The result of in-space placebo tests.

We identified 8 merger cases with remedies in China for a period from the time when the Anti-monopoly Law was enacted in 2008–2018, and about 150 other merger cases corresponding to these 8 cases in their respective industries but approved without remedies. We then use the latter data to construct a counterfactual for the former to compare the factually observed level of competition after the merger decision with that derived from the counterfactual, based on a method called the synthetic control method (SCM). The exercise allows us to assess the remedies’ effectiveness. We find that overall the remedies are effective, but the structural remedies’ effect tends to be more abrupt and pronounced than behavioral remedies.本研究选取2008年《反垄断法》（Anti-monopoly Law）施行至2018年间，我国境内共8起附有救济措施的经营者集中案件；同时选取同期对应行业内、未附带救济措施且获批准的150余起同类经营者集中案件作为对照样本。基于合成控制法（synthetic control method, SCM），本研究以对照样本构建处理组的反事实竞争场景，将并购决策后实际观测到的竞争水平与反事实场景下的竞争水平进行对比，借此可量化评估涉案救济措施的实施效果。研究结果显示，整体而言涉案救济措施均能发挥预期效果，但相较于行为性救济（behavioral remedies），结构性救济（structural remedies）的实施效果往往更为突兀且显著。