对反垄断的再思考：动态竞争政策的案例

GIORGIO CASTIGLIA|OCTOBER 2025 Antitrust policy relies too heavily on static models that focus on prices and market shares whiletreating innovation as external. A dynamic approach that views competition as a process ofinnovation is better suited to guiding policy in today’s technology-driven economy. KEY TAKEAWAYS Static models treat competition as equilibrium, judging markets mainly by prices andmarket shares. This overlooks innovation and leads to flawed conclusions about long-termwelfare. Dynamic competition sees rivalry as an ongoing process of innovation and adaptation. Itbetter captures how firms invest and compete in modern, fast-changing markets. Hayek viewed competition as a discovery process wherein entrepreneurs test ideas andprices guide coordination. This constant search fuels efficiency and adaptation. Schumpeter highlighted creative destruction, in which new products and methodsdisplace the old. Innovation—even by large firms—drives growth and renewal. High profits and market concentration reflect success at innovating and scaling, notanticompetitive harm. In dynamic markets, size can support greater investment and R&D. Antitrust should assess whether firms innovate and reinvest, not just whether they are bigor profitable. A dynamic lens ensures that policy supports growth and progress. CONTENTS Key Takeaways................................................................................................................... 1Introduction....................................................................................................................... 3Static vs. Dynamic Competition ........................................................................................... 4Static Models and Static Competition ............................................................................... 5Dynamic Models and Dynamic Competition ....................................................................... 5Hayek’s Model of Dynamic Competition................................................................................ 7Competition as a Discovery Procedure ............................................................................... 7Changing Market Structure Is Part of the Discovery Process ................................................ 8Entrepreneurs Navigate Disequilibrium.............................................................................. 8Schumpeterian Competition ................................................................................................ 9Innovation Competition and Creative Destruction................................................................ 9Market Structure and Incentives to Innovate .................................................................... 10Schumpeter’s Heroic Spirit of Entrepreneurship............................................................... 10Comparative Analysis........................................................................................................ 11Innovation and Price as Different Dimensions of Competition ............................................ 11The Irrelevance of Perfect Competition Model for Understanding Capitalist Performance...... 12Comparison of the Role of the Entrepreneur..................................................................... 12Summary and Implications................................................................................................ 13Competition Is a Dynamic Process .................................................................................. 13The Process Is Defined by Innovation.............................................................................. 14Larger Firms Are Part of a Vibrant Innovation Ecosystem................................................... 14The Entrepreneurial Spirit and Creativity Are Central to the Process of Competition ............. 15Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 15Endnotes......................................................................................................................... 16 INTRODUCTION It has long been noted that antitrust law depends on economics probably more than any otherbranch of the law does.1This has become known as the “economic construction” of antitrustlaw.2Today, proposals abound for rethinking the interaction between economics and antitrustlaw given that the “Chicago/Harvard” approach, which relied chiefly on static neoclassicalanalysis, has come under fire in the academic literature, as well as in public discussion.3Antitrust enforcers that rose to prominence under the Biden administration attempted to moveaway from the old consensus by aggressively pursuing a Neo-Brandeisian agenda, which, at afoundational level, elevated political concerns over economic ones.4Enforcement under thisagenda underperformed on critical measures and left antitrust institutions in a greater state of