What is meant by the term excess capacity as it relates to monopolistically competitive firms

The difference between the short‐run and the long‐run in a monopolistically competitive market is that in the long‐run new firms can enter the market, which is especially likely if firms are earning positive economic profits in the short‐run. New firms will be attracted to these profit opportunities and will choose to enter the market in the long‐run. In contrast to a monopolistic market, no barriers to entry exist in a monopolistically competitive market; hence, it is quite easy for new firms to enter the market in the long‐run.

The monopolistically competitive firm's long‐run equilibrium situation is illustrated in Figure .


The entry of new firms leads to an increase in the supply of differentiated products, which causes the firm's market demand curve to shift to the left. As entry into the market increases, the firm's demand curve will continue shifting to the left until it is just tangent to the average total cost curve at the profit maximizing level of output, as shown in Figure . At this point, the firm's economic profits are zero, and there is no longer any incentive for new firms to enter the market. Thus, in the long‐run, the competition brought about by the entry of new firms will cause each firm in a monopolistically competitive market to earn normal profits, just like a perfectly competitive firm.

Excess capacity. Unlike a perfectly competitive firm, a monopolistically competitive firm ends up choosing a level of output that is below its minimum efficient scale, labeled as point b in Figure . When the firm produces below its minimum efficient scale, it is under‐utilizing its available resources. In this situation, the firm is said to have excess capacity because it can easily accommodate an increase in production. This excess capacity is the major social cost of a monopolistically competitive market structure.

journal article

Excess Capacity in Monopolistic Competition

Journal of Political Economy

Vol. 78, No. 5 (Sep. - Oct., 1970)

, pp. 1142-1149 (8 pages)

Published By: The University of Chicago Press

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1830884

Read and download

Log in through your school or library

Alternate access options

For independent researchers

Read Online

Read 100 articles/month free

Subscribe to JPASS

Unlimited reading + 10 downloads

Purchase article

$14.00 - Download now and later

Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free.

Get Started

Already have an account? Log in

Monthly Plan

  • Access everything in the JPASS collection
  • Read the full-text of every article
  • Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
$19.50/month

Yearly Plan

  • Access everything in the JPASS collection
  • Read the full-text of every article
  • Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
$199/year

Purchase a PDF

Purchase this article for $14.00 USD.

How does it work?

  1. Select the purchase option.
  2. Check out using a credit card or bank account with PayPal.
  3. Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.

Journal Information

Current issues are now on the Chicago Journals website. Read the latest issue.One of the oldest and most prestigious journals in economics, the Journal of Political Economy (JPE) presents significant and essential scholarship in economic theory and practice. The journal publishes highly selective and widely cited analytical, interpretive, and empirical studies in a number of areas, including monetary theory, fiscal policy, labor economics, development, microeconomic and macroeconomic theory, international trade and finance, industrial organization, and social economics.

Publisher Information

Since its origins in 1890 as one of the three main divisions of the University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press has embraced as its mission the obligation to disseminate scholarship of the highest standard and to publish serious works that promote education, foster public understanding, and enrich cultural life. Today, the Journals Division publishes more than 70 journals and hardcover serials, in a wide range of academic disciplines, including the social sciences, the humanities, education, the biological and medical sciences, and the physical sciences.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Journal of Political Economy © 1970 The University of Chicago Press
Request Permissions

What is meant by excess capacity in monopolistic competition?

Excess capacity (or unutilized capacity) occurs when a firm operates or is producing output at less than the optimum level. It can happen when there is a market recession or increased competition, where demand declines and firms are forced to reduce capacity to decrease costs.

What is the concept of excess capacity?

The doctrine of excess (or unutilized) capacity is associated with monopolistic competition in the long-run and is defined as “the difference between ideal (optimum) output and the output actually attained in the long-run.”

Why is excess capacity said to exist in monopolistic competition in the long run?

Excess capacity. In this situation, the firm is said to have excess capacity because it can easily accommodate an increase in production. This excess capacity is the major social cost of a monopolistically competitive market structure.

Do monopolistically competitive firms have excess capacity in the long run?

In the long run in monopolistic competition any economic profits or losses will be eliminated by entry or by exit, leaving firms with zero economic profit. A monopolistically competitive industry will have some excess capacity; this may be viewed as the cost of the product diversity that this market structure produces.