OECD Journal: Competition Law and Policy

Frequency :
Annual
ISSN :
1609-7521 (online)
ISSN :
1560-7771 (print)
DOI :
10.1787/16097521
Hide / Show Abstract

This journal draws on the best of the recent work done for and by the OECD Committee on Competition Law and Policy. Its articles provide insight into the thinking a competition law enforcers, and focus on the practical application of competition law and policy. Here’s what Robert Pitofsky, Chairman of the US Federal Trade Commission said about this new journal when it was launched: "Global competition is the wave of the future, and comparative analysis of the laws and practices of various members of the worldwide community of nations is a necessary corollary. This new OECD Journal of Competition Law and Policy, compiled from OECD Round Table discussions, summaries of recent developments, and articles on topics of special interest, will introduce regulators, practitioners, and scholars to different regulatory approaches around the world and will allow us to consider in a more informed way the strengths and weaknesses of our own systems."

Now published as part of the OECD Journal package.

Also available in: French
 
 
 

Volume 8, Issue 3 You do not have access to this content

Publication Date :
07 Feb 2007
DOI :
10.1787/clp-v8-3-en
Also available in: French

Hide / Hide / Show all Abstracts Articles

Mark Mark Date TitleClick to Access
  07 Feb 2007 Click to Access:  Competition Law and Policy in Mexico, 2004
Jay C. Shaffer

This report on Mexico’s competition law and policy, which was the foundation for a peer review examination in early 2004, is a follow-up to a 1998 OECD assessment. Mexico’s competition commission ("CFC") has become a mature and well-respected agency; however, the degree of general support for competition policy in Mexico remains an open question. The CFC has encountered problems in the courts, and its resources have declined despite an increasing workload. The 2004 report and peer review recommended a number of changes in operations and law to make enforcement and advocacy more effective. In 2006, Mexico revised its basic competition law to incorporate many of these recommendations, such as strengthening investigative powers for onsite inspections, increasing sanctions (including the possibility of orders to divest assets in case of serious, repeat violations) and providing for Senate approval of appointments to the CFC. In response to court rulings that some applications of the previous law were unconstitutional, the revised law now specifies when practices such as predatory pricing, exclusive dealing, cross subsidization and price discrimination would be violations. The merger notification system has been simplified. The amendments have also strengthened the CFC’s roles and powers of advocacy and policy advice in dealing with legislation, regulatory proceedings and other levels of government.

  07 Feb 2007 Click to Access:  Enhancing Beneficial Competition in the Health Professions
OECD

Health professions are overseen by an array of rules and regulations that are justified by the need to protect consumers from unqualified practitioners. The most common method of ensuring practitioner quality is professional licensure. Because health care expertise is necessary to establish the appropriate program of study, training, and examination for new professionals, a licensed profession often directly or indirectly controls its own licensure rules. In this process of selfregulation, a profession exercises its legitimate interest in maintaining the quality of its members. But a self-regulating profession also has the potential to abuse its control over who can practice and how they practice in order to enhance member income.

  07 Feb 2007 Click to Access:  Competition in the Provision of Hospital Services
OECD

Because of the high percentage of national income and government budget typically associated with the provision of hospital services and because there is substantial evidence of hospital services could often be delivered more efficiently than they are, a number of OECD countries have increased the extent to which competitive mechanisms are adopted to increase the efficiency of hospital care delivery. Hospital services are complex set of products and services than comprise many different types of patient-oriented activities and not all services are equally subject to competition. For some services, such as emergency services, a hospital may have few if any competitors. For other services, such as inpatient scheduled surgeries, a hospital may compete for patients with other hospitals that offer comparable care. For still other services, such as diagnostic services, specialist consultations and outpatient services hospitals may at times compete with diagnostic centers, doctors’ offices and ambulatory surgery centers. Competition between providers of hospital services can have a number of impacts, including reducing excessive hospital stays, reducing costs of providing care and improving quality of care. Mechanisms for increasing competition or market forces identified in this paper include: collecting and distributing improved information on provider performance; supporting new entry when entry and exit costs are low; encouraging independent or private operation of facilities; improving allocation of human resources, particularly through reducing anticompetitive restrictions by professionals; introducing prospective pricing in combination with benchmarking; physician-led purchasing; providing for greater consumer choice, particularly when waiting lists are long; introducing contestable management of hospitals; and applying competition law in circumstances where public policy focuses on pro-competitive mechanisms. A competitive mechanism that might work in one system will not necessarily transfer well to another. Moreover, competitive mechanisms may at times increase costs. As health policy makers increase reliance on competitive mechanisms, they may need to think carefully about structural market conditions and potentially involve competition authorities when it appears that participants in the market are acting to restrain or eliminate competition.

Add to Marked List