Pratique anticoncurrentielle | EPFL Graph Search

Anti-competitive practices are business or government practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market. Antitrust laws ensure businesses do not engage in competitive practices that harm other, usually smaller, businesses or consumers. These laws are formed to promote healthy competition within a free market by limiting the abuse of monopoly power. Competition allows companies to compete in order for products and services to improve; promote innovation; and provide more choices for consumers. In order to obtain greater profits, some large enterprises take advantage of market power to hinder survival of new entrants. Anti-competitive behavior can undermine the efficiency and fairness of the market, leaving consumers with little choice to obtain a reasonable quality of service. Anticompetitive behavior refers to actions taken by a business or organization to limit, restrict or eliminate competition in a market, usually in order to gain an unfair advantage or dominate the market. These practices are often considered illegal or unethical and can harm consumers, other businesses and the broader economy Anti-competitive behaviour is used by business and governments to lessen competition within the markets so that monopolies and dominant firms can generate supernormal profits and deter competitors from the market. Therefore, it is heavily regulated and punishable by law in cases where it substantially affects the market. Anti-competitive practices are commonly only deemed illegal when the practice results in a substantial dampening in competition, hence why for a firm to be punished for any form of anti-competitive behaviour they generally need to be a monopoly or a dominant firm in a duopoly or oligopoly who has significant influence over the market. Anti-competitive behaviour can be grouped into two classifications. Horizontal restraints regard anti-competitive behaviour that involves competitors at the same level of the supply chain. These practices include mergers, cartels, collusions, price-fixing, price discrimination and predatory pricing.

Three essays on the role of proximity in science and innovation

Stefano Horst Baruffaldi

This thesis proposes three studies that provide novel empirical evidence on how different types of proximity can affect innovation and science activities through various mechanisms and in different contexts. In the first study (second chapter of this thesis), in collaboration with Julio Raffo, we analyze the relationship between geography and the likelihood of duplication in inventive activities. We argue that the uneven diffusion of knowledge means that the duplication of inventions will not be randomly distributed geographically and over time. First, as knowledge diffuses over time and competitive incentives decrease, the probability of a claimed invention duplicating an existing one will decrease in the time distance between the two. Second, for recent and upcoming inventions, competitive incentives are high, and localized knowledge flows increase the probability of duplication. Therefore, over a brief time period, the probability of duplication decreases with geographic distance. Conversely, the duplication of less recent inventions is more likely to occur at long distances as a consequence of less awareness of a technology existing due to missing knowledge flows. We test our hypotheses on European Patent Office (EPO) patent bibliographical data on patent citation categories. Geographic distance matters significantly less in sectors in which patents are known to be more effective as a source of information such as discrete technologies. In the second study (third chapter), in collaboration with Annamaria Conti and Fabiana Visentin, we investigate the effects of professorsâ social proximity with external universities on the level of productivity of PhD students hired from these universities. Researchers hired from external environments tend to have high scientific productivity compared to those who completed their studies in the same institution where they are employed. In a population of 4,666 PhD students, we further study the scientific productivity of external students from professorsâ networks, defined as students with a master's degree from a different university from that of their PhD, and also from a university with which their supervisors' co-authors are affiliated. We find that these students are significantly more productive, both compared to other students with a master's degree from a different university, and to students with a master's degree from the same university as that of their PhD. In our analyses, we control for the heterogeneity of supervisors and the heterogeneity of institutions where the students obtained their master's degrees, including proxies for the specific relevance of these universities for a given supervisor. Thus, we conclude that professors hire students with higher scientific productivity from universities where their co-authors are affiliated. Additional analyses further suggest that the reduction of information asymmetries is the main mechanism to explain this finding. In the third study (fourth chapter), in collaboration with Guillaume Burghouwt, we investigate the role of interregional knowledge integration as a driver of firm innovative performance. We adopt an unbalanced panel of 3,871 innovative companies in Germany between 1992 and 2010, for a total of 15,819 observations, and we study their innovative productivity. [...]

EPFL2015

Three essays on the role of proximity in science and innovation

Stefano Horst Baruffaldi

EPFL2015