The choice of antimonopoly policy measures for highly concentrated markets (on the example of cement markets)

Abstract

Structural or behavioral measures can be implemented in antitrust policy to protect competition and social welfare protection. The effectiveness of such measures depends on how market concentration affects the intensity of competition. In economic theory, two basic approaches were proposed: the first considers high market concentration as a negative factor for competition and social welfare (for example, Harvard School representatives offered such a concept), the second approach assumed that high concentration can be evidence of a high level of competition, in this situation, government interventions are not recommended. In the article the cement market was selected for empirical test of these approaches. The growth of concentration problem (in the Siberian Federal District and the Far Eastern Federal District of Russia) was analyzed, it was shown that for such markets, taking into account actual characteristics, the Harvard approach turned out to be more correct in Russia. The increase in the level of concentration led to a decrease in the intensity of competition. At the same time, in the antitrust policy of the FAS behavioral measures were actively used, which could be rather difficult to implement, but did not prevent the growth of concentration. For such markets, the use of structural rather than behavioral measures to improve the effectiveness of antitrust policy can be recommended.