SUNK COST, POTANCIAL COMPETITION AND CONTESTABILITY: THE SAMPLE OF MARITIME TRANSPORT MARKET

Year 2018, Volume: 5 Issue: 3, 665 - 686, 27.12.2018

Ferhat Pehlivanoğlu , Muhammet Rıdvan İnce

https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.425245

Cited By: 2

Abstract

The
theory of contestable markets suggest that the presence of limited number and
large-volume firms in a market may not be a disadvantage in terms of market
efficiency. Contrary to traditional approaches which accept concentration and
scale economies as a source of monopoly power, the theory of contestable
markets has not seen these factors as an obstacle to effective markets. Within
the scope of the theory It is considered sufficient for high industry
efficiency that the entry and exit to the market are completely free. Empirical
and theoretical study has been carried out for many types of markets under the
theory developed at the beginning of the 1980s. In this study, the theoretical
infrastructure of the Contestable Markets model is explained and the World
maritime transport market has been examined in terms of potential competition
and sunk cost. As a result of the empirical studies it has been concluded that
the market has the basic features of the Contestable Markets model.

Keywords

Contestable Markets, Maritime Industry, Sunk Cost, potencial competition

BATIK MALİYET, POTANSİYEL REKABET VE YARIŞILABİLİRLİK: DENİZYOLU TAŞIMACILIĞI PİYASASI ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Yarışılabilir
Piyasalar teorisi, bir piyasada az sayıda ve büyük hacimli firmaların piyasa
etkinliği açısından dezavantaj oluşturmayabileceğini ileri sürmektedir. Yoğunlaşma
ve ölçek ekonomilerini tekelci gücün kaynağı olarak gören geleneksel
yaklaşımların aksine, Yarışılabilir Piyasalar teorisi bu faktörleri etkin
piyasalar için bir engel olarak görmemiştir. Teori kapsamında piyasaya giriş ve
çıkışların tamamen serbest olması yüksek endüstri verimi için yeterli
görülmektedir. 1980’li yılların başında geliştirilen teori kapsamında bir çok
piyasa türü için ampirik ve teorik çalışma yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmada,
Yarışılabilir Piyasalar Modelinin teorik altyapısı anlatılmış ve Dünya denizyolu
taşımacılığı piyasası, potansiyel rekabet ve batık maliyet açısından
incelenmiştir. Yapılan ampirik çalışmalar sonucunda piyasanın Yarışılabilir Piyasalar modelinin temel özelliklerini
taşıdığı sonucuna varılmıştır. 

Keywords

Yarışılabilir Piyasalar, Denizyolu Taşımacılığı Piyasası, Batık Maliyet, Potansiyel Rekabet

References

• ARKES, H.R. VE BLUMER, C. (1985), The Psychology of Sunk Cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 124 - 140.
• BAILEY, E.E VE PANZAR, J.C. (1981) , The Contestability of Airline Markets During the Transitionto Deregulation. Law and Contemporary Problems(44), 125 - 145.
• BAILEY, E.E. VE BAUMOL J.W. (1984) , Deregulation and the Theory of Contestable Markets. Yale Journal on Regulation(1), 111 - 137.
• BAİN, J. (1996), Barriers to New Competition. European Journal of Political Economy, 211 - 223.
• BAUMOL, W.J. VE LEE, K.S. (1991), Contestable Markets, Trade and Developments. The World Bank Observer(6), 1-17.
• BAUMOL W.J. VE WILLING R.D. (1986), Contestability: Developments since the Book. Oxford Economics Papers(38), 9-36.
• BAUMOL W.J., PANZAR J.C. VE WILLIG R. D. (1983), Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure: A Review Article. Journal of Economic Literature(21), 981 - 990.
• BAUMOL, W. (1982), Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure. American Economic Association(72), 1-15.
• BOCUTOĞLU, E. (2016), İktisadi Düşünceler Tarihi. Bursa: Ekin Basın Yayın Dağıtım.
• BRATLAND, J. (2003), Contestability: A New Theory of Natural Monopoly . Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of The Interior .
• MCCONNEL C VE BRUE S. (1993), Microeconomics. Newyork: McGrow Hill Inc.
• ÇERMİKLİ, H. (1997), Yarışılabilir Piyasalar Teorisi, Charter Firmalar ve Avrupa Uluslararası Sivil Havacılık Piyasası. Ekonomik Yaklaşım, 8(26), 105-117.
• ÇERMİKLİ, H. (2002), Piyasa Gücü ve Firma Davranışları. Ankara: Atlas Yayın Dağıtım.
• ÇOBAN, O. (2003), Endüstri İktisadı ve Oyun Teorisi. Bursa: Ekin Kitapevi.
• DAVIES, J. (1986), Competition, Contestability and the Liner Shipping Industry. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy(16), 299-312.
• DAVİES, J. (1990), Destructive Competition and Market Sustainability in the Liner Shipping Industry. International Journal of Transport Economics(16), 227 - 245.
• FRANK, B VE J.C. BUNEL. (1991), Contestability, competition and regulation, The case of liner shipping. International Journal of Industrial Organisation, 9, 141-159.
• GALE, D. (1987), Limit Theorems for Markets with Sequential Bargaining. Journal of Economic Theory, 20 - 54.
• GELLES, G.M. VE MITCHELL D.W. (1996), Return to Scale and Economies of Scale. Journal of Economic Education , 259 - 261.
• GÖKÇE, A. (2002), İMKB'de Fiyat Hacim İlişkisi: Granger Nedensellik Testi. Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi.
• GRANGER C.W.J. (1969), Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-spectral Methods. Econometrica, 424 - 438.
• GÜNALP, B. VE ÖZEL, H. (2005), Rekabet Politikalarının Esasları. Piyasa Dergisi(1), 64 - 84.
• HİRATA, E. (2017), Contestability of Container Liner Shipping Market in Alliance Era. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics(33), 27 - 32.
• JANKOWSKI, W. (1989a), Competition, Contestability and the Liner Shipping Industry; a Comment. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 199-203.
• JANKOWSKI, W. (1989b), The Development of Liner Shipping Conferences: A Game Theoretical Explanation. International Journal of Transport Economics (16), 313 - 328.
• KAHRAMAN, S. NART, E.Ç. (2008), Yarışılan Piyasa. Journal of Yaşar University, 3(10), 1301 - 1312.
• KAPLAN, R.T, LUSKI, I. VE WETTSTEİN, D. (2002), Innovative Activity and Sunk Cost. Department of Economics Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 1 - 43.
• KAZGAN, G. (2012), İktisadi Düşünce veya Politik İktisadın Evrimi. İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi.
• KOREEDA, M. (1989), Contestable Market and Cost Structure. Nagasaki University's Academic Output, 19 - 29.
• MACLEOD, W.B. (1987), Entry, Sunk Cost and Market Structure. The Canadian Journal of Economics(20), 140 - 151.
• PEARSON, R. (1987), Some doubts on the contestability of liner shipping markets. Maritime Policy and Management(14), 71-78.
• REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT. (1985 - 2016), New York and Geneva: UNCTAD.
• SAVAŞ, V. (2007), İktisadın Tarihi. Ankara: Siyasal Kitapevi.
• SAYERS, C. (1986), Contestability Theory An Assessment of its Relevance to Australian Liner Shipping . Bureau of Transport Economics , 1-30.
• SHASHIKUMAR, N. (1995), Competition and models of market structure in liner shipping. Transport Reviews(15), 3-26.
• SMITH, W.R. (1956), Product Differentiation and Market Segmentation as Alternative Marketing Strategies. American Marketing Association, 3 - 8.
• STOPFORD, M. (2016), Denizcilik Ekonomisi. (O. Duru, Çev.)
• SUTTON, J. (1991), Sunk Cost And Market Structure. Massachusetts, London: MIT Press.
• TARI, R. (2015), Ekonometri. Kocaeli: Umuttepe Yayınları.
• WANG, H. VE YANG B.Z. (2001), Fixed and Sunk Costs Revisited. The Journal of Economic Education(32), 178-185.
• WEITZMAN, M. L. (1983), Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure: Comment. The American Economic Review(73), 486-487.
• ZERBY, J. (1988), Clarifying some issues relating to contestability in liner shipping. and perhaps eliminating some doubts. Maritime Policy and Management(15), 5-14.