|
|
Industrial
Organization
Over-diversification
The literature on multi-product firms has focused on the `economies
of scope' that occur when it is more efficient for one firm to produce a
certain combination of products than for each of several firms to
specialize in only one. These typically reflect complementarities in
production or the presence of `quasi-public inputs', such as R&D or
`large' and indivisible capital goods. Less attention has been paid to
the limits to such diversification, but there must be eventual
diseconomies of scope since there are well-known benefits from
specialization, learning-by-doing and product- specific human and
physical capital.
In Discussion Paper No. 732, Research Fellow Huw David Dixon
considers firms' decisions to diversify in oligopolistic markets. In
perfectly competitive or contestable markets, firms will take such
decisions solely on efficiency grounds; by continuing to diversify after
diseconomies of scope set in they would incur a cost disadvantage. In
oligopolistic markets, however, imperfect competition implies the
presence of supernormal profits; these provide firms in
technologically-related markets with incentives to enter, even when this
is `inefficient' in terms of production costs. This can lead to
`over-diversification' if firms diversify by more than is justified on
grounds of cost-efficiency.
Dixon argues that oligopolistic firms' diversification into each others'
markets therefore tends to raise welfare by both improving cost
efficiency and promoting competition, which reduces prices and raises
consumer welfare. If there are (eventual) diseconomies, however, the
production inefficiency may more than outweigh this welfare gain, so
that overall welfare is reduced. Dixon concludes that the presence of
supernormal profits (or `rents') in imperfectly competitive markets is
likely to induce `over-diversification' to the extent that overall
social welfare may be reduced.
Inefficient Diversification in Multimarket Oligopoly with
Diseconomies of Scope
Huw David Dixon
Discussion Paper No. 732, November 1992 (AM)
|
|