基于超边际交易费用范式的垄断与反垄断理论再构建及经验验证

The neo-classical monopolistic theory is deficient in methodology both because of its lack of thorough understanding about competition and its property of dichotomy. The following improved documents after that are full of rich insight but still fail to get rid of neo-classical paradigm. This research is not to improve the neo-classical monopolistic theory but to use the paradigm of infra-marginal transactional cost to establish an analytic frame on monopoly, which approaches much more to the reality. The establishment of the framework aims not only to offer proper understanding for the causes and consequences market power, and to offer theoretical support for China's economic practice in present period, especially for anti-trust and public affair reform practice. It can be regarded as part of the efforts to practice the thought of Changing Microeconomics Structure that Coase advocates. This research is to correct the following neo-classical conclusions such as that efficiency exists where the price equates the cost, that X-efficiency is a new type of efficiency which can be explained independently from allocating efficiency and that X-inefficiency represent another beneficial loss caused by the monopoly. It is concluded in this research that price setting according to marginal cost is not necessarily the optimum, and price setting according to average cost is not necessarily the suboptimum. It is proved that previous economic documents have seriously over-estimated social cost of monopoly. The inferred policy suggestion is not to issue a new anti-trust law, but to perfect the present Law against Unfair Competition in China. This research also propose the direction and principle to amend the Law against Unfair Competition

新古典垄断理论缺乏对竞争理念的深刻理解，呈现"两分"特征，存在方法论缺陷。后续改进工作虽极富洞见，但基本上难脱新古典范式的窠臼。本项目关注的不是在新古典分析框架下所做的改进，而是用超边际交易费用范式建立新的更加接近真实世界的垄断分析框架，不仅为市场势力的原因和后果提供正确的理解，也为我国现阶段的经济实践，特别是为反垄断及公用事业改革实践提供理论支持。这是实践科斯的"改变微观经济学结构"的部分尝试。本项目修正"效率出现在价格等于边际成本的地方"、"X效率是一种区别于配置效率、可以离开配置效率而独立得到说明的新型效率"、"X无效率代表着垄断的另一种福利损失"等新古典结论，发现边际成本定价未必定是最优，平均成本定价也未必是次优。本项目表明经济学严重高估了垄断的社会成本。本项目的政策含义是我国应完善《反不正当竞争法》而不是另外进行《反垄断法》立法，并且指明了修改《反不正当竞争法》的方向和细节。

本项目用超边际交易费用范式建立了新的更加接近真实世界的垄断分析框架。.垄断和竞争由不同因素决定，彼此并不对立。竞争因稀缺性而生，竞争总存在，且并不总是好的，恰恰要对竞争筛选限制。历史成本不是成本，成本决定于并等于价格，只有预期成本才影响价格。劳务只有预期成本，成本曲线本质是预期成本曲线。边际选择的范围很大程度上决定于超边际决策，仅仅根据边际决策不能说明现实世界的效率问题。在正交易费用的情况下，边际等式成立未必有效率，边际等式不成立反而有可能有效率。效率不仅具有条件依存性，而且具有一般均衡性。边际成本定价未必是最优，平均成本定价也未必是次优。.哈伯格三角形只在事前从预期成本曲线来看才存在，事后产品生产出来之后成本决定于并等于价格，哈伯格三角形就不存在了。垄断未必一定导致莱本斯泰因四边形，就算导致其存在，也不会容许它过大。如果存在严重的莱本斯泰因四边形真，那么一定不是垄断的问题，而是产权的问题。不考虑价格和产量扭曲，不可能说明成本扭曲，不能因为成本上升就说存在新型的无效率，区分配置效率和X效率是错误的。哈伯格三角形、莱本斯泰四边形未必代表垄断的社会成本。一般垄断是通过市场竞争获得的，行政垄断则是反市场竞争的产物。两者都叫垄断，其实是性质根本不同。塔洛克四边形只是行政垄断的社会成本。.功利主义分析只有在严格的条件下才能得出垄断存在效率损失、需要政府干预的结论。单从理论上讲这没有问题，但因为现实存在交易费用，几乎无法知道机会成本曲线，因此并不具有实践操作性。如果不涉及权利界定不清的问题，应该遵循权利主义的产权保护的原则。保护产权，就不应该一般地反垄断，而只应反行政垄断。政府在反垄断政策的制定和执行中，应该坚守普遍保护产权、反对市场禁入的原则。我国应完善《反不正当竞争法》而不是另外进行《反垄断法》立法。《反不正当竞争法》应坚守普遍产权保护的原则。.本项目后续希望建立更一般的交易费用范式经济学。