Construct · 2 fields · 2 citations

Where does monopoly collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, two constructs Nearest construct by meaningstatecompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to monopoly is state.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

monopoly2 CONSTRUCTSEconomic monopolyLERNER · SINGLE SELLERMonopoly on forceWEBER · MONOPOLY ON FORCE

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

1919Monopoly on force1934Economic monopoly
2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Economics

A single seller with pricing power

In economic theory a monopoly is a market with a single seller of a product that has no close substitute, so the seller faces the whole market demand curve and can set a price above marginal cost rather than accept a price fixed by rivals. Lerner's 1934 The Concept of Monopoly and the Measurement of Monopoly Power defined that pricing power and proposed measuring it by the gap between price and marginal cost, the source of the welfare loss that monopoly imposes and the target of antitrust law and of the theory of the natural monopoly. The referent is the structure of a market and the pricing power it confers, not a state's exclusive claim on force or a printed board game.[1]

Unit
A market with one seller of a good with no close substitute, scaled by the markup of price over marginal cost
Recovery means
The entry of rivals, or regulation and antitrust action, can erode the single seller's pricing power
Measured by
Operationalised by the Lerner index, price minus marginal cost divided by price, and by concentration measures such as market share and the Herfindahl index

Political sociology

The state's claim on legitimate force

In political sociology a monopoly names a claim, not a market: Max Weber defined the modern state as the human community that successfully claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. His 1919 lecture Politik als Beruf (Politics as a Vocation) made that claim the defining mark of statehood, so that all other bodies may use force only as the state permits. The referent is a political community's exclusive and accepted right to authorise violence, a matter of legitimacy and territory, and it is unrelated to a single seller's pricing power or a game played with dice and tokens.[2]

Unit
A territorial state's exclusive and accepted claim to authorise physical force
Recovery means
The claim can fail: where rival armed groups contest it, the state's monopoly on force breaks down
Measured by
Assessed qualitatively through a state's command of armed force and the acceptance of its authority, and by indicators of contested or failed statehood

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how monopoly sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

state4 fields · 6 citationsjingle · one word, four constructsrent2 fields · 3 citationsjingle · one word, two constructssovereignty4 fields · 4 citationsjingle · one word, four sovereignties

References

  1. Lerner, A. P. (1934). The concept of monopoly and the measurement of monopoly power. The Review of Economic Studies, 1(3), 157–175. https://doi.org/10.2307/2967480
  2. Weber, M. (1946). Politics as a vocation. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds. & Trans.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 77–128). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1919)

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct