An illustration of variable precision rough sets model:an analysis of the findings of the UK Monopolies and Mergers Commission

This paper introduces a new technique in the investigation of limited-dependent variable models. This paper illustrates that variable precision rough set theory (VPRS), allied with the use of a modern method of classification, or discretisation of data, can out-perform the more standard approaches that are employed in economics, such as a probit model. These approaches and certain inductive decision tree methods are compared (through a Monte Carlo simulation approach) in the analysis of the decisions reached by the UK Monopolies and Mergers Committee. We show that, particularly in small samples, the VPRS model can improve on more traditional models, both in-sample, and particularly in out-of-sample prediction. A similar improvement in out-of-sample prediction over the decision tree methods is also shown.

Effectiveness and effects of attempts to regulate the UK petrol industry

This paper evaluates the impact that investigation and regulation of the UK petrol industry has had on the profitability of the companies. Using a gross margin for petrol, we estimate a series of variable parameter autoregressive processes. The results demonstrate that the 1979 Monopolies and Mergers Commission investigation into the industry, caused a long term decline in profit margins in the industry, despite the fact that no recommendations or undertakings were made. This cannot however be said for subsequent investigations.

Regulation of the petrol industry in the UK: issues and evidence

The petrol industry has been investigated twice by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission in the last 20 years. On both occasions the MMC found that the conduct of the companies was not against the public interest. These findings were based on the perceived stable relationship between oil and petrol prices. This paper develops a model of petrol price using a co-integration approach, concluding that one must question the findings of the MMC.

Monopoly in the UK:what determines whether the MMC finds against the investigated firms?

This paper draws on data from 73 UK Monopolies and Mergers Commission reports on monopoly between 1973 and 1995. It shows that there is a roughly two in three chance that the Commission will come to an adverse conclusion against the investigated firms in a given case. 75–80% of decisions can be explained purely in terms of the market share of the leading firm and knowledge of the broad nature of the alleged anti-competitive practice. An adverse finding is most likely in cases involving exclusive dealing, and least likely where other vertical restraints are involved.

Economic performance in European telecommunications, 1978-1998:a comparative study

The European telecommunications sector is undergoing major structural change in the face of new technology, privatisation and European Commission directives requiring market liberalisation. This study considers the comparative performance of the major European telecommunications operators between 1978 and 1998. This period encompasses an era of state monopolies, market liberalisation initiatives and a number of privatisations. The objectives are to assess: the extent so far to which market liberalisation and privatisation have impacted on the efficiency with which telecommunications services are provided in Europe; and changes in the performance of the different telecommunications operators over time with a view to providing an insight into the comparative efficiency performance of the different telecommunications operators in Europe. Performance is measured in terms of profit margins and labour and total factor productivity.

Retail competition and consumer choice:contextualising the “food deserts” debate

The “food deserts” debate can be enriched by setting the particular circumstances of food deserts – areas of very limited consumer choice – within a wider context of changing retail provision in other areas. This paper’s combined focus on retail competition and consumer choice shifts the emphasis from changing patterns of retail provision towards a more qualitative understanding of how “choice” is actually experienced by consumers at the local level “on the ground”. This argument has critical implications for current policy debates where the emphasis on monopolies and mergers at the national level needs to be brought together with the planning and regulation of retail provision at the local, neighbourhood level.