公共竞争会排挤私人投资吗?市政提供互联网接入的证据

Kyle Wilson
{"title":"公共竞争会排挤私人投资吗?市政提供互联网接入的证据","authors":"Kyle Wilson","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2848569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Government investment in infrastructure may crowd out private investment that would have otherwise occurred. But, the threat of government intervention may also induce private firms to invest preemptively in infrastructure, in order to maintain their market position. This leaves the net effect of public competition on private investment unclear. This paper investigates the tension between these competing effects by providing evidence from the setting of internet service provision. Using household survey data and a novel data set of internet plan characteristics, I provide nationwide estimates of demand for internet technologies. I then use these results to estimate a dynamic oligopoly model of private and public internet service providers’ entry and technology adoption decisions, where private firms are driven by profits and municipalities by some (as yet) unknown combination of profits and consumer welfare. Finally, I simulate firms’ actions under a ban on public provision and find evidence that public competition partially, but not completely, crowds out private investment. Ultimately, I find that a ban on municipal provision in 30 states would result in a loss in consumer welfare of $1.11 billion over 20 years.","PeriodicalId":11837,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Public Competition Crowd Out Private Investment? Evidence from Municipal Provision of Internet Access\",\"authors\":\"Kyle Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2848569\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Government investment in infrastructure may crowd out private investment that would have otherwise occurred. But, the threat of government intervention may also induce private firms to invest preemptively in infrastructure, in order to maintain their market position. This leaves the net effect of public competition on private investment unclear. This paper investigates the tension between these competing effects by providing evidence from the setting of internet service provision. Using household survey data and a novel data set of internet plan characteristics, I provide nationwide estimates of demand for internet technologies. I then use these results to estimate a dynamic oligopoly model of private and public internet service providers’ entry and technology adoption decisions, where private firms are driven by profits and municipalities by some (as yet) unknown combination of profits and consumer welfare. Finally, I simulate firms’ actions under a ban on public provision and find evidence that public competition partially, but not completely, crowds out private investment. Ultimately, I find that a ban on municipal provision in 30 states would result in a loss in consumer welfare of $1.11 billion over 20 years.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2848569\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other IO: Empirical Studies of Firms & Markets (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2848569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

政府对基础设施的投资可能会排挤原本会出现的私人投资。但是,政府干预的威胁也可能诱使私营企业先发制人地投资基础设施,以保持其市场地位。这使得公共竞争对私人投资的净影响变得不明朗。本文通过提供互联网服务提供环境的证据来研究这些竞争效应之间的紧张关系。利用家庭调查数据和互联网计划特征的新数据集,我提供了对互联网技术需求的全国估计。然后,我使用这些结果来估计私营和公共互联网服务提供商的进入和技术采用决策的动态寡头垄断模型,其中私营公司由利润驱动,而市政当局由一些(迄今)未知的利润和消费者福利组合驱动。最后,我模拟了公司在禁止公共供应的情况下的行为,并找到证据表明,公共竞争部分地(而不是完全)排挤了私人投资。最终,我发现在30个州禁止市政供应将导致消费者福利在20年内损失11.1亿美元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does Public Competition Crowd Out Private Investment? Evidence from Municipal Provision of Internet Access
Government investment in infrastructure may crowd out private investment that would have otherwise occurred. But, the threat of government intervention may also induce private firms to invest preemptively in infrastructure, in order to maintain their market position. This leaves the net effect of public competition on private investment unclear. This paper investigates the tension between these competing effects by providing evidence from the setting of internet service provision. Using household survey data and a novel data set of internet plan characteristics, I provide nationwide estimates of demand for internet technologies. I then use these results to estimate a dynamic oligopoly model of private and public internet service providers’ entry and technology adoption decisions, where private firms are driven by profits and municipalities by some (as yet) unknown combination of profits and consumer welfare. Finally, I simulate firms’ actions under a ban on public provision and find evidence that public competition partially, but not completely, crowds out private investment. Ultimately, I find that a ban on municipal provision in 30 states would result in a loss in consumer welfare of $1.11 billion over 20 years.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信