Cilt 6 Sayı 1 (2018): BUSINESS & MANAGEMENT STUDIES: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Makaleler

SEKTÖREL DÜZENLEMELER VE DAVRANIŞSAL İKTİSAT: 149 SAYILI KARARIN DÜŞÜNDÜRDÜKLERİ

PDF
  • Emin KÖKSAL,
  • Şahin ARDIYOK
Emin KÖKSAL
Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi, Ekonomi Bölümü
Şahin ARDIYOK
Bilkent Üniversitesi; Balcığoğlu-Selçuk-Akman-Keki Avukat Ortaklığı
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i1.210

Yayınlanmış 2018-04-25

Anahtar Kelimeler

  • Sektörel düzenlemeler,
  • rekabet,
  • davranışsal iktisat,
  • fırsat maliyeti

Nasıl Atıf Yapılır

KÖKSAL, E., & ARDIYOK, Şahin. (2018). SEKTÖREL DÜZENLEMELER VE DAVRANIŞSAL İKTİSAT: 149 SAYILI KARARIN DÜŞÜNDÜRDÜKLERİ. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 6(1), 86–106. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v6i1.210

Özet

Bu çalışma, tüketicilerin rasyonel davrandığı varsayımıyla tasarlanan sektörel düzenlemelerin, kendisinden beklenen rekabetçi yapıyı sağlama fonksiyonunu yerine getirmeyebileceğini ve toplum için fırsat maliyetleri yaratabileceğini vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma bu vurguyu, BTK’nın 2009 yılında yürürlüğe girip 2016 yılında yürürlüğü sonlanan ve kamuoyunda “149 sayılı Karar” olarak bilinen düzenlemesi üzerinden, davranışsal iktisat literatürüne dayalı sistematik eleştiriler sunarak yapmaktadır. Çalışmanın vardığı sonuçlardan ilki, söz konusu düzenlemenin tüketicilerin satın alma davranışlarını yansıtmadığına işaret etmektedir. İkincisi ise, düzenlemeye tabi olan işletmecinin, tüketicilerin yanlılıklarını kullanarak, düzenlemeyi kendi lehine çevirebileceğinin gözden kaçırıldığını göstermektedir.

PDF

İndirmeler

İndirme verileri henüz mevcut değil.

Referanslar

  1. Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). “Coherent Arbitrariness”: Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 73–106. http://doi.org/10.1162/00335530360535153
  2. Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Control by Precommitment. Psychological Science, 13(3), 219–224. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00441
  3. Armstrong, M. (2008). Interactions between competition and consumer policy. In Competition Policy International (Vol. 4, pp. 97–147).
  4. Atiyas, I., & Doǧan, P. (2007). When good intentions are not enough: Sequential entry and competition in the Turkish mobile industry. Telecommunications Policy, 31(8–9), 502–523. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2007.05.012
  5. Della Vigna, S., & Malmendier, U. (2006). Paying Not to Go to the Gym. American Economic Review, 96(3), 694–719. http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.3.694
  6. DellaVigna, S. (2009). Psychology and economics: Evidence from the field. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 315–372. http://doi.org/10.1257/jel.47.2.315
  7. DelVecchio, D., Krishnan, H. S., & Smith, D. C. (2007). Cents or Percent? The Effects of Promotion Framing on Price Expectations and Choice. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 158–170. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.158
  8. Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time Discounting and Preference : A Critical Review. Journal of Economic Literature. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.151.3712.867-a
  9. Gabrielsen, T. S., & Vagstad, S. (2008). Why is on-net traffic cheaper than off-net traffic? Access markup as a collusive device. European Economic Review, 52(1), 99–115. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2007.02.002
  10. Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985). The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences. Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 295–314. http://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(85)90010-6
  11. Grubb, M. D. (2009). Selling to overconfident consumers. American Economic Review, 99(5), 1770–1807. http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.5.1770
  12. Hsu, S. H., Huang, C. Y., & Tang, C. T. (2007). Minimax play at wimbledon: Comment. American Economic Review. http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.517
  13. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisted: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgement. Heuristics of Intuitive Judgment: Extensions and Applications. http://doi.org/10.1038/2251090a0
  14. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325–1348. http://doi.org/10.1086/261737
  15. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193–206. http://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.193
  16. Kulalı, İ., & Bilir, H. (2012). Türkiye GSM Pazarına Genel Bir Bakış: Şebeke Etkisi , Pazar Yapısı ve Sektörel Düzenlemeler. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 415–439.
  17. Laffont, J.-J., Rey, P., & Tirole, J. (1998). Network Competition: II. Price Discrimination. The RAND Journal of Economics, 29(1), 38. http://doi.org/10.2307/2555815
  18. Laibson, D. (1997). Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–478. http://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555253
  19. Lambrecht, A., & Skiera, B. (2006). Paying Too Much and Being Happy About It: Existence, Causes, and Consequences of Tariff-Choice Biases. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(2), 212–223. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.2.212
  20. Levin, I. P., Wall, L. L., Dolezal, J. M., & Norman, K. L. (1973). Differential weighting of positive and negative traits in impression formation as a function of prior exposure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 97(1), 114–115. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0033846
  21. Li, S., Sun, Y., & Wang, Y. (2007). 50% Off or Buy One Get One Free? Frame Preference as a Function of Consumable Nature in Dairy Products. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147(4), 413–421. http://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.147.4.413-422
  22. López, Á. L., & Rey, P. (2016). Foreclosing Competition Through High Access Charges and Price Discrimination. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 64(3), 436–465. http://doi.org/10.1111/joie.12115
  23. Lunn, P. D. (2013). Telecommunications Consumers: A Behavioral Economic Analysis. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 47(1), 167–189. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2012.01245.x
  24. Miravete, E. J. (2003). Choosing the wrong calling plan? Ignorance and learning. American Economic Review. http://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455304
  25. Pauwels, K., & Weiss, A. (2008). Moving from Free to Fee: How Online Firms Market to Change Their Business Model Successfully. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 14–31. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.72.3.14
  26. Plott, C. R., & Zeiler, K. (2005). The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the “Endowment Effect,” Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations. American Economic Review, 95(3), 530–545. http://doi.org/10.1257/0002828054201387
  27. Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7–59. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00055564
  28. Thaler, R. H. (1981). Some Empirical Evidence on Dynamic Inconsistency. Economic Letters. http://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7
  29. Thaler, R. H., & Shefrin, H. M. (1981). An Economic Theory of Self-Control. Journal of Political Economy, 89(2), 392–406. http://doi.org/10.1086/260971
  30. Train, K. E., McFadden, D. L., & Ben-Akiva, M. (1987). The Demand for Local Telephone Service: A Fully Discrete Model of Residential Calling Patterns and Service Choices. The RAND Journal of Economics, 18(1), 109–123. http://doi.org/10.2307/2555538
  31. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76(2), 105–110. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0031322
  32. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
  33. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683