We have seen that perfectly competitive firms can earn economic profits, normal profits, or losses in the short run because their plant size is fixed, and they cannot exit the industry. We now turn our attention to the long run. In the long run, firms can adjust all factors, even to the point of leaving an industry. And if the industry looks attractive, other firms can enter it in the long run. Why are some industries (such as medical marijuana) thriving, while others (such as photo developing) are declining? The answer is tied to economic profits and losses.
If firms in the industry are earning short-
207
In panel A, the market is initially in equilibrium at point a, with industry supply and demand equal to S0 and D0, and equilibrium price equal to P0. For the typical firm shown in panel B, this translates into a short-
These economic profits (sometimes called supernormal profits) will attract other firms into the industry. Remember that in a perfectly competitive market, entry and exit are easy in the long run; therefore, many firms decide to get in on the action when they see these profits. As a result, industry supply will shift to the right, to S1, where equilibrium is at point b, resulting in a new long-
Consider the opposite situation—
Notice that in Figures 9 and 10, the final equilibrium in the long run is the point at which industry price is just tangent to the minimum point on the ATC curve. At this point, there are no net incentives for firms to enter or leave the industry.
208
If industry price rises above this point, the economic profits being earned will induce other firms to enter the industry; the opposite is true if price falls below this point. A simple way to remember this is with the elimination principle: In a competitive industry in the long run with easy entry and exit, profits are eliminated by firm entry, and losses are eliminated by firm exit.
Competitive processes dominate modern life. You and your friends compete for grades, concert tickets, spouses, jobs, and many other benefits. Competitive markets are simply an extension of the competition inherent in daily life. Figure 11 illustrates the long-
P = MR = MC = SRATCmin = LRATCmin
This equation illustrates why competitive markets are the standard (benchmark) by which all other market structures are evaluated. First, competitive markets exhibit productive efficiency. Products are produced and sold to consumers at their lowest possible opportunity cost. For consumers, this is an excellent situation: They pay no more than minimum production costs plus a profit (a normal profit, to be precise) sufficient to keep producers in business, and consumer surplus shown in panel A is maximized. When we look at monopoly firms in the next chapter, consumers do not get such a good deal.
Second, competitive markets demonstrate allocative efficiency. The price that consumers pay for a given product is equal to marginal cost. Because price represents the value consumers place on a product, and marginal cost represents the opportunity cost to society to produce that product, when these two values are equal, the market is allocating the production of various goods according to consumer wants.
209
Colombian Coffee: The Perils of Existing in a Perfectly Competitive Industry
What aspects of the coffee market make it difficult for Colombian coffee growers to maintain a consistent income every year?
Each day, over 2 billion cups of coffee are consumed globally. Although coffee baristas around the world use their talents to produce the best cup of latte or espresso, the most crucial input remains the coffee bean, which can be produced only in tropical climates with volcanic soil and with the right amount of rain. With an ideal climate, a country can produce billions of pounds of coffee beans, providing income to millions of workers. But what happens when the weather doesn’t cooperate? Farmers in one country, Colombia, can share that experience.
Colombia has long been one of the largest coffee producers in the world. Although it’s never been the top coffee producer (that award goes to Brazil), Colombian coffee is famous due in large part to Colombia’s ideal climate suited for growing high-
Because the price that individual farmers receive for their coffee is determined by the market, fluctuations in coffee prices can result in a large windfall or a devastating drop in a coffee producer’s household income. Moreover, unpredictable weather patterns and crop diseases, as experienced in recent years, can destroy a harvest altogether. The income risk involved with producing in a perfectly competitive industry such as coffee means that farmers need to prepare for a rainy day, both figuratively and literally.
GO TO TO PRACTICE THE ECONOMIC CONCEPTS IN THIS STORY
210
The flip side of these observations is that if a market falls out of equilibrium, the public interest will suffer. If, for instance, output falls below equilibrium, marginal cost will be less than price. Therefore, consumers place a higher value on that product than it is costing firms to produce. Society would be better off if more of the product were put on the market. Conversely, if output rises above the equilibrium level, marginal cost will exceed price. This excess output costs firms more to produce than the value placed on it by consumers. We would be better off if those resources were used to produce another commodity more highly valued by society.
Recall from an earlier chapter that supply curves tend to be more elastic (flat) over time as businesses have time to adjust their output to changing prices. In addition to responding to market prices, firms also respond to changes in production costs as output changes. Economies or diseconomies of scale determine the shape of the long-
Globalization and “The Box”
When we think of disruptive technologies that radically changed an entire market, we typically think of computers, the Internet, and smartphones. Competitors must adapt to the change or wither away. One disruptive technology we take for granted today, but one that changed our world, is “the box”—the standardized shipping container. Today the vast majority of the world’s deep-
Before containers, shipping costs added about 25% to the cost of some goods and represented over 10% of U.S. exports. The process was cumbersome; hundreds of longshoremen would remove boxes of all sizes, dimensions, and weight from a ship and load them individually onto trucks (or from trucks to a ship if they were going the other way). This process took a lot of time, was subject to damage and theft, and was costly and inconvenient for business.
In 1955 Malcom McLean, a North Carolina trucking entrepreneur, got the idea to standardize shipping containers. He originally thought he would drive a truck right onto a ship, drop a trailer, and drive off. Realizing that the wheels would consume a lot of space, he soon settled on standard containers that would stack together, but would also load directly onto a truck trailer. Containers are 20 or 40 feet long, 8 feet wide, and 8 or 8½ feet tall. This standardization greatly reduced the costs of handling cargo. McLean bought a small shipping company, called it Sea-
Longshoremen and other port operators thought he was nuts, but as the idea took hold, the West Coast longshoremen went on strike to prevent the introduction of containers. They received some concessions, but containerization was inevitable. Containerization was so cost-
Much of what we call globalization today can be traced to “the box.” Firms producing products in foreign countries can fill a container, deliver it to a port, and send it directly to the customer or wholesaler in the United States. The efficiency, originally seen by McLean, was that the manufacturer and the customer would be the only ones to load and unload the container, keeping the product safer, more secure, and cutting huge chunks off the cost of shipping. Today, a 40-
Sources: Based on Mark Levinson, The Box (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press), 2006.
211
increasing cost industry An industry that, in the long run, faces higher prices and costs as industry output expands. Industry expansion puts upward pressure on resources (inputs), causing higher costs in the long run.
Long-
To illustrate, panel A of Figure 12 shows two sets of short-
decreasing cost industry An industry that, in the long run, faces lower prices and costs as industry output expands. Some industries enjoy economies of scale as they expand in the long run, typically the result of technological advances.
Alternatively, an industry might enjoy economies of scale as it expands, as suggested by panel C of Figure 12. In this case, price and output initially rise as the short-
constant cost industry An industry that, in the long run, faces roughly the same prices and costs as industry output expands. Some industries can virtually clone their operations in other areas without putting undue pressure on resource prices, resulting in constant operating costs as they expand in the long run.
Finally, some industries seem to expand in the long run without significant change in average cost. These are known as constant cost industries and are shown in panel B in Figure 12. Some fast-
212
This chapter has focused on markets in which there is perfect competition—
These assumptions allow us to reach some clear conclusions about how firms operate in competitive markets. In the long run, firms will produce the efficient level of output at which LRATC is minimized, and profits are enough to keep capital in the industry. This output level is efficient because it gives consumers just the goods they want and provides these goods at the lowest possible opportunity costs. Competitive market efficiency represents the benchmark for comparing other market structures.
Competitive markets as we have described them might seem to have such restrictive assumptions that this model only applies to a few industries, such as agriculture, minerals, and lumber. Most businesses you deal with don’t look like the assumptions of these competitive markets. This is true, but most businesses you encounter, such as bars, restaurants, coffee shops, fast-
Because perfect competition is so clearly in the public interest and is the benchmark for comparing other market structures, we can ponder the answer to the following question: Do firms seek the competitive market structure? The answer is: Generally, no. Why? Recall the profit equation. In perfectly competitive markets, firms are price takers. They can achieve economic profits in the short run, but find it almost impossible to have long-
PERFECT COMPETITION: LONG-
When perfectly competitive firms are earning short-
The opposite occurs when firms are making losses in the short run. Losses mean some firms will leave the industry. This reduces supply, thus increasing prices until profits return to normal.
Competitive markets are efficient because products are produced at their lowest possible opportunity cost, and the sum of consumer and producer surplus is at a maximum.
An industry in which prices rise as the industry grows is an increasing cost industry, and increased costs may be caused by rising prices of raw materials or labor as the industry expands.
Decreasing cost industries see their prices fall as the industry expands, possibly due to large economies of scale or rapidly improving technology.
Constant cost industries seem to be able to expand without facing higher or lower costs.
QUESTION: Most of the markets and industries in the world are highly competitive, and presumably most CEOs of businesses know that competition will mean that they will only earn normal profits in the long run. Given this analysis, why do they bother to stay in business, when any economic profits will vanish in the long run?
Answers to the Checkpoint questions can be found at the end of this chapter.
All businesses are looking for the “next new thing” that will generate economic profits and propel them to monopoly status. Even normal profits are not trivial. Remember, normal profits are sufficient to keep investors happy in the long run. When firms do find the right innovation, such as the iPad, Windows operating system, or a blockbuster drug, the short-