The Comparison And Analysis Of The Antitrust Law In China Korea And Japan

This essay aims at comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the antitrust laws in three countries-China, Japan and Korea through detailed analysis of the antitrust laws of three countries and come up with suggestion as to how antitrust law of China could be further improved. The essay could be divided into six chapters. The first chapter give background to this essay. The reasons why china's antitrust law can't be passed until now include academic and realistic reasons. First, antitrust is a complicated problem. A certain kind of business behavior can have both negative and positive influences upon social benefits. Naturally interest groups are desperate to prevent the antitrust law from being passed. Organized minority can easily defeat unorganized majority. In addition, China Japan and Korea have much in common. None of them has a long history of market economy and they all have a tradition of intervene in the operation of market economy. Therefore many statesman of the three countries have similar attitudes toward antitrust laws. The second chapter gives a brief review of the related research. First, we briefly review the industrial theories related to the topic of antitrust laws, including the SCP paradigm and the new industrial organization theory. According to SCP paradigm antitrust authority should pay great attention to improving market structure because market concentration will lead to illegal market behavior, extra profits and low social benefits. But the new industrial organization theory negates the relationship between market concentration and profit rate. The new discoveries made by new industrial economists shift the focus of antitrust from market concentration to market behavior. The research made by the Chinese scholars focus on the settings of antitrust authorities in Japan and Korea, as well as the legal processes in a antitrust lawsuit. The third chapter introduces the environment of antitrust in three countries, including both domestic and international environment. The three countries all have a tradition of intervening in market economy, although the origins of the tradition are different. Korea and Japan have a tradition of functionalism. The statesmen in the two countries focus on the short-term economic growth while ignoring the building of market economy mechanism. China have a forty-year history of planned economy. Planned economy usually means state monopoly. With the maturity of market economy, the three countries have begun to realize the relationship between building market economy and antitrust. The forth chapter compare specifically the antitrust laws of three countries. When analyzing the antitrust laws of three countries ,the new industrial organization theory will be used as the final evaluation criteria. Because administrative monopoly is unique to China, it will be discussed in a specialized section by using public choice theory. The fifth chapter gives the conclusions of this essay. But it mainly gives the general conclusions instead of the detailed differences discussed in the previous chapters. Generallyspeaking, the antitrust law of China is a bit subjective.