Classification of sample by remedies type.

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《中华人民共和国反垄断法》（Anti-monopoly Law）施行至2018年期间，我国附救济措施的经营者集中案件共8起；同时筛选出同期与该8起案件分属同一行业、未附救济措施即获批准的约150起经营者集中案件作为对照样本。随后，基于合成控制法（Synthetic Control Method，简称SCM），本研究利用该对照样本为前述附救济措施的案件构建反事实竞争场景，将经营者集中审查决定作出后实际观测到的市场竞争水平与反事实场景下推导得到的竞争水平进行对比。该研究框架可用于评估反垄断救济措施的实施效果。研究结果显示，总体而言反垄断救济措施均具备有效性，但结构性救济措施的实施效果相较于行为性救济措施更为突兀且显著。