Effects of Antitrust on Inequality: Incidental or Explicit Goal?
Explore the impact of antitrust on inequality, questioning if it serves as an incidental byproduct or an explicit goal. Delve into the relationship between competition, globalization, redistributive policies, and populism, evaluating competition law's role in addressing economic disparities.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
COMPETITION AND INEQUALITY THE EFFECTS OF ANTITRUST ON INEQUALITY: A (MORE OR LESS) INCIDENTAL BY PRODUCT OR AN EXPLICIT ANTITRUST GOAL? Andrea Pezzoli Sapienza-Economia e Politica Industriale marzo-maggio 2023 andrea.pezzoli@agcm.it andrea.pezzoli@uniroma1.it
OUTLINE Does Competition benefit all? The growing gap between the winners and the losers of globalisation Redistributive policies have largely failed (to restore the hope of the victims of globalisation and competition) Inequality and Populism (what is fair can be perceived as unfair What is Fairness?)
OUTLINE Should Competition Law take account of Inequality? In parallel to other efforts, can competition law provide a usefull contribution to mitigate the rise of inequality? The relationships between Competition Enforcement, Competition Dynamics and Economic Inequality Micro and Macro evidence: i) Competition, Firms mark-ups, Labour Share, Economic Inequality; ii) Competition Law, Reduced Concentration, Reduced Profits, Reduced Inequality
OUTLINE Fight against Inequality: an explicit Competition Goal? Public Interest Goals and Competition Law Competition Enforcement as a Strategic Lever? Prioritization of cases (Pharmaceutical, Public Services, No PoachAgreements ) Advocacy aimed at supporting transition policies (fair competition might produce unfair outcome the short and the long term the winners and the losers productivity, innovation, exit barriers and the disruption of jobs the need for an ORDERLY RETREAT)
OUTLINE Fight against Inequality: an explicit Competition Goal? Public Interest Goals and Competition Law Competition Enforcement as a Strategic Lever? Prioritization of cases (Pharmaceutical, Public Services, No PoachAgreements ) Advocacy aimed at supporting transition policies (fair competition might produce unfair outcome the short and the long term the winners and the losers productivity, innovation, exit barriers and the disruption of jobs the need for an ORDERLY RETREAT)
OUTLINE The purity of competition law cannot justify the exclusion of inequality concerns but Legitimacy: do CAs possess sufficient legitimacy to make complex value judgments? According to some authors the constitutional framework (art. 11 TFEU) requires them to do so It depends on the social and political context (A. Ezrachi (2017)): e.g. in South Africa the Constitution requires affirmative actionempowering disadvantaged groups (E. Fox (2000))
OUTLINE Public Policies (Fiscal Policies, Welfare Policies, Labour Policies) can directly cope with inequality Competition Authorities can indirectly provide their valuable contribution Keep in mind that too many cooks spoil the broth !! (J. Tirole,2022)
