Public investment and higher education inequality

Empirical results show that children from high income households achieve higher levels of education and are more likely to be enrolled in post compulsory school. Theoretical findings fail to answer clearly whether greater public investment in the higher education system effectively decreases the inequality between the educational attainment of rich and poor children. We show that if the child receives a monetary transfer from his parents and allocates it between private consumption and investment in private additional education, then a further public investment decreases the educational gap. This result holds under the assumptions of both sub-stitutability and complementarity between private and public education.Higher education inequality; Public education; Altruism

Mergers under endogenous minimum quality standard: a note

We introduce merging strategies and endogenous MQS, borrowed from Ecchia and Lambertini (1997), in Scarpa (1998). MQS induces the low-quality firm to exit the market and leads to a monopoly arising from the bilateral merger of the high-quality firmsMergers, Minimum quality standard, Quality differentiation.

Do childless households support local public provision of education

Empirical and theoretical studies show that the local provision of public education affects the well being of individuals through two channels: the first reflects the direct use of the good, whereas the second runs through the value of the housing. The second effect leans on the idea that the quality of public education is capitalized into the value of the own housing. Empirical evidence finds that in a multi-community model childless households support local public spending in education because of the capitalization effect. I study the behavior of childless households, not necessarily elderly, in a two community model and show that the capitalization effect may not be a sufficient condition for middle aged households without children to support local public spending in education by a majority voting.

Profitability of Horizontal Mergers in Trigger Strategy Game

It is shown that, in a dynamic competition, an exogenous horizontal merger is profitable even if a small share of active firms merge. However, each firm has incentive to remain outside the merger because it would benefit more (Insiders’dilemma). We show that in an infinite repeated game in which the firms use trigger strategies an exogenous bilateral merger can be profitable and the Insiders’dilemma is mitigated.Horizontal mergers; Insiders’ dilemma; trigger strategy

Local public education and childless voting : the arising of an "ends with the middle" coalition

We show that capitalization of local education into the housing price induces childless voters to support local education. In particular, low income childless households vote for a tax raise when capitalization is strong, whereas high income childless supports a higher tax when capitalization is weak. The median income voter is never pivotal because "ends with the middle" coalitions arise: high income households (with and without a child) makes coalition with middle income class with a child, whereas low income households (with and without a child) make coalition with childless middle income class. We …nd that the income of the childless median voter is higher than the median income, whereas median voter with a child has income lower than the median. Thus the equilibrium tax preferred by the median voter (childless or not), is higher than the tax preferred by the childless median income voter and lower than the tax preferred by the median income voter with a child. This result implies that it is not possible to exclude voting equilibria in which thelocal public education; housings; local tax; capitalization; childless voting

Regulating unverifiable quality by fixed-price contracts

We apply the idea of relation contracting to a very simple problem of regulating a single-product monopolistic firm when the regulatory instrument is a fixed-price contract, and quality is endogenous and observable, but not verifiable. We model the interaction between the regulator and the firm as a dynamic game, and we show that, provided both players are sufficiently patient, there exist self-enforcing regula- tory contracts in which the firm prefers to produce the quality man- dated by the regulator, while the regulator chooses to leave the firm a positive rent as a reward to its quality choice. We also show that the socially optimal self-enforcing contract implies a distortion from the second best, which is greater the more impatient is the firm and the larger is the (marginal) effect of the contractual price on the profits the firm would make by deviating from the offered contract. Whenever the punishment profits are strictly positive, even if the firm were infinitely patient, the optimal contract would ensure a Ramsey condition but with positive profits to the firm. Our result also illustrates that, whenever the firm's output has some unverifiable component, optimal regulatory lag in fixed-price contract should be reduced to limit the reward of the firm's opportunistic behaviour.Quality regulation, relational contracts

University choice, peer group and distance

We analyze how authorizing a new university affects welfare when the students’ education depends on the peer group effect. Students are horizontally differentiated according to their ability and the distance from the university. Comparing a monopolistic university with a two-universities model we find that allowing a “new” university is welfare improving when the monopolistic university is only attended by able students with less mobility constraints. This occurs when mobility costs are sufficiently high. When mobility costs are low, a negative externality arises and welfare decreases. The negative externality comes through the peer group effect: high ability students that would have gone to the monopolistic university go to the university with the lower average ability. These students end up in a university with students whose ability was not high enough to go to the monopolist. On the other hand, students remaining in the good university benefit from a lower average ability. Thus, a new university is welfare improving only for those with low ability that in the monopolistic scenario would remain unskilled. When, instead, the mobility cost is high, the monopolist leaves out a significative mass of individuals. In this case, no negative externality arises because no student swaps university therefore a "new" university is welfare improving. However, this welfare improvement makes the opportunities for a higher education less equal (according to Romer, 1998) because an "external circumstance" like mobility cost, rather than own ability, becomes the main determinant of the students’ human capital

Public Procurement with Unverifiable Quality: The Case for Discriminatory Competitive Procedures

Unverifiable quality may affect the enforcement of procurement contracts even when the award procedure is able to select the most efficient firm in the market. In this paper, we show that a discriminatory competitive mechanism – which awards the contract on the basis of price and (firms') past performance – yields an efficient allocation of the contract and allows the buyer to implement her desired quality. Quality enforcement arises out of relational contracting whereby the buyer ‘handicaps' a contractor in future competitive tendering processes if it fails to provide the required quality. We study an infinitely repeated procurement model with two firms and one buyer imperfectly informed on the firms' cost, in which, in each period, the buyer runs a discriminatory auction. We restrict our analysis to the case of a buyer committed to her handicapping strategy, a case which captures some of the features of a public buyer. When players use either grim trigger or stick-and-carrot strategies, we find that the buyer can induce the delivery of optimal (unverifiable) quality with a variety of handicap levels and, when applicable, durations of the punishment period; for some values of the handicap and the length of the punishment period, both firms remain active in the market even when punished

Regulating Unverifiable Quality by Fixed-Price Contracts

We apply the idea of relational contracting to a simple problem of regulating a single-product monopoly with unverifiable (then ex ante not contractible) quality. We model the interaction between the regulator and the firm as an infinitely repeated game; we observe that there exist self-enforcing contracts in which the regulator, using her discretionary power on the price (the contractible variable) can induce the firm to produce the required quality level by leaving it a positive rent. When players use grim trigger strategies, the optimal self-enforcing contract implies a distortion from the second best which is greater the more impatient is the firm and the larger is the effect of the price on the deviation profits. Whenever the equilibrium profits of the static game are strictly positive, even if the firm were infinitely patient, the optimal contract would not reach the second-best: it would ensure a quality-adjusted Ramsey condition and, at the same time, leave positive profits to the firm. We extend the model in a few ways: we find that when players use stick-and-carrot strategies, with an infinitely patient firm the second-best outcome is reached even if this implies to punish the deviating firm with negative profits. When instead the regulator is unable to perfectly monitor the firm’s quality choice, the price/quality pair giving the highest payoff to the regulator does not directly depend on the firm’s discount factor, which instead affects the probability of punishment. Our results suggest that, in fixed price regulatory contracts, the regulatory lag should be shorter the more relevant is the issue of unverifiability, in order to reduce the reward for opportunistic behavior by the firm

Peer group and distance: when widening university participation is better

We analyze the welfare effect of allowing a new university in a local area where another university is already operating. We use a two-city model in which individuals, whose education depends on the average peer ability (peer group effect), can sort across cities by facing a mobility cost. Com- paring monopoly with a two-university system we find that introducing the second university is always welfare improving. We obtain a symmetric Nash equilibrium for every mobility costs and asymmetric Nash equilibria only for sufficiently low mobility costs. In particular, in the symmetric scenario both universities have the same peer groups (lower than the peer group under monopoly) and the same number of students. The asymmetric scenario instead is such that the "top" ("bottom") university has a peer group higher (lower) than the monopolistic one. Moreover, we find that the symmetric scenario always induces the highest welfare. After checking for equilibrium refinements we find that asymmetric equilibria are never strong Nash whereas the symmetric equilibrium is strong Nash only for sufficiently high mobility costs