Ken Heyer, Jun 19, 2012
The author argues for using the total welfare standard, rather than the more commonly employed consumer welfare standard. In doing so, Heyer responds to three broad objections that have been raised. One is that use of a total welfare standard conflicts with antitrust law, or at least with legal precedent. A second is that employing a total welfare standard would clearly be more costly for antitrust agencies than employing one or another flavor of a consumer welfare standard. A third is that the total welfare standard ignores important distributional considerations—considerations that are better treated under some form of consumer welfare standard. Each of these objections is evaluated, and ultimately found unpersuasive.
Reprinted from the CPI Journal, Autumn 2006, Volume 2 Number 2
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Novo Nordisk Foundation’s Acquisition Faces Regulatory Hurdles
May 6, 2024 by
CPI
Microsoft’s MAI-1 to Compete with Google and OpenAI in AI Language Models
May 6, 2024 by
CPI
Qantas Settles ‘Ghost Flights’ Case With Australian Watchdog for $120 Million
May 6, 2024 by
CPI
Compass Lexecon Expands EMEA Presence with Opening of Lisbon Office
May 6, 2024 by
CPI
EU Extends Support for Farms and Fisheries Amid Market Disruptions
May 5, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI