Abstract
Despite the fact that it has existed for over ten years, the Competition Act has had little impact in diluting the dominance of big business in the South African manufacturing sector. This study sought to ascertain the extent of anti-competitive behaviour in two sub-sectors of the South African manufacturing sector and to determine whether the competition authorities should focus on supporting SMEs as competitors to big business. The findings indicated that SMEs in these two sub-sectors face unique difficulties in fighting anti-competitive behaviour, and that there is scope for the competition authorities to facilitate the participation of SMEs in the economy through the use of tools such as market inquiries, the Corporate Leniency Policy and structural remedies.
Highlights
The legacy of apartheid has resulted in the South African economy being dominated by large businesses, making it difficult for smaller entities to grow (Chabane, Machaka, Molaba, Roberts & Taka, 2003; Hartzenberg, 2006; Kampel, 2005)
Given the financial resources and time needed for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to bring a case against big business (Kampel, 2005), SMEs tend to opt out of markets dominated by big business or tolerate anti-competitive behaviour (Chabane et al, 2003; Hartzenberg, 2006) instead of relying on remedies provided for in the Competition Act (Republic of South Africa, 1998), the objectives of the study were to ascertain the extent of anti-competitive behaviour in the agri-food and steel value chains, and to determine whether the competition authorities should protect SMEs as a specific class of competitor
The study has indicated that SMEs were both victims of and voluntary participants in anticompetitive behaviour in both the agri-food and steel value chains in the South African manufacturing sector
Summary
The legacy of apartheid has resulted in the South African economy being dominated by large businesses, making it difficult for smaller entities to grow (Chabane, Machaka, Molaba, Roberts & Taka, 2003; Hartzenberg, 2006; Kampel, 2005). Criticism that the competition authorities were inaccessible increased following the recent rulings of the Competition Appeal Court (CAC) and the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) These rulings held that the Competition Commission was not allowed to widen a complaint against one party to include other parties – and so initiate an industry-wide investigation – unless it had the evidence to do so (CAC, 2011). SMEs have not successfully used the remedies of the Competition Act (Republic of South Africa, 1998) to tackle anti-competitive behaviour, namely horizontal and vertical restricted practices and abuse of dominance (Hartzenberg, 2006). This is because it is difficult to prove
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
