Securing route optimisation in NEMO

Third International Symposium on Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc,and Wireless Networks. 4-6 April 2005. Riva del Garda, Trentino, ItalyThe network mobility (NEMO) basic support protocol enables mobile networks to change their point of attachment to the Internet, while preserving established sessions of the nodes within the mobile network. When only a nonnested mobile network is considered, the so-called triangle routing is the main problem that should be faced. In mobile IPv6, the route optimisation mechanism solves this problem, and the return routability mechanism aims to limit the security concerns originated because of the route optimisation. Nowadays return routability is considered a weak solution (i.e., based on strong assumptions). In this article we explore different approaches to route optimisation in NEMO and we devise how to adapt some of the terminal mobility solutions to a NEMO environment, where, as we propose, a delegation of signalling rights from the mobile network node to the mobile router is necessary.Publicad

Delegation and Information Revelation

This paper addresses the question of delegation in a principal-agent setting with asymmetric information. If the person who has the power to act, the principal, doesn't have the necessary information to make the best possible decision, she can address herself to someone, the agent, who has this information. Such delegation of authority has its drawbacks given that the agent may not implement the principal's ideal decision. Delegation is costly for the principal. This cost is called the loss of control. But delegation has also its benefits. We show that delegation is useful to reduce the initial asymmetry of information between the principal and the agent. The benefits of delegation are linked to the information transmitted by the agent to the principal. To show this, we model an organization composed of one principal and one agent. The organization should take a sequence of decisions that are affected by a common environemental parameter. We assume that there is an initial asymmetry of information between the principal and the subordinate agent: the agent knows the state of the world while the principal has only some prior about its distribution. Moreover, we assume that the principal cannot use revelation techniques la Baron Myerson to elicit agent's superior information. In contrast, we adopt an incomplete contract framework and posit that the decision and the state of the world parameter cannot be contracted for. Therefore, the remaining contracting variable is the allocation of decision rights. With these simple contracts, we study how the agent's decision can signal his information to the principal. When the agent is in charge of a decision, his decision signals his information to the principal. The trade off between information transmitted through decisions under delegation and the associated loss of control is the heart of our analysis.

Delegation and Organizational Design

This paper concentrates on the question of organizational design under asymmetric information. The design of the organization has two parts: first, communication channels between the members should be established and second, the tasks should be allocated to the party that performs it in the most efficient way. We show that if the decisions are delegated to the agents, the agent's decisions reveal the information they have to the principal. Delegation is then a mechanism to transfer information. Given that delegation is costly, the principal should decide how many decisions she delegates. In this paper, we show that delegation is only partial. The agents do not receive power over all decisions and some agents may receive power will the other will not even if they are identical.Delagation;Hierarchy;Assymmetric information

When second opinions hurt: a model of expert advice under career concerns

We augment the standard career concerns model by introducing (i) an action that blocks the information about the true state of the world and (ii) a second opinion/interim news after the initial consultation with the expert. In this model, the principal's action as well as the expert's message endogenously determine the observability of the states and consequently, the assessment of the expert's ability by the principal. We show that having access to better interim news could reduce the welfare of the principal due to its strategic effect on the expert's recommendation. We also discuss the implication of the results for possible delegation of decision making to another person with different decision parameters

UK opens up to Sudanese oil business, just as the country may be headed back to war in 2011

Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, David Cameron, and a host of politicians from all over the UK political spectrum have expressed outrage at the atrocities committed in the Darfur region of Sudan. But further out of the public eye is the very real threat that the country’s fragile peace agreement between the North and South could unravel into war- largely over division of natural resource wealth. Avery Hancock questions whether the UK should encourage investment in the country’s oil sector when the stakes are so high

On the Non-Contractual Nature of Donor-Recipient Interaction in Development Assistance

This paper analyses three issues in strategic donor-recipient interaction motivated by the complexity of the rationale underlying aid. The first is when we have several principals with conflicting objectives. Any one principal cannot offer high powered incentives to the agent to carry out their designated task. The second is to do with the fact that effort associated with ensuring aid effectiveness may concern both principal and agent; the optimal solution to which requires difficult to design cooperative behaviour. Consequently, the contractual type principal-agent relationship between donors and recipients is inappropriate. We need to consider models that signal recipient quality or commitment to reform. A simple model of signalling with commitment problems is presented, along with extensions to multiple types of agents and time periods, as well as possible solutions involving mechanism design.aid, conditionality, contracting, signalling quality, mechanism design

Slotting Allowances and Buy-Back Clauses

In this paper we investigate some of the most frequent arguments for the use of slotting allowances. It has been claimed that slotting allowances can be profitability used to increase retail profits at the cost of increasing consumer prices. A second argument is that slotting allowances can be used by producers of new product to signal the demand potential of their products. We find that in perfect information setting slotting allowances will never arise in equilibrium. Moreover, we question whether slotting allowances can serve as a signalling device. We argue that buy-back clauses are far better instruments to signal profitability of new product launches in the grocery sector.Demand and Price Analysis, L12, L40,

Deciding about (de-)centralization of industrial policy: Delegation by a central authority vs. bargaining of regional governments

In the European Union the commission has the primary right to decide about industrial policy. Note that this includes the possibility to allow actions of member countries as long as these are not in conflict with the interest of the EU. This paper deals with the question whether such an assignment of decision rights is appropriate by comparing it with a more decentral system where the decision power is in the hands of the member countries which, however, may agree to delegate this power on a case by case basis to a central authority. The analysis is performed in an integrated Cournot duopoly with domestic and third country consumption. Here it depends on the export ratio and the degree of uncertainty whether industrial policy is better performed by a central authority that internalizes spillovers or by regional governments with superior information about the costs of the regional firm. To analyze how the initial allocation of decision rights affects the actual assignment of power for a specific industry we compare two situations: (i) An uninformed central authority decides about delegation to regional governments. (ii) Asymmetrically informed regional governments bargain about empowering a central authority. Interestingly delegation outperforms bargaining on average in a setting with side payments but without information transfer. If, however, signals obtained in the bargaining stage are used to update the own information, bargaining without side payments delivers in expectation a better result than delegation. -- Die europäische Kommission ist primärer Träger der Industriepolitik in der europäischen Union. Industriepolitische Aktivitäten der Mitgliedsländer können jedoch zugelassen werden, solange sie nicht den Interessen der Union zuwiderlaufen. Das vorliegende Papier beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, ob diese Zuordnung der Entscheidungsmacht sinnvoll ist. Dazu wird als Vergleichsbasis ein dezentrales System mit Befugnissen auf Seiten der einzelnen Länder, aber mit Möglichkeit zur fallweisen Delegation auf eine zentrale Instanz herangezogen. Analysiert wird das Problem im Rahmen eines Cournot Duopols auf einem integrierten Weltmarkt mit heimischem und Drittland-Konsum. Dabei hängt es von der Exportquote und dem Grad der Unsicherheit ab, ob Industriepolitik besser von einem zentralen Träger durchgeführt wird, der Spillovers internalisiert, oder von den regionalen Regierungen, die über bessere Informationen bezüglich der Kosten des jeweiligen regionalen Unternehmens verfügen. Um die Auswirkung der ursprünglichen Verteilung der Entscheidungsmacht auf die tatsächliche Zuordnung der Kompetenz in einer bestimmten Branche zu analysieren werden zwei Situationen verglichen: (i) Ein uninformierter zentraler Träger entscheidet über die Delegation an die regionalen Regierungen. (ii) Asymmetrisch informierte regionale Regierungen verhandeln darüber, ob die Industriepolitik regional oder durch eine zentrale Instanz durchgeführt werden soll. Interessanterweise schneidet bei Verhandlungen mit Seitenzahlungen die Delegationslösung trotz der Informationsvorteile der regionalen Regierungen im Durchschnitt besser ab, solange im Rahmen der Verhandlung kein Informationstransfer erfolgt. Werden jedoch die im Rahmen der Verhandlung empfangenen Signale zur Anpassung der eigenen Wahrscheinlichkeitsschätzungen herangezogen, so ist die Verhandlungslösung ohne Seitenzahlungen zumindest im Erwartungswert effizienter.Delegation,Bargaining,Industrial policy,(De-)centralization,Verhandlungen,Industriepolitik,(De-)Zentralisierung,Produktdifferentierung

The Informational Effects of Competition and Collusion in Legislative Politics

We use a mechanism design approach to study the organization of interest groups in an informational model of lobbying. Interest groups influence the legislature only by communicating private information on their preferences and not by means of monetary transfers. Interest groups have private information on their ideal points in a one-dimensional policy space and may either compete or adopt more collusive behaviors. Optimal policies result from a trade-off between imposing rules which are non-responsive to the groups' preferences and flexibility that pleases groups better. Within a strong coalition, interest groups credibly share information which facilitates communication of their joint interests, helps screening by the legislature and induces flexible policies responsive to the groups' joint interests (an informativeness effect). Competing interest groups better transmit information on their individual preferences (a screening effect). The socially and privately optimal organization of lobbying favors competition between groups only when their preferences are not too congruent with those of the legislature. With more congruence, a strong coalition is preferred. Finally, within a weak coalition, interest groups must design incentive compatible collusive mechanisms to share information. Such weak coalitions are always inefficient.Communication Mechanisms, Lobbying, Competition, Coalition, Legislative Politics