DOCSLIB.ORG

The Market Structure of Higher Learning

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Market Structure of Higher Learning The Park Place Economist Volume 4 Issue 1 Article 16 5-1996 The Market Structure of Higher Learning Brett Roush '97 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/parkplace Recommended Citation Roush '97, Brett (1996) "The Market Structure of Higher Learning," The Park Place Economist: Vol. 4 Available at: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/parkplace/vol4/iss1/16 This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Commons @ IWU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this material in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This material has been accepted for inclusion by faculty at Illinois Wesleyan University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ©Copyright is owned by the author of this document. The Market Structure of Higher Learning Abstract A student embarking on a college search is astounded at the number of higher learning institutions available -- an initial response may be to consider their market structure as one of perfect competition. Upon fkrther consideration, though, one sees this is inaccurate. In fact, the market structure of higher learning incorporates elements of monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and monopoly. An institution may not explicitly be a profit maximizer. However, treating it as such allows predictions of actions to be made by applying the above three market structures. Such predictions include the quantity of education offered as well as advertising tendencies (Section 11), scrutiny of competitors (Section III), and price discrimination (Section IV). This article is available in The Park Place Economist: https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/parkplace/vol4/iss1/16 The Market Structure of Higher Learning Brett Roush I. INTRODUCTION demand curve is downward-sloping. To maximize profit, an institution's offered A student embarking on a college search is enrollment will be the level at which MC = astounded at the number of higher learning MR (see FIGURE 1). Though the quantity institutions available -- an initial response may can be predicted, in this analysis the price is be to consider their market structure as one of not yet determined. Simple mark-up pricing, perfect competition. Upon fkrther characteristic of a monopolistic competitor, consideration, though, one sees this is does not apply, as this paper will later inaccurate. In fact, the market structure of demonstrate. higher learning incorporates elements of monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and FIGURE 1: Quantity Supplied , monopoly. An institution may not explicitly be Monopolistic Competition a profit maximizer. However, treating it as such allows predictions of actions to be made by applying the above three market structures. Such predictions include the quantity of education offered as well as advertising tendencies (Section 11), scrutiny of competitors (Section III), and price discrimination (Section IV). IL MONOPOLISTIC COMPETITION Though thousands of firms offer their product - an education and degree -- each has Q, unique aspects. Campus envircknent, faculty, Quantity academic reputation, location, and countless other differentiate one institution Another important ramification of this fiom another. However, each institution's model - that advertising expenditures are product is a substitute for the others'. (Some significant - relates to the higher education are closer substitutes, of course -- Yale and industry. Each institution has extensive Southwestern Kentucky Bible School are not advertising, both informational (through such equally good substitutes for Harvard). Since mediums as Peterson's Guides and direct each institution has a monopoly over its own mailings to potential applicants) and product and product differentiation is evident, glamorous (such as sports recognition and $25 higher learning can be modelled as a million science buildings). The institution's monopolistic competition market. name is plastered on merchandise, alumni are The first prediction made by the encouraged to express pride in their alma monopolistic competition model is the mater, and the "publish or perish" doctrine at equilibrium quantity supplied. With product many research institutions means you must differentiation, the individual institution's elicit recognition for your name -- and the The Park Place Economist, v. 4 institution's name. Combined, these methods These divisions are made for athletic make advertising a central concern of each competition, but what underlies them? Each institution, as the monopolistic competition division encompasses institutions with similar model predicts. qualities, such as size, student characteristics, Theoretically, the amount of advertising and location. More importantly, a consumer would be such that the marginal revenue from typically chooses one or two of these one extra advertising dollar equals that dollar; categories and then decides among the schools alternatively, the marginal revenue of the included. In a sense, a small number of fhs advertisimg dollar equals the price elasticity of sell to a specific group of consumers in a niche demand. Whether an institution implements of the higher education market. Since the this efficient level is not easily discernible. market is plausibly divided into small units First, many forms of advertising, such as and, as explained earlier, there are barriers to constructing a flashy new building, have entry, an oligopolistic model is appropriate. benefits other than simply increased revenue. One of the few definite predictions the Others, like merchandise bearing the oligopoly model makes does pertain to higher institution's insignia, may actually have no cost learning. This market structure's theory since the advertising itself represents revenue. contends that each institution will scrutinize Moreover, such elements as marginal revenue the others' actions, and must consider fiom advertising expenditures and price reactions when planning their own actions. elasticities are difficult to estimate. The This most certainly occurs. WU observes determination of an institution's efficiency in policies in other small liberal arts universities -- advertising expenditures would be an extensive for example, Dr. Robert Leekley compared research project. faculty salaries and benefits of area An important prediction of the institutions. Also, I recall an article in my monopolistic competition model that does not freshman seminar detailing the monitoring by describe higher learning is that long-run top East coast universities of Duke's economic profits are zero. This conclusion is revolutionary multi-cultural programs. based on the ease of entry and exit of firms, Also, collusion is possible. An example of but higher education presents significant formal collusion would be the small college barriers, such as the necessity for a reputation consortium, where many small colleges in and the large amount of capital required to Illinois unite for employers to recruit students. open an institution This paper will show that, Total benefits are increased - working in fact, long-run profits are possible. individually, each institution would not attract many recruiters. Informal collusion may exist m. OLIGOPOLY as well. I recall rumors of Ivy League admissions counsellors meeting in order to The previous model has another substantial diwy up financial aid for students (who shortcoming when applied to the industry of generally apply to multiple institutions in that higher education - the substitutes vary widely, oligopoly). as mentioned earlier. Instead of one The previous conclusions (under a comprehensive market with some good and monopolistic competition assumption) some poor substitutes, the market is concerning advertising and product segmented into small groups of institutions differentiation are not invalid with an that are considered nearly perfect substitutes. oligopolistic interpretation. Mansfield (1994) Some of this segmentation is reflected in the declares that "In many oligopolistic industries, sports listings: Big 10, PAC 8, Ivy League. firms tend to use nonprice competition, like Roush advertising and variation in product FIGURE 2: Price Discrimination characteristics." This makes sense, since In a Mompoly institutions initially attract students with their reputations and programs rather than p, competitive prices. IV. R MONOPOLY Once an institution is chosen, the market $ structure changes drastically. As mentioned g - before, an institution has a monopoly on its W own product. Also, once a student enters an institution, barriers to entry occur, diierently than described earlier. In this case, it is the consumer, the student, who finds barriers in Q, attempting to bring his business to another Quantity firm. The rigmarole of physically transferring, refinancing, and acclimatizing the student and above and some below the typical price, PE his past course work to a new institution all (see FIGURE 2). If this price were universally help prevent changing the institution providing charged, many students would be unable to the education. Thus a monopoly market attend and the revenue that they offer would - structure applies. be forgone. Here a monopoly's ability to price k The most fascinating application of this
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Socialization of Investment, from Keynes to Minsky and Beyond
    Working Paper No. 822 The Socialization of Investment, from Keynes to Minsky and Beyond by Riccardo Bellofiore* University of Bergamo December 2014 * [email protected] This paper was prepared for the project “Financing Innovation: An Application of a Keynes-Schumpeter- Minsky Synthesis,” funded in part by the Institute for New Economic Thinking, INET grant no. IN012-00036, administered through the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. Co-principal investigators: Mariana Mazzucato (Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex) and L. Randall Wray (Levy Institute). The author thanks INET and the Levy Institute for support of this research. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection presents research in progress by Levy Institute scholars and conference participants. The purpose of the series is to disseminate ideas to and elicit comments from academics and professionals. Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independently funded research organization devoted to public service. Through scholarship and economic research it generates viable, effective public policy responses to important economic problems that profoundly affect the quality of life in the United States and abroad. Levy Economics Institute P.O. Box 5000 Annandale-on-Hudson, NY 12504-5000 http://www.levyinstitute.org Copyright © Levy Economics Institute 2014 All rights reserved ISSN 1547-366X Abstract An understanding of, and an intervention into, the present capitalist reality requires that we put together the insights of Karl Marx on labor, as well as those of Hyman Minsky on finance. The best way to do this is within a longer-term perspective, looking at the different stages through which capitalism evolves.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Exchange During Hyperinflation
    Economic Exchange during Hyperinflation Alessandra Casella Universityof California, Berkeley Jonathan S. Feinstein Stanford University Historical evidence indicates that hyperinflations can disrupt indi- viduals' normal trading patterns and impede the orderly functioning of markets. To explore these issues, we construct a theoretical model of hyperinflation that focuses on individuals and their process of economic exchange. In our model buyers must carry cash while shopping, and some transactions take place in a decentralized setting in which buyer and seller negotiate over the terms of trade of an indivisible good. Since buyers face the constant threat of incoming younger (hence richer) customers, their bargaining position is weak- ened by inflation, allowing sellers to extract a higher real price. How- ever, we show that higher inflation also reduces buyers' search, increasing sellers' wait for customers. As a result, the volume of transactions concluded in the decentralized sector falls. At high enough rates of inflation, all agents suffer a welfare loss. I. Introduction Since. Cagan (1956), economic analyses of hyperinflations have fo- cused attention on aggregate time-series data, especially exploding price levels and money stocks, lost output, and depreciating exchange rates. Work on the German hyperinflation of the twenties provides a We thank Olivier Blanchard, Peter Diamond, Rudi Dornbusch, Stanley Fischer, Bob Gibbons, the referee, and the editor of this Journal for helpful comments. Alessandra Casella thanks the Sloan Foundation
    [Show full text]
  • Market-Structure.Pdf
    This chapter covers the types of market such as perfect competition, monopoly, oligopoly and monopolistic competition, in which business firms operate. Basically, when we hear the word market, we think of a place where goods are being bought and sold. In economics, market is a place where buyers and sellers are exchanging goods and services with the following considerations such as: • Types of goods and services being traded • The number and size of buyers and sellers in the market • The degree to which information can flow freely Perfect or Pure Market Imperfect Market Perfect Market is a market situation which consists of a very large number of buyers and sellers offering a homogeneous product. Under such condition, no firm can affect the market price. Price is determined through the market demand and supply of the particular product, since no single buyer or seller has any control over the price. Perfect Competition is built on two critical assumptions: . The behavior of an individual firm . The nature of the industry in which it operates The firm is assumed to be a price taker The industry is characterized by freedom of entry and exit Industry • Normal demand and supply curves • More supply at higher price Firm • Price takers • Have to accept the industry price Perfect Competition cannot be found in the real world. For such to exist, the following conditions must be observed and required: A large number of sellers Selling a homogenous product No artificial restrictions placed upon price or quantity Easy entry and exit All buyers and sellers have perfect knowledge of market conditions and of any changes that occur in the market Firms are “price takers” There are very many small firms All producers of a good sell the same product There are no barriers to enter the market All consumers and producers have ‘perfect information’ Firms sell all they produce, but they cannot set a price.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the International Economic Organization: Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis Joel P
    Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business Volume 17 Issue 1 Winter Winter 1997 The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the International Economic Organization: Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis Joel P. Trachtman Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njilb Part of the International Trade Commons Recommended Citation Joel P. Trachtman, The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the International Economic Organization: Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis, 17 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 470 (1996-1997) This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. The Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the International Economic Organization: Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis Joel P. Trachtman* Without a theory they had nothing to pass on except a mass of descriptive material waiting for a theory, or a fire. 1 While the kind of close comparative institutional analysis which Coase called for in The Nature of the Firm was once completely outside the universe of mainstream econo- mists, and remains still a foreign, if potentially productive enterrise for many, close com- parative analysis of institutions is home turf for law professors. Hierarchical arrangements are being examined by economic theorists studying the or- ganization of firms, but for less cosmic purposes than would be served3 by political and economic organization of the production of international public goods. I. INTRODUCrION: THE PROBLEM Debates regarding the competences and governance of interna- tional economic organizations such as the World Trade Organization * Associate Professor of International Law, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation, Market Structure and Performance in Telecommunications
    OECD Economic Studies No. 32, 2001/I REGULATION, MARKET STRUCTURE AND PERFORMANCE IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS By Olivier Boylaud and Giuseppe Nicoletti TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 100 Regulation and market structure in telecommunications: a cross-country perspective ... 102 Past trends in regulatory reform............................................................................................ 103 Summarising regulatory reform for empirical analysis ....................................................... 111 Evaluating the effects of regulatory reform on performance in telecommunications........ 117 The empirical approach taken here...................................................................................... 119 The performance data ............................................................................................................122 Empirical results...................................................................................................................... 124 Conclusions.................................................................................................................................. 133 Annex. Panel Data Estimation Techniques ......................................................................... 139 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................ 141 The authors wish
    [Show full text]
  • 0530 New Institutional Economics
    0530 NEW INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS Peter G. Klein Department of Economics, University of Georgia © Copyright 1999 Peter G. Klein Abstract This chapter surveys the new institutional economics, a rapidly growing literature combining economics, law, organization theory, political science, sociology and anthropology to understand social, political and commercial institutions. This literature tries to explain what institutions are, how they arise, what purposes they serve, how they change and how they may be reformed. Following convention, I distinguish between the institutional environment (the background constraints, or ‘rules of the game’, that guide individuals’ behavior) and institutional arrangements (specific guidelines designed by trading partners to facilitate particular exchanges). In both cases, the discussion here focuses on applications, evidence and policy implications. JEL classification: D23, D72, L22, L42, O17 Keywords: Institutions, Firms, Transaction Costs, Specific Assets, Governance Structures 1. Introduction The new institutional economics (NIE) is an interdisciplinary enterprise combining economics, law, organization theory, political science, sociology and anthropology to understand the institutions of social, political and commercial life. It borrows liberally from various social-science disciplines, but its primary language is economics. Its goal is to explain what institutions are, how they arise, what purposes they serve, how they change and how - if at all - they should be reformed. This essay surveys the wide-ranging and rapidly growing literature on the economics of institutions, with an emphasis on applications and evidence. The survey is divided into eight sections: the institutional environment; institutional arrangements and the theory of the firm; moral hazard and agency; transaction cost economics; capabilities and the core competence of the firm; evidence on contracts, organizations and institutions; public policy implications and influence; and a brief summary.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Structures
    Market Structures Lesson Goal: In this lesson, you will learn the characteristics of the 4 types of market ​ structures: perfect competition, monopoly, monopolistic competition, and oligopoly. You ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ will also learn how the government intervenes in the market to protect competition. Directions: Read the notes below CLOSELY for understanding, and follow the prompts ​ given to you throughout the lesson. For example, if I ask you to pause and watch a video and take notes, pause and watch the video. Open a Google Doc and take notes as you work. WHEN the whole lesson is finished, share your completed Google Doc with me. NOTES #1 Perfect Competition The simplest market structure is known as perfect competition. It is also called pure ​ ​ competition. A perfectly competitive market is one with a large number of firms all producing essentially the same product. Pure competition assumes that the market is in equilibrium and that all firms sell the same product for the same price. However, each firm produces so little of the product compared to the total supply that no single firm can hope to influence prices. The only decision such producers can make is how much to produce, given their production costs and the market price. Four Conditions for Perfect Competition While very few industries meet all of the conditions for perfect competition, some come close. For example, markets for many farm products and the stocks traded on the New York Stock Exchange meet the conditions for perfect competition. The 4 conditions are: 1. Many buyers and sellers participate in the market. 2. Sellers offer identical products.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding and Maximizing America's Evolutionary Economy
    UNDERSTANDING AND MAXIMIZING AMERICA’S EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMY ITIF The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation DR. ROBERT D. ATKINSON i UNDERSTANDING AND MAXIMIZING AMERICA’S EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMY DR. ROBERT D. ATKINSON OCTOBER 2014 DR. ROBERT D. ATKINSON ITIF The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation In the conventional view, the U.S. economy is a static entity, changing principally only in size (growing in normal times and contracting during recessions). But in reality, our economy is a constantly evolving complex ecosystem. The U.S. economy of 2014 is different, not just larger, than the economy of 2013. Understanding that we are dealing with an evolutionary rather than static economy has significant implications for the conceptu- alization of both economics and economic policy. Unfortunately, the two major economic doctrines that guide U.S. policymakers’ thinking—neoclassical economics and neo-Keynesian economics—are rooted in overly simplistic models of how the economy works and therefore generate flawed policy solutions. Because these doctrines emphasize the “economy as machine” model, policymakers have developed a mechanical view of policy; if they pull a lever (e.g., implement a regulation, program, or tax policy), they will get an expected result. In actuality, economies are complex evolutionary systems, which means en- abling and ensuring robust rates of evolution requires much more than the standard menu of favored options blessed by the prevailing doctrines: limiting government (for conservatives), protecting worker and “consumer” welfare (for liberals), and smoothing business cycles (for both). As economies evolve, so too do doctrines Any new economic and governing systems. After WWII when the framework for America’s United States was shifting from what Michael “fourth republic” needs Lind calls the second republic (the post-Civil War governance system) to the third republic to be grounded in an (the post-New-Deal, Great Society governance evolutionary understanding.
    [Show full text]
  • Fintech and Market Structure in Financial Services
    FinTech and market structure in financial services: Market developments and potential financial stability implications 14 February 2019 The Financial Stability Board (FSB) is established to coordinate at the international level the work of national financial authorities and international standard-setting bodies in order to develop and promote the implementation of effective regulatory, supervisory and other financial sector policies. Its mandate is set out in the FSB Charter, which governs the policymaking and related activities of the FSB. These activities, including any decisions reached in their context, shall not be binding or give rise to any legal rights or obligations under the FSB’s Articles of Association. Contacting the Financial Stability Board Sign up for e-mail alerts: www.fsb.org/emailalert Follow the FSB on Twitter: @FinStbBoard E-mail the FSB at: [email protected] Copyright © 2019 Financial Stability Board. Please refer to: www.fsb.org/terms_conditions/ Table of Contents Page Executive summary .................................................................................................................... 1 1. Background and definitions ............................................................................................... 3 2. Financial innovation and links to market structure ............................................................ 5 2.1 Supply factors – technological developments ............................................................ 6 2.2 Supply factors – regulation .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • New Institutional Economics
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Missouri: MOspace 0530 NEW INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS Peter G. Klein Department of Economics, University of Georgia © Copyright 1999 Peter G. Klein Abstract This chapter surveys the new institutional economics, a rapidly growing literature combining economics, law, organization theory, political science, sociology and anthropology to understand social, political and commercial institutions. This literature tries to explain what institutions are, how they arise, what purposes they serve, how they change and how they may be reformed. Following convention, I distinguish between the institutional environment (the background constraints, or ‘rules of the game’, that guide individuals’ behavior) and institutional arrangements (specific guidelines designed by trading partners to facilitate particular exchanges). In both cases, the discussion here focuses on applications, evidence and policy implications. JEL classification: D23, D72, L22, L42, O17 Keywords: Institutions, Firms, Transaction Costs, Specific Assets, Governance Structures 1. Introduction The new institutional economics (NIE) is an interdisciplinary enterprise combining economics, law, organization theory, political science, sociology and anthropology to understand the institutions of social, political and commercial life. It borrows liberally from various social-science disciplines, but its primary language is economics. Its goal is to explain what institutions are, how they arise,
    [Show full text]
  • Ans. Meaning of Market: Ordinarily, the Term ―Market‖ Refers to a Particular Place Where Goods Are Purchased and Sold
    MODULE=III Q.1.Explain different market structure & their characterstics. Ans. Meaning of Market: Ordinarily, the term ―market‖ refers to a particular place where goods are purchased and sold. But, in economics, market is used in a wide perspective. In economics, the term ―market‖ does not mean a particular place but the whole area where the buyers and sellers of a product are spread. This is because in the present age the sale and purchase of goods are with the help of agents and samples. Hence, the sellers and buyers of a particular commodity are spread over a large area. The transactions for commodities may be also through letters, telegrams, telephones, internet, etc. Thus, market in economics does not refer to a particular market place but the entire region in which goods are bought and sold. In these transactions, the price of a commodity is the same in the whole market. According to Prof. R. Chapman, ―The term market refers not necessarily to a place but always to a commodity and the buyers and sellers who are in direct competition with one another.‖ In the words of A.A. Cournot, ―Economists understand by the term ‗market‘, not any particular place in which things are bought and sold but the whole of any region in which buyers and sellers are in such free intercourse with one another that the price of the same goods tends to equality, easily and quickly.‖ Prof. Cournot‘s definition is wider and appropriate in which all the features of a market are found. Contents : 1. Meaning of Market 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Structure: Oligopoly (Imperfect Competition)
    Market Structure: Oligopoly (Imperfect Competition) I. Characteristics of Imperfectly Competitive Industries A. Monopolistic Competition • large number of potential buyers and sellers • differentiated product (every firm produces a different product) • buyers and sellers are small relative to the market • no barriers to entry or exit B. Oligopoly • large number of potential buyers but only a few sellers • homogenous or differentiated product • buyers are small relative to the market but sellers are large • barriers to entry C. What is product differentiation? • Product differentiation occurs when firms sell similar but not identical products. • Examples? • Two kinds of product differentiation. • Real product differentiation = actual differences exist between the goods produced by different firms. • Imaginary product differentiation = no actual differences but consumer believe there are and act as if there were differences between the goods produced by different firms. • Impact of product differentiation on firm demand. Recall that a perfectly competitive firm is a price taker with demand that is perfectly elastic. A price taker cannot raise its price without losing all of its quantity demanded. If that firm can differentiate its product then it will no longer be a price taker. Rather, it can now raise its price and not lose all of its quantity demanded, although it will still lose some. Thus, product differentiation causes a firm’s demand to become larger and less elastic. • Relationship between firm demand and market demand. Firms have more competitors than does the entire market because they have both the competitors from other goods that the market has plus the competition from other firms within the same market.
    [Show full text]