市场势力与审计市场合谋:西班牙案例

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q3 BUSINESS Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion Pub Date : 2017-08-10 DOI:10.1108/ARLA-11-2015-0307
P. Castro, E. R. Barbadillo, E. B. López
{"title":"市场势力与审计市场合谋:西班牙案例","authors":"P. Castro, E. R. Barbadillo, E. B. López","doi":"10.1108/ARLA-11-2015-0307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nThe purpose of this paper is to analyse whether the major international audit firms reach collusive agreements in Spain, in order to exercise market power and impose higher prices than those of competitors. According to the traditional theory of oligopoly, the ability to achieve these agreements is dependent primarily on the high level of market concentration, so that multiple studies have analysed the relationship between concentration and prices. However, the concentration has serious limitations to infer collusion and therefore the exercise of market power (Dedman and Lennox, 2009). \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nBased on an alternative current of the theory of industrial organisation, the authors use measures of industrial mobility as a measure of collusion or rivalry of firms in oligopolistic markets. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nThe results reveal that international audit firms do not reach collusive agreements to limit competition between them. \n \n \n \n \nSocial implications \n \n \n \n \nAccording to the empirical evidence obtained, the measures taken by the regulatory bodies to avoid market concentration would not be necessary or efficient and they would have significant costs for the audit market (GAO, 2003, 2008; FRC, 2009; European Commission, 2010; Competition Commission, 2013). \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nTo the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to introduce mobility measures to explain market collusion and the exercise of market power in the audit market.","PeriodicalId":45515,"journal":{"name":"Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Market power and audit market collusion: the Spanish case\",\"authors\":\"P. Castro, E. R. Barbadillo, E. B. López\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ARLA-11-2015-0307\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nThe purpose of this paper is to analyse whether the major international audit firms reach collusive agreements in Spain, in order to exercise market power and impose higher prices than those of competitors. According to the traditional theory of oligopoly, the ability to achieve these agreements is dependent primarily on the high level of market concentration, so that multiple studies have analysed the relationship between concentration and prices. However, the concentration has serious limitations to infer collusion and therefore the exercise of market power (Dedman and Lennox, 2009). \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nDesign/methodology/approach \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nBased on an alternative current of the theory of industrial organisation, the authors use measures of industrial mobility as a measure of collusion or rivalry of firms in oligopolistic markets. \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nFindings \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nThe results reveal that international audit firms do not reach collusive agreements to limit competition between them. \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nSocial implications \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nAccording to the empirical evidence obtained, the measures taken by the regulatory bodies to avoid market concentration would not be necessary or efficient and they would have significant costs for the audit market (GAO, 2003, 2008; FRC, 2009; European Commission, 2010; Competition Commission, 2013). \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nOriginality/value \\n \\n \\n \\n \\nTo the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to introduce mobility measures to explain market collusion and the exercise of market power in the audit market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45515,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-11-2015-0307\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ARLA-11-2015-0307","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文的目的是分析主要的国际审计公司是否在西班牙达成串通协议,以行使市场力量和强加比竞争对手更高的价格。根据传统的寡头垄断理论,达成这些协议的能力主要取决于市场集中度的高水平,因此有多项研究分析了集中度与价格之间的关系。然而,集中度严重限制了推断共谋和市场力量的行使(Dedman和Lennox, 2009)。基于产业组织理论的另一种潮流,作者使用产业流动性的衡量标准作为寡头垄断市场中企业勾结或竞争的衡量标准。结果表明,国际审计事务所之间不存在限制竞争的合谋协议。根据所获得的经验证据,监管机构为避免市场集中而采取的措施既没有必要也没有效率,而且会给审计市场带来巨大的成本(GAO, 2003,2008;FRC, 2009;欧盟委员会,2010;竞争委员会,2013)。据作者所知,这是第一个引入流动性措施来解释审计市场中市场合谋和市场权力行使的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Market power and audit market collusion: the Spanish case
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse whether the major international audit firms reach collusive agreements in Spain, in order to exercise market power and impose higher prices than those of competitors. According to the traditional theory of oligopoly, the ability to achieve these agreements is dependent primarily on the high level of market concentration, so that multiple studies have analysed the relationship between concentration and prices. However, the concentration has serious limitations to infer collusion and therefore the exercise of market power (Dedman and Lennox, 2009). Design/methodology/approach Based on an alternative current of the theory of industrial organisation, the authors use measures of industrial mobility as a measure of collusion or rivalry of firms in oligopolistic markets. Findings The results reveal that international audit firms do not reach collusive agreements to limit competition between them. Social implications According to the empirical evidence obtained, the measures taken by the regulatory bodies to avoid market concentration would not be necessary or efficient and they would have significant costs for the audit market (GAO, 2003, 2008; FRC, 2009; European Commission, 2010; Competition Commission, 2013). Originality/value To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to introduce mobility measures to explain market collusion and the exercise of market power in the audit market.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
The role of dynamic capabilities on the effectiveness of organizational changes in public sector Sustainable strategies and firm performance in manufacturing industry of Coahuila, Mexico Economic-financial performance and value creation in the Brazilian construction industry Firm certification and export performance: the case of the “SME Leader” label Innovation in the tourism sector, organizational learning and performance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1