E.CA Economists publish regularly in academic journals, competition and regulation journals and the more popular business press. We speak frequently at conferences, workshops and symposiums.

Page 1 of 49
Papers & reports

Using Compensating Efficiencies to Assess EU Merger Policy

Pauline AffeldtTomaso Duso, Klaus Gugler, Joanna Piechucka, Vox EU, January 2022
Papers & reports

Competitors’ Reactions to Big Tech Acquisitions: Evidence from Mobile Apps

Pauline AffeldtReinhold Kesler, DIW Discussion Paper, DP 1987, December 2021
Papers & reports

Assessing EU Merger Control through Compensating Efficiencies

Pauline AffeldtTomaso Duso, Klaus Gugler, Joanna Piechucka, CEPR Discussion Papers, DP 16705, November 2021
Papers & reports

Collusion among Autonomous Pricing Algorithms Utilizing Function Approximation Methods

Malte JeschonneckDICE, discussion paper, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, August 2021

Papers & reports

Estimating Demand with Multi-Homing in Two-Sided Markets

Pauline AffeldtElena Argentesi, Lapo Filistrucchi, DIW Discussion Paper, DP 1965, August 2021
Papers & reports

Big Tech Acquisitions – Towards Empirical Evidence

Pauline AffeldtReinhold Kesler, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, Volume 12, Issue 6, Pages 471-478, June 2021
Papers & reports

Marktkonzentrationstrend steigt in Dienstleistungsmärkten deutlich

Pauline AffeldtTomaso Duso, Klaus Gugler, Joanna Piechucka, DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institue for Economic Research, Volume 88, Issue 20, Pages 339-347, May 2021
Papers & reports

Concentration in the EU: Where It is Increasing and Why

Pauline AffeldtTomaso Duso, Klaus Gugler, Joanna Piechucka, Promarket, May 2021
Papers & reports

25 Years of European Merger Control

Pauline AffeldtTomaso Duso, Florian Szücs, International Journal of Industrial Organization, Volume 76, 102720, May 2021

How to Choose the Lesser Evil When Defining Local Markets?

Alexis WalckiersOlivier Body, Journal of European Competition & Practice (JECLAP), April 2021

Economists often weigh the pros and cons of different alternatives, none of which is ideal (or first best in economic jargon). The latest paper of our director Alexis Walckiers and his former colleague of the Belgian Competition Authority, Olivier Body, discusses one of such choices: whether to define local markets by relying on catchment areas or by applying a hypothetical monopoly test. It argues that competition authorities should recognise more explicitly that this choice should be driven by the quality of the available data.

They address the issue of geographic market definition, which could be discussed in the context of the review of the Communication on the definition of the relevant market. Specifically, based on the observation that competition authorities use two methods to define the relevant geographic market (the SSNIP test and catchment areas), they argue that the Guidelines should more explicitly recognize that the quality of the available data should guide the choice of the most appropriate method.

Link to article