolies
• The effectiveness of such policies depends on the ability to accurately identify and address anticompetitive behavior
  • Challenges include distinguishing between procompetitive and anticompetitive practices, balancing short-term and long-term effects, and avoiding unintended consequences

Cournot vs Bertrand Models

Cournot Model

• In the Cournot model, firms simultaneously choose their output levels, taking their competitors' output as given
  • The market price is then determined by the total industry output
• The Nash equilibrium in the Cournot model typically results in higher prices and lower output compared to perfect competition
  • As the number of firms increases, the equilibrium approaches the competitive outcome
• The Cournot model is more applicable to industries with capacity constraints or significant production lead times
  • Examples include the cement, aluminum, or agricultural commodity industries

Bertrand Model

• In the Bertrand model, firms simultaneously choose their prices, taking their competitors' prices as given
  • Consumers purchase from the firm offering the lowest price
• If firms produce homogeneous products, the Nash equilibrium in the Bertrand model results in prices equal to marginal cost, similar to perfect competition
  • This outcome is known as the "Bertrand paradox" and is driven by intense price competition
• The Bertrand model is more applicable to industries with low capacity constraints and the ability to quickly adjust prices
  • Examples include the retail sector, online commerce, or markets for digital goods

Comparisons and Extensions

• Both models predict that as the number of firms in the market increases, the equilibrium price decreases and approaches the competitive level
  • However, the convergence is typically faster in the Bertrand model due to the intense price competition
• Extensions of the Cournot and Bertrand models, such as the Stackelberg model or models with product differentiation, can provide additional insights into oligopolistic competition
  • These extensions often result in outcomes that lie between the extremes of perfect competition and monopoly
• The choice between the Cournot and Bertrand models depends on the key features of the market, such as the nature of competition, capacity constraints, and the speed of price adjustments

Product Differentiation and Entry Barriers

Product Differentiation

• Product differentiation refers to the degree to which consumers perceive the products offered by different firms as distinct or imperfect substitutes
  • Differentiation can be based on factors such as quality, design, brand image, or location
• In markets with significant product differentiation, firms have some degree of market power and can charge prices above marginal cost without losing all their customers to competitors
  • This allows firms to earn positive economic profits in the short run and potentially in the long run
• The degree of product differentiation affects the intensity of price competition in the market
  • As products become more differentiated, the cross-price elasticity of demand decreases, and firms have more flexibility in setting prices without fear of losing market share
• The Hotelling model and the Salop circular city model are examples of spatial competition models that analyze product differentiation based on location
  • These models highlight how differentiation can soften price competition and lead to localized market power

Entry Barriers

• Entry barriers are factors that prevent or discourage new firms from entering a market
  • Examples include economies of scale, high fixed costs, legal barriers (patents or licenses), or strategic behavior by incumbent firms (limit pricing or predatory pricing)
• The presence of entry barriers allows incumbent firms to maintain market power and earn positive economic profits in the long run
  • In the absence of entry barriers, the threat of potential competition disciplines incumbent firms and drives prices towards marginal cost
• The Bain-Sylos postulate suggests that incumbent firms may engage in limit pricing, setting prices just low enough to deter entry by making it unprofitable for potential entrants
  • This strategic behavior can help maintain oligopolistic market structures and prevent the erosion of market power

Interaction and Market Outcomes

• The interaction between product differentiation and entry barriers shapes the nature of competition in oligopolistic markets
  • Markets with high differentiation and high entry barriers are more likely to sustain oligopolistic structures and allow firms to exercise market power
• The combination of differentiation and entry barriers can lead to market segmentation, with firms targeting different consumer groups or niches
  • This can result in reduced competition, higher prices, and lower consumer welfare compared to markets with homogeneous products and low entry barriers
• Government policies aimed at reducing entry barriers or promoting product standardization can help facilitate competition and improve market outcomes
  • Examples include patent reform, reducing occupational licensing requirements, or mandating interoperability standards in technology markets