DOCSLIB.ORG

The Firm: Cost and Output Determination 303

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Firm: Cost and 22 Output Determination Learning Objectives After you have studied this chapter, you should be able to 1. define short run, long run, production, production function, law of diminishing marginal product, average physical product, marginal physical product, total costs, fixed costs, variable costs, average fixed costs, average variable costs, average total costs, marginal costs, planning horizon, long-run average cost curve, planning curve, economies of scale, constant returns to scale, diseconomies of scale, and minimum efficient scale; 2. distinguish between the firm’s short run and its long run; 3. apply the law of diminishing marginal product to account for the shape of the firm’s short-run marginal cost curve, average total cost curve, and average variable cost curve; 4. classify firm costs as fixed or variable costs; 5. calculate average total costs, average fixed costs, average variable costs, and marginal costs, given sufficient information; 6. apply the concepts of economies of scale, diseconomies of scale, and constant returns to scale to predict the shape of a firm’s long-run average cost curve; 7. list reasons for economies of scale and for diseconomies of scale; and 8. understand the concept of minimum efficient scale (MES). Outline 1. The short run is defined as that time period in which a firm cannot alter its current size of plant. The long run is that time period in which all factors of production can be varied. ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. 302 Miller • Economics Today, Seventeenth Edition 2. Total costs are identical to total fixed costs plus total variable costs. a. Total fixed costs do not vary with output. b. Total variable costs are the sum of all those costs that vary with output. c. There are several short-run average cost curves. i. Average total costs equal total costs divided by output. ii. Average variable costs equal total variable costs divided by output. iii. Average fixed costs equal total fixed costs divided by output. d. Marginal cost equals the change in total costs divided by the change in output. e. When marginal cost is above average cost, average cost rises. When marginal cost is below average cost, average cost falls. When marginal cost equals average cost, average cost remains constant. f. The marginal cost curve intersects the average total cost curve and the average variable cost curve at their respective minimum points. 3. The production function is a relationship between inputs and outputs. The production function is a technological, not an economic, relationship. a. The law of diminishing marginal product comes into play when the firm increases output in the short run. b. The marginal physical product is the change in total product that occurs when a variable input is increased and all other inputs are held constant. c. The law of diminishing marginal product implies that the marginal physical product of labor eventually falls. 4. Diminishing marginal product causes the marginal cost curve, the average total cost curve, and the average variable cost curve to rise. 5. In the long run, all inputs are variable, and long-run cost curves must take this into account. a. The long-run average cost curve is the locus of points representing the minimum unit cost of producing any given rate of output, given current technology and resource prices. b. Another name for the long-run average cost curve is the planning horizon. 6. The long-run average cost curve is U-shaped. a. Initially a firm experiences economies of scale due to specialization, a dimensional factor, or improved productive equipment. b. Eventually a firm might experience diseconomies of scale because a disproportionate increase in management and staff may be needed, and because the costs of information and communication also grow more than proportionally with output. 7. The minimum efficient scale is the lowest rate of output per unit time period at which average costs reach a minimum for a particular firm. ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 22 The Firm: Cost and Output Determination 303 Key Terms Average fixed costs Economies of scale Planning curve Average physical product Fixed costs Plant size Average total costs Long-run average cost curve Production Average variable costs Marginal costs Total costs Constant returns to scale Marginal physical product Variable costs Key Concepts Diseconomies of scale Planning horizon Law of diminishing marginal Production function product Short run Long run Minimum efficient scale Completion Questions Fill in the blank, or circle the correct term. 1. Our definition of the short run is the time during which _____________________ is fixed, but _______________________ is variable. 2. In the long run (no, all) factors are variable. 3. Fixed costs (do, do not) vary with output. Variable costs (do, do not) vary with output. 4. (Rent, Wages) and (mortgage interest payments, raw materials costs) are examples of fixed costs. (Rent, Wages) and (mortgage interest payments, raw materials costs) are examples of variable costs. 5. Short-run average cost curves eventually are upward sloping due to ______________. 6. If marginal cost exceeds average total cost, then average total cost will (fall, rise, remain constant). 7. At the minimum of the average total cost curve, marginal cost is (less than, greater than, equal to) average total cost. 8. If marginal cost is less than average total cost, then average total cost will (fall, rise, remain constant). 9. Because of the law of diminishing marginal product, in the (short, long) run the marginal product of labor will eventually (fall, rise, remain constant). ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. 304 Miller • Economics Today, Seventeenth Edition 10. The long-run cost curve typically is U-shaped because initially, as a firm expands its scale of operations, it realizes _____________________ of scale. Then the firm may realize __________ returns to scale. Eventually, the firm realizes _________________ of scale. 11. Reasons for economies of scale include ____________________, ___________________, and ____________________. 12. A firm might experience diseconomies of scale due to ________________ and ________________. True-False Questions Circle the T if the statement is true, the F if it is false. Explain to yourself why a statement is false. T F 1. Short-run cost curves that include variable costs eventually reflect the influence of the law of diminishing marginal product. T F 2. Fixed costs vary with output. T F 3. Eventually, as output expands, the short-run marginal cost curve must rise. T F 4. When average total cost exceeds marginal cost, marginal cost must be rising. T F 5. When average variable cost is less than marginal cost, marginal cost must be falling. T F 6. At the minimum average total cost output level, marginal cost equals average total cost. T F 7. In the short run, the supply of labor to the firm is usually fixed. T F 8. Because of the law of diminishing marginal product, the marginal product of labor will rise. T F 9. Long-run cost curves are U-shaped due to the law of diminishing marginal product. T F 10. The minimum efficient scale is the lowest scale of output at which long-run average total cost is as low as possible. Multiple Choice Questions Circle the letter that corresponds to the best answer. 1. In the short run, for our purposes, a. all factors are variable. b. labor is variable. c. capital is variable. d. both capital and labor are variable. ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 22 The Firm: Cost and Output Determination 305 2. The long run a. permits the variation of all factors of production. b. is different for different firms. c. permits a firm to avoid the consequences of the law of diminishing marginal product. d. All of the above. 3. Fixed costs a. vary with output. b. do not vary with output. c. reflect the effect of diminishing marginal product. d. include labor and raw materials costs. 4. In the short run, which cost is not fixed? a. rent b. wages c. opportunity cost of capital d. interest payments on borrowed money 5. If marginal cost is above average total cost, then average total cost a. will rise. b. will fall. c. will remain constant. d. cannot be calculated. 6. At that output where average total cost is at a minimum, a. marginal cost equals average total cost. b. marginal cost equals average variable cost. c. average total cost is rising. d. total cost is constant. 7. Which short-run curve is not U-shaped? a. average total cost b. marginal cost c. average variable cost d. average fixed cost 8. The production function a. is a technological relationship. b. is not an economic relationship. c. relates output to inputs. d. All of the above. ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. 306 Miller • Economics Today, Seventeenth Edition 9. Because of the law of diminishing marginal product, a. long-run average cost eventually rises. b. marginal cost falls. c. the marginal product of labor eventually falls. d. the average total cost curve falls. 10. Which is not due to the law of diminishing marginal product? a. rising short-run marginal cost b. rising long-run average total cost c. rising short-run average variable cost d. rising short-run average total cost 11. Analogy: Diminishing marginal product is to rising short-run average total costs as __________ is to rising long-run average total costs. a. economies of scale b. diseconomies of scale c. law of diminishing marginal product d. constant returns to scale 12. Which of the following helps to account for a U-shaped short-run average total cost curve? a. economies of scale b. diseconomies of scale c. law of diminishing marginal product d. constant returns to scale 13.
Recommended publications
  • 1 Objective 2 Examples of Cost Functions

    1 Objective 2 Examples of Cost Functions

    BEE1020 { Basic Mathematical Economics Dieter Balkenborg Week 8, Lecture Thursday 28.11.02 Department of Economics Increasing and convex functions University of Exeter 1Objective The ¯rst and the second derivative of a function contain important qualitative information about the graph of a function. The ¯rst derivative of a function measures the steepness of its graph. The second derivative (the derivative of the derivative) measures how \curved" the graph is. We illustrate this and discuss for cost functions what it means in economic terms. 2 Examples of cost functions A function describes how one quantity changes in response to another quantity. An ex- ample is the total cost function of a ¯rm. Consider, for instance, a publisher selling a particular newspaper. His production costs depend on the number of newspapers he prints. This information { together with information on the demand side { will be im- portant if the publisher tries to make a pro¯t out of his business. There are three ways to describe the relation between production costs and the number of newspapers produced: 1. by a table, 2. by a graph, 3. using an algebraic expression to describe the relationship. Here are three examples of types of cost functions frequently used in microeconomics. 2.1 Example 1: Constant marginal costs In tabular form: quantity (in 100.000) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 total costs (in 1000$) 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 With the aid of a graph: 220 200 180 160 140 TC120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1234567Q In algebraic form: TC(Q)=90+20Q 2.2 Example 2: Increasing
  • A Primer on Profit Maximization

    A Primer on Profit Maximization

    Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Faculty Scholarship for the College of Business College of Business Fall 2011 A Primer on Profit aM ximization Robert Carbaugh Central Washington University, [email protected] Tyler Prante Los Angeles Valley College Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/cobfac Part of the Economic Theory Commons, and the Higher Education Commons Recommended Citation Carbaugh, Robert and Tyler Prante. (2011). A primer on profit am ximization. Journal for Economic Educators, 11(2), 34-45. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Business at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship for the College of Business by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU. 34 JOURNAL FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATORS, 11(2), FALL 2011 A PRIMER ON PROFIT MAXIMIZATION Robert Carbaugh1 and Tyler Prante2 Abstract Although textbooks in intermediate microeconomics and managerial economics discuss the first- order condition for profit maximization (marginal revenue equals marginal cost) for pure competition and monopoly, they tend to ignore the second-order condition (marginal cost cuts marginal revenue from below). Mathematical economics textbooks also tend to provide only tangential treatment of the necessary and sufficient conditions for profit maximization. This paper fills the void in the textbook literature by combining mathematical and graphical analysis to more fully explain the profit maximizing hypothesis under a variety of market structures and cost conditions. It is intended to be a useful primer for all students taking intermediate level courses in microeconomics, managerial economics, and mathematical economics. It also will be helpful for students in Master’s and Ph.D.
  • Report No. 2020-06 Economies of Scale in Community Banks

    Report No. 2020-06 Economies of Scale in Community Banks

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Staff Studies Report No. 2020-06 Economies of Scale in Community Banks December 2020 Staff Studies Staff www.fdic.gov/cfr • @FDICgov • #FDICCFR • #FDICResearch Economies of Scale in Community Banks Stefan Jacewitz, Troy Kravitz, and George Shoukry December 2020 Abstract: Using financial and supervisory data from the past 20 years, we show that scale economies in community banks with less than $10 billion in assets emerged during the run-up to the 2008 financial crisis due to declines in interest expenses and provisions for losses on loans and leases at larger banks. The financial crisis temporarily interrupted this trend and costs increased industry-wide, but a generally more cost-efficient industry re-emerged, returning in recent years to pre-crisis trends. We estimate that from 2000 to 2019, the cost-minimizing size of a bank’s loan portfolio rose from approximately $350 million to $3.3 billion. Though descriptive, our results suggest efficiency gains accrue early as a bank grows from $10 million in loans to $3.3 billion, with 90 percent of the potential efficiency gains occurring by $300 million. JEL classification: G21, G28, L00. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the United States. FDIC Staff Studies can be cited without additional permission. The authors wish to thank Noam Weintraub for research assistance and seminar participants for helpful comments. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, [email protected], 550 17th St. NW, Washington, DC 20429 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, [email protected], 550 17th St.
  • Working Paper No

    Working Paper No

    Department of Economics Natural or Unnatural Monopolies in UK Telecommunications? Lisa Correa Working Paper No. 501 September 2003 ISSN 1473-0278 Natural or Unnatural Monopolies In UK ∗ Telecommunications? ≅ Lisa Correa September 2003 ABSTRACT This paper analyses whether scale economies exists in the UK telecommunications industry. The approach employed differs from other UK studies in that panel data for a range of companies is used. This increases the number of observations and thus allows potentially for more robust tests for global subadditivity of the cost function. The main findings from the study reveal that although the results need to be treated with some caution allowing/encouraging infrastructure competition in the local loop may result in substantial cost savings. JEL Classification Numbers: D42, L11, L12, L51, L96, Keywords: Telecommunications, Regulation, Monopoly, Cost Functions, Scale Economies, Subadditivity ∗ The author is indebted to Richard Allard and Paul Belleflamme for their encouragement and advice. She would however also like to thank Richard Green and Leonard Waverman for their insightful comments and recommendations on an earlier version of this paper. All views expressed in the paper and any remaining errors are solely the responsibility of the author. ≅ Department of Economics, Queen Mary, University of London (UK). Preferred e- mail address for comments is [email protected] 1 Natural or Unnatural Monopolies in U.K. Telecommunications? 1. Introduction The UK has historically pursued a policy of infrastructure or local loop competition in the telecommunications market with the aim of delivering dynamic competition, the key focus of which is innovation. Recently, however, Directives from Europe have been issued which could be argued discourages competition in the local loop.
  • Returns to Scale and Size in Agricultural Economics

    Returns to Scale and Size in Agricultural Economics

    Returns to Scale and Size in Agricultural Economics John W. McClelland, Michael E. Wetzstein, and Wesley N. Musser Differences between the concepts of returns to size and returns to scale are systematically reexamined in this paper. Specifically, the relationship between returns to scale and size are examined through the use of the envelope theorem. A major conclusion of the paper is that the level of abstraction in applying a cost function derived from a homothetic technology within a relevant range of the expansion path may not be severe when compared to the theoretical, estimative, and computational advantages of these technologies. Key words: elasticity of scale, envelope theorem, returns to size. Agricultural economists investigating long-run scale, Euler's theorem, and the form of pro- relationships among levels of inputs, outputs, duction functions. However, the direct link be- and costs generally use concepts of returns to tween returns to size and scale is not devel- scale and size. Econometric studies which uti- oped. Hanoch investigates the elasticity of scale lize production or profit functions commonly and size in terms of variation with output and are concerned with returns to scale (de Janvry; illustrates that only at the cost-minimizing in- Lau and Yotopoulos), while synthetic studies put combinations are the two concepts equiv- of relationships between output and cost uti- alent. Hanoch further provides a proposition lize returns to size (Hall and LaVeen; Rich- stating that Frisch's "Regular Ulta-Passum ardson and Condra). However, as noted by Law" is neither necessary nor sufficient for a Bassett, the word scale is sometimes also used production technology to be associated with to mean size (of a plant).
  • Assessing the Role of Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition in the Context of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation: a Canadian Case Study

    Assessing the Role of Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition in the Context of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation: a Canadian Case Study

    ASSESSING THE ROLE OF SCALE ECONOMIES AND IMPERFECT COMPETITION IN THE CONTEXT OF AGRICULTURAL TRADE LIBERALISATION: A CANADIAN CASE STUDY Franqois Delorme and Dominique van der Mensbrugghe CONTENTS Introduction .............................................. 206 I. The implementation of scale economies in WALRAS ............ 207 A. Scale-economy parameters ............................ 209 B. Pricing strategies ................................... 21 1 II. Empirical results ....................................... 218 A. Perfect competition ................................. 220 B. Scale economies and oligopolistic behaviour ............... 222 111. Concluding remarks.. ................................... 225 Technical Annex ........................................... 230 Bibliography .............................................. 233 FranCois Delorme is an Administrator with the Growth Studies Division and Dominique van der Mensbrugghe was a Trainee with the Growth Studies Division. The authors are grateful to John P. Martin, Val Koromzay and Peter Sturm for many perceptive suggestions and substantial comments on an earlier draft. They are also indebted to Kym Anderson, Jean-Marc Burniaux, Avinash Dixit, Robert Ford, Richard Harris, lan Lienert, James Markusen, Victor Norman, J. David Richardson, Benoit Robidoux, Jeff Shafer and Anthony J. Venables for valuable discussions and comments during the course of this work. 205 INTRODUCTION One of the key characteristics of the WALRAS model [as described in Burniaux et a/. (1989)l is that it assumes that all markets are perfectly competi- tive and production takes place under constant returns to scale. In this case, supply curves are flat', although they shift as input prices change. Until recently, this modelling strategy was adopted by most applied general equilibrium (AGE) modellers, since such models are relatively easy to build and their properties are well understood. Simulations of trade liberalisation with such models tend to show rather "small" welfare gains, typically of the order of 1 per cent of GNP or less.
  • Thesis-Marion T.Pdf

    Thesis-Marion T.Pdf

    Assessing the long-term attractiveness of mining a commodity based on the structure of its industry by Tanguy Marion B.S. Advanced Sciences, L’Ecole Polytechnique, 2016 MSc. Economics and Strategy, L’Ecole Polytechnique, 2017 Submitted to the Institute for Data, Systems and Society in partial FulFillment of the requirements for the degree oF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN TECHNOLOGY AND POLICY AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUNE 2019 ©2019 Massachusetts Institute oF Technology. All rights reserved. Signature of Author: Tanguy Marion Institute for Data, Systems and Society Technology and Policy Program May 9, 2019 Certified by: Richard Roth Director, Materials Systems’ Laboratory Research Associate, Materials Systems’ Laboratory Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: Noelle Eckley Sellin Director, Technology and Policy Program Associate Professor, Institute for Data, Systems and Society and Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences 1 2 Assessing the long-term attractiveness of mining a commodity based on the structure of its industry By Tanguy Marion Submitted to the Institute For Data, Systems and Society in partial FulFillment of the requirements For the degree of Masters of Science in Technology and Policy Abstract. Throughout this thesis, we sought to determine which forces drive commodity attractiveness, and how a general Framework could assess the attractiveness oF mining commodities. Attractiveness can be deFined From multiple perspectives (investor, company, policy-maker, mine workers, etc.), which lead to varying measures oF attractiveness. The scope oF this thesis is limited to assessing attractiveness From an investor’s perspectives, wherein the key perFormance indicators (KPIs) For success are risk and return on investments (ROI). To this end, we have studied the structure oF a mining industry with two concurrent approaches.
  • IB Economics HL Study Guide

    IB Economics HL Study Guide

    S T U D Y G UID E HL www.ib.academy IB Academy Economics Study Guide Available on learn.ib.academy Author: Joule Painter Contributing Authors: William van Leeuwenkamp, Lotte Muller, Carlijn Straathof Design Typesetting Special thanks: Andjela Triˇckovi´c This work may be shared digitally and in printed form, but it may not be changed and then redistributed in any form. Copyright © 2018, IB Academy Version: EcoHL.1.2.181211 This work is published under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This work may not used for commercial purposes other than by IB Academy, or parties directly licenced by IB Academy. If you acquired this guide by paying for it, or if you have received this guide as part of a paid service or product, directly or indirectly, we kindly ask that you contact us immediately. Laan van Puntenburg 2a ib.academy 3511ER, Utrecht [email protected] The Netherlands +31 (0) 30 4300 430 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 5 1. Microeconomics 7 – Demand and supply – Externalities – Government intervention – The theory of the firm – Market structures – Price discrimination 2. Macroeconomics 51 – Overall economic activity – Aggregate demand and aggregate supply – Macroeconomic objectives – Government Intervention 3. International Economics 77 – Trade – Exchange rates – The balance of payments – Terms of trade 4. Development Economics 93 – Economic development – Measuring development – Contributions and barriers to development – Evaluation of development policies 5. Definitions 105 – Microeconomics – Macroeconomics – International Economics – Development Economics 6. Abbreviations 125 7. Essay guide 129 – Time Management – Understanding the question – Essay writing style – Worked example 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 INTRODUCTION The foundations of economics Before we start this course, we must first look at the foundations of economics.
  • Profit Maximization

    Profit Maximization

    PROFIT MAXIMIZATION [See Chap 11] 1 Profit Maximization • A profit-maximizing firm chooses both its inputs and its outputs with the goal of achieving maximum economic profits 2 Model • Firm has inputs (z 1,z 2). Prices (r 1,r 2). – Price taker on input market. • Firm has output q=f(z 1,z 2). Price p. – Price taker in output market. • Firm’s problem: – Choose output q and inputs (z 1,z 2) to maximise profits. Where: π = pq - r1z1 – r2z2 3 1 One-Step Solution • Choose (z 1,z 2) to maximise π = pf(z 1,z 2) - r1z1 – r2z2 • This is unconstrained maximization problem. • FOCs are ∂ ( , ) ∂ ( , ) f z1 z2 = f z1 z2 = p r1 and p r2 z1 z2 • Together these yield optimal inputs zi*(p,r 1,r 2). • Output is q*(p,r 1,r 2) = f(z 1*, z2*). This is usually called the supply function. π • Profit is (p,r1,r 2) = pq* - r1z1* - r2z2* 4 1/3 1/3 Example: f(z 1,z 2)=z 1 z2 π 1/3 1/3 • Profit is = pz 1 z2 - r1z1 – r2z2 • FOCs are 1 1 pz − 3/2 z 3/1 = r and pz 3/1 z − 3/2 = r 3 1 2 1 3 1 2 2 • Solving these two eqns, optimal inputs are 3 3 * = 1 p * = 1 p z1 ( p,r1,r2 ) 2 and z2 ( p,r1, r2 ) 2 27 r1 r2 27 1rr 2 • Optimal output 2 * = * 3/1 * 3/1 = 1 p q ( p, r1,r2 ) (z1 ) (z2 ) 9 1rr 2 • Profits 3 π * = * − * − * = 1 p ( p, r1,r2 ) pq 1zr 1 r2 z2 27 1rr 2 5 Two-Step Solution Step 1: Find cheapest way to obtain output q.
  • ECON 200. Introduction to Microeconomics Homework 5 Part I

    ECON 200. Introduction to Microeconomics Homework 5 Part I

    ECON 200. Introduction to Microeconomics Homework 5 Part I Name:________________________________________ [Multiple Choice] 1. Diminishing marginal product explains why, as a firm’s output increases, (d) a. the production function and total-cost curve both get steeper. b. the production function and total-cost curve both get flatter c. the production function gets steeper, while the total-cost curve gets flatter. d. the production function gets flatter, while the total-cost curve gets steeper. 2. A firm is producing 1,000 units at a total cost of $5,000. If it were to increase production to 1,001 units, its total cost would rise to $5,008. What does this information tell you about the firm? (d) a. Marginal cost is $5, and average variable cost is $8. b. Marginal cost is $8, and average variable cost is $5. c. Marginal cost is $5, and average total cost is $8. d. Marginal cost is $8, and average total cost is $5. 3. A firm is producing 20 units with an average total cost of $25 and marginal cost of $15. If it were to increase production to 21 units, which of the following must occur? (c) a. Marginal cost would decrease. b. Marginal cost would increase. c. Average total cost would decrease. d. Average total cost would increase 4. The government imposes a $1,000 per year license fee on all pizza restaurants. Which cost curves shift as a result? (b) a. average total cost and marginal cost b. average total cost and average fixed cost c. average variable cost and marginal cost d.
  • Excess Capacity.Pdf

    Excess Capacity.Pdf

    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Todorova, Tamara Preprint Is There Excess Capacity Really? Theoretical and Practical Research in Economic Fields Suggested Citation: Todorova, Tamara (2015) : Is There Excess Capacity Really?, Theoretical and Practical Research in Economic Fields, ISSN 2068–7710, ASERS Publishing, s.l., Vol. 6, Iss. 2 (12) (Winter), pp. 127-143 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/157217 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Is There Excess Capacity Really? Tamara Todorova American University in Bulgaria Excess capacity is viewed as a distinctive feature and an essential inefficiency of monopolistic competition as the large-group case of imperfect competition.
  • ECO 610: Lecture 4 Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm: Outline

    ECO 610: Lecture 4 Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm: Outline

    ECO 610: Lecture 4 Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm Horizontal Boundaries of the Firm: Outline • Long-run average cost (LRAC) curve • Shape of the LRAC: economies and diseconomies of scale • Optimal plant size: minimum efficient scale (MES) • MES, market demand, and market structure • Horizontal boundaries vs. vertical boundaries • Reasons why economies of scale might occur Product-level economies Plant-level economies Firm-level economies • Economies of scope Choosing a plant size: Long-run average costs and the firm’s planning curve • Now let’s get serious about opening up a fast-food restaurant near the UK campus. You find a location and choose a franchise chain. You set up a meeting with company representatives, at which they open a briefcase and pull out some spreadsheets and blueprints which contain the following information: • [see next slide] • Then they ask you: How many customers do you envision yourself wanting to serve each day? • Answer #1: Duh? • Answer #2: Well, I’ve done some demand forecasting and I envision serving roughly X meals per day. The LRAC curve and economies of scale • Given sufficient time to plan and execute, firms can vary all inputs optimally for whatever scale of operation they desire. • So in reality, firms can choose from many different plant sizes. The LRAC curve is the envelope of all the SRATC curves associated with each different plant size. • The LRAC curve tells us the minimum possible average total cost for producing each output level. • The shape of the LRAC curve tells us how per unit costs change as the firm changes the scale of its operations.