This paper undertakes structural estimation of asymmetric auction models in a market for basmati, and detects the presence of a cartel consisting of a large (in market share) local miller and commission agents purchasing for large distant millers. The contracts between the distant millers and their commission agents help to explain the specific form that collusion takes. Simulations indicate that (i) the cartel gains considerably by colluding, over the competitive outcome; (ii) however, sellers (farmers) do not lose significantly under collusion when the commission agents bid. The paper also shows that efficient collusion, the form of collusion commonly assumed in the literature, does not explain the data well.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Banerji et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: