Monopsony and the Sherman Act: Consumer Welfare in a New Light

33 Pages Posted: 31 Mar 2007

See all articles by Gregory J. Werden

Gregory J. Werden

Independent; George Mason University - Mercatus Center

Date Written: March 23, 2007


The Weyerhaeuser case presents the scenario of a firm that successfully engages in exclusionary conduct, obtains a monopsony, and yet does not have any potential to injure the end users of its products. Rather, the conduct has the immediate effect of injuring competitors, and the longer-term effect of injuring input sellers. Commentators have argued that the antitrust laws are indifferent to latter injuries because they are concerned only with "consumer welfare." This essay demonstrates that Congress was, and the courts have been, far from indifferent to the plight of sellers exploited by monopsonies. This essay shows that Sherman Act cases referring to "consumer welfare" have not indicated that they meant end-user welfare rather than aggregate welfare. Finally, this essay argues that promoting consumer welfare is a goal of the Sherman Act, but only a goal, and that making end-user welfare the touchstone under the Act could have extraordinarily undesirable consequences.

Keywords: antitrust, monopsony, welfare

JEL Classification: K21, L41

Suggested Citation

Werden, Gregory J., Monopsony and the Sherman Act: Consumer Welfare in a New Light (March 23, 2007). Available at SSRN: or

George Mason University - Mercatus Center ( email )

3434 Washington Blvd., 4th Floor
Arlington, VA 22201
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics