Common Agency with Risk-Averse Agent

I consider a common agency model under adverse selection with a risk averse agent. Contracting takes place ex ante when all players have symmetric, although incomplete, information. The coordination problem between principals leads to more distortion in the optimal policy from the first best compared to the case of risk neutrality. In contrast with the risk neutral case the principals are unable to screen completely the agent's preferences if she/he is sufficiently risk averse. However, if the agent is almost risk neutral the output is separating, but the transfer schedules keep track of asymmetric contractual externality. When risk aversion goes to zero the transfers become truthful as in the complete information case.

Communication by Interest Groups and the Organization of Lobbying

This paper uses a mechanism design approach to characterize the optimal organization of lobbying groups in a political context where those groups have private information on their ideal points in a one-dimensional policy space. First, we derive the optimal mechanism for one single group and show that it depends on the confict of interests between his own preferences and those of the policy-maker but also on how informative the distribution of the interest group's ideal point is. We then extend the analysis to the case of multiple nterest groups. Although dealing with a coalition of those groups allows the policy-maker to benefit from a more precise information (an informativeness effect), the optimal organization may nevertheless call for a decentralized mechanism where groups compete because this is the only way to transmit information on the relative strength of their preferences (a screening effect). A coalition of interest groups dominates for small values of the confict of interests whereas competing interest groups emerge for greater values.

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

Entry deterrrence via renegotiation-proof non-exclusive contracts

We establish the entry-deterring role of vertical contracts in a setting that does not rely on asymmetric information, the exclusivity of the incumbent’s contracts, limits on distribution channels, or restrictions on the ability to renegotiate contracts in case of entry. The optimal contract we describe is a three-part quantity discounting contract that involves the payment of an allowance to the downstream firm and a marginal wholesale price below the incumbent’s marginal cost for sufficiently large quantitiesentry, vertical contracts, exclusivity, renegotiation

Vertical Limit pricing

A new theory of limit pricing is provided which works through the vertical contract signed between an incumbent manufacturer and a retailer. We establish conditions under which the incumbent can obtain full monopoly profits, even if the potential entrant is more efficient. A key feature of the optimal vertical contract we describe is quantity discounting, typically involving three-part incremental-units or all-units tariffs, with a marginal wholesale price that is below the incumbent’s marginal cost for sufficiently large quantities.limit pricing, vertical contracts, multi-part tariffs.

On the Dynamic Analysis of Cournot-Bertrand Equilibria

We consider a setting where firms in the first stage invest in cost-reducing R&D. In the market stage, one firm sets a quantity, and another sets a price. We prove that the quantity-setting firm invests more in R&D, has a lower price, and produces higher quantity than the price-setting firm. We also consider welfare implications