Recent years have witnessed an increased interest, by competition agencies, in assessing the competitive e¤ects of partial acquisitions. We propose a generalization to a partial horizontal acquisition setting of the two most traditional indicators used to screen unilateral anti-competitive e¤ects: the Hel…ndahl-Hirschman Index and the Gross Upward Price Pressure Index. The proposed generalized indicators can deal with all types of acquisitions that may lessen competition in the industry: acquisitions by owners that are internal to the industry (rival …rms) and engage in cross-ownership, as well as acquisitions by owners that are external to the industry and engage in common-ownership. Furthermore, these indicators can deal with direct and indirect acquisitions, which may or may not correspond to control, and nest full mergers as a special case. We provide an empirical application to several acquisitions in the wet shaving industry. The results seem to suggest that (i) a full merger induces higher unilateral anti-competitive e¤ects than a partial controlling acquisition involving the same …rms, (ii) a partial controlling acquisition induces higher unilateral anti-competitive e¤ects than a partial non-controlling acquisition involving the same …rms and the same …nancial stakes, and (iii) an acquisition by owners that are internal to the industry induces higher unilateral anti-competitive e¤ects than an acquisition (involving the same …rms and the same stakes) by external owners that participate in more than one competitor …rm. JEL Classi…cation: L13, L41, L66Keywords: Antitrust, Partial Horizontal Acquisitions, Oligopoly, Screening Indicators, HHI, GUPPIWe w o u ld like to th a n k M a ria n a C u n h a , J o ã o G a ta , P e d ro P e re ira , A n a R o d rig u e s, a s w e ll a s nu m e ro u s se m in a rs p a rtic ip a nts a t A u to rid a d e d a C o n c o rrê n c ia a n d U n ive rsid a d e C a tó lic a P o rtu g u e sa , fo r h e lp fu l c o m m e nts a n d su g g e stio n s. A ll re m a in in g e rro rs a re o f c o u rse o u r ow n .

No abstract

No abstract

Collaboration among researchers is becoming increasingly common, which raises a large number of scientometrics questions for which there is not a clear and generally accepted answer. For instance, what value should be given to a two-author or threeauthor publication with respect to a single-author publication? This paper uses axiomatic analysis and proposes a practical method to compute the expected value of an n-authors publication that takes into consideration the added value induced by collaboration in contexts in which there is no prior or ex-ante information about the publication's potential merits or scientific impact. The only information required is the number of authors. We compared the obtained theoretical values with the empirical values based on a large dataset from the Web of Science database. We found that the theoretical values are very close to the empirical values for some disciplines, but not for all. This observation provides support in favor of the method proposed in this paper. We expect that our findings can help researchers and decisionmakers to choose more effective and fair counting methods that take into account the benefits of collaboration.

No abstract