Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'monopolistic'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 52
-
Working PaperPrivate Equity and Workers: Modeling and Measuring Monopsony, Implicit Contracts, and Efficient Reallocation
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-37
We measure the real effects of private equity buyouts on worker outcomes by building a new database that links transactions to matched employer-employee data in the United States. To guide our empirical analysis, we derive testable implications from three theories in which private equity managers alter worker outcomes: (1) exertion of monopsony power in concentrated markets, (2) breach of implicit contracts with targeted groups of workers, including managers and top earners, and (3) efficient reallocation of workers across plants. We do not find any evidence that private equity-backed firms vary wages and employment based on local labor market power proxies. Wage losses are also very similar for managers and top earners. Instead, we find strong evidence that private equity managers downsize less productive plants relative to productive plants while simultaneously reallocating high-wage workers to more productive plants. We conclude that post-buyout employment and wage dynamics are consistent with professional investors providing incentives to increase productivity and monitor the companies in which they invest.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperFirm Heterogeneity, Misallocation, and Trade
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-33
To what extent do domestic distortions influence the gains from trade? Using data from Chinese manufacturing surveys and U.S. census records, I document two novel stylized facts: (1) Larger producers in China exhibit lower revenue productivity, whereas larger producers in the U.S. exhibit higher revenue productivity. (2) Larger exporters in China exhibit lower export intensity, whereas larger exporters in the U.S. exhibit higher export intensity. A model of heterogeneous producers shows that only the U.S. patterns are consistent with an efficient allocation. To reconcile the observed patterns in China, I introduce producer- and destination-specific subsidies and estimate the model without imposing functional form assumptions on the joint distribution of productivity and subsidy rates. Accounting for distortions in China leads to substantially smaller estimated gains from trade.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMulti-Market Contact in International Trade; Evidence from U.S. Battery Exporters
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-32
When competitors compete in more than one market they are said to have multi-market contact (MMC). Firms with MMC are more likely collude to avoid cross-market retaliation. This paper investigates the impact of MMC among U.S. battery exporters on the prices they set in foreign markets using confidential export transaction data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. The ability of firms to exploit MMC for collusive gain in international markets can be both detrimental to import-dependent consumers and harder for anti-trust authorities to detect. Motivated by litigation finding evidence of collusive behavior by multi-national battery manufacturers, MMC has an upward effect on export prices set by U.S. battery exporters. These results are robust across different panel regression specifications using different measures of MMC.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMultinational Production and Innovation in Tandem
October 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-64
Multinational firms colocate production and innovation by offshoring them to the same host country or region. In this paper, I examine the determinants of multinational firms' production and innovation locations. Exploiting plausibly exogenous variations in tariffs, I find complementarities between production and innovation within host countries and regions. To evaluate manufacturing reshoring policies, I develop a quantitative multicountry offshoring location choice model. I allow for rich colocation benefits and cross-country interdependencies and prove supermodularity of the model to solve this otherwise NP-hard problem. I find the effects of manufacturing reshoring policies are nonlinear, contingent upon firm heterogeneity, and they accumulate dynamically.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperForeign Direct Investment, Geography, and Welfare
September 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-45
We study the impact of FDI on domestic welfare using a model of internal trade with variable markups that incorporates intranational transport costs. The model allows us to disentangle the various channels through which FDI affects welfare. We apply the model to the case of Ethiopian manufacturing, which received considerable amounts of FDI during our study period. We find substantial gains from the presence of foreign firms, both in the local market and in other connected markets in the country. FDI, however, resulted in a modest worsening of allocative efficiency because foreign firms tend to have significantly higher markups than domestic firms. We report consistent findings from our empirical analysis, which utilises microdata on manufacturing firms, information on FDI projects, and geospatial data on improvements in the road network.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperGood Dispersion, Bad Dispersion
March 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-13
We document that most dispersion in marginal revenue products of inputs occurs across plants within firms rather than between firms. This is commonly thought to reflect misallocation: dispersion is 'bad.' However, we show that eliminating frictions hampering internal capital markets in a multi-plant firm model may in fact increase productivity dispersion and raise output: dispersion can be 'good.' This arises as firms optimally stagger investment activity across their plants over time to avoid raising costly external finance, instead relying on reallocating internal funds. The staggering in turn generates dispersion in marginal revenue products. We use U.S. Census data on multi-plant manufacturing firms to provide empirical evidence for the model mechanism and show a quantitatively important role for good dispersion. Since there is less scope for good dispersion in emerging economies, the difference in the degree of misallocation between emerging and developed economies looks more pronounced than previously thought.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperOutput Market Power and Spatial Misallocation
November 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-57
Most product industries are local. In the U.S., firms selling goods and services to local consumers account for half of total sales and generate more than sixty percent of the nation's jobs. Competition in these industries occurs in local product markets: cities. I propose a theory of such competition in which firms have output market power. Spatial differences in local competition arise endogenously due to the spatial sorting of heterogeneous firms. The ability to charge higher markups induces more productive firms to overvalue locating in larger cities, leading to a misallocation of firms across space. The optimal policy incen tivizes productive firms to relocate to smaller cities, providing a rationale for commonly used place-based policies. I use U.S. Census establishment-level data to estimate markups and to structurally estimate the model. I document a significant heterogeneity in markups for local industries across U.S. cities. Cities in the top decile of the city-size distribution have a fifty percent lower markup than cities in the bottom decile. I use the estimated model to quantify the general equilibrium effects of place-based policies. Policies that remove markups and relocate firms to smaller cities yield sizable aggregate welfare gains.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Spillover Effects of Top Income Inequality
June 2023
Working Paper Number:
CES-23-29
Top income inequality in the United States has increased considerably within occupations. This phenomenon has led to a search for a common explanation. We instead develop a theory where increases in income inequality originating within a few occupations can 'spill over' through consumption into others. We show theoretically that such spillovers occur when an occupation provides non divisible services to consumers, with physicians our prime example. Examining local income inequality across U.S. regions, the data suggest that such spillovers exist for physicians, dentists, and real estate agents. Estimated spillovers for other occupations are consistent with the predictions of our theory.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWhat Drives Stagnation: Monopsony or Monopoly?
October 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-45
Wages for the vast majority of workers have stagnated since the 1980s while productivity has grown. We investigate two coexisting explanations based on rising market power: 1. Monopsony, where dominant firms exploit the limited mobility of their own workers to pay lower wages; and 2. Monopoly, where dominant firms charge too high prices for what they sell, which lowers production and the demand for labor, and hence equilibrium wages economy-wide. Using establishment data from the US Census Bureau between 1997 and 2016, we find evidence of both monopoly and monopsony, where the former is rising over this period and the latter is stable. Both contribute to the decoupling of productivity and wage growth, with monopoly being the primary determinant: in 2016 monopoly accounts for 75% of wage stagnation, monopsony for 25%.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMarket Power And Wage Inequality
September 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-37
We propose a theory of how market power affects wage inequality. We ask how goods and labor market power jointly affect the level of wages, the Skill Premium, and wage inequality. We then use detailed microdata from the US Census between 1997 and 2016 to estimate the parameters of labor supply, technology and the market structure. We find that a less competitive market structure lowers the wage level, contributes 7% to the rise in the Skill Premium and accounts for half of the increase in between-establishment wage variance.View Full Paper PDF
