Cementing the case for collusion under the National Recovery Administration

Mark Chicu, Chris Vickers and Nicolas Ziebarth

Explorations in Economic History, 2013, vol. 50, issue 4, 487-507

Abstract: Macroeconomists have long debated the aggregate effects of anti-competitive provisions under the “Codes of Fair Conduct” promulgated by the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA). Despite the emphasis on these provisions, there is only limited evidence documenting any actual effects at the micro-level. We use a combination of narrative evidence and a novel plant-level dataset from 1929, 1931, 1933, and 1935 to study the effects of the NIRA in the cement industry. We develop a test for collusion specific to this particular industry. We find strong evidence that before the NIRA, the costs of a plant's nearest neighbor had a positive effect on a plant's own price, suggesting competition. After the NIRA, this effect is completely eliminated, with no correlation between a plant's own price and its neighbor's cost.

Keywords: Collusion; New deal; Cement (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014498313000296
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
Chapter: Cementing the Case for Collusion under the National Recovery Administration (2012)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:exehis:v:50:y:2013:i:4:p:487-507

DOI: 10.1016/j.eeh.2013.07.002

Access Statistics for this article

Explorations in Economic History is currently edited by R.H. Steckel

More articles in Explorations in Economic History from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().