Partial Privatization and Incomplete Contracts: The Proper Scope of Government Reconsidered

In this paper it is argued that privatization is not the only alternative to public ownership. Adopting the incomplete contract approach, it is shown that partial privatization may well be the optimal ownership structure. While in the standard incomplete contract model joint ownership is usually dominated, it is shown here that joint ownership in the form of partial privatization can be optimal since it mitigates the disadvantages of public ownership (no incentives to improve quality if the manager invests or too strong incentives if the government invests) and of privatization (too strong incentives for the manager to reduce costs).Partial Privatization; Public Ownership; Incomplete Contracts

The Structure of Multiple Credit Relationships: Evidence from US Firms

When firms borrow from multiple concentrated creditors such as banks they appear to differentiate their allocation of borrowing. In this paper, we put forward hypotheses for this borrowing pattern based on incomplete contract theories and test them using a sample of small U.S. firms. We find that firms with more valuable, more redeployable, and more homogeneous assets differentiate borrowing more sharply across their concentrated creditors. We also find that borrowing differentiation is inversely related to restructuring costs and positively related to firms’ informational transparency. This evidence supports the predictions of incomplete contract theories: the structure of credit relationships appears to be used as a device to discipline creditors and entrepreneurs, especially during corporate reorganizations.Credit Relationships, Multiple Creditors, Borrowing Allocation

Debt renegotiation with incomplete contract

A debt contract usually does not include a provision about renegotiation. The right to seize the borrowers asset and the rules of this process are usually stipulated in the contract. Such a promise not to renegotiate is not credible since renegotiation can mitigate the dead-weight loss of liquidating insolvent borrowers. Once the initial contract may not consider the renegotiation procedure and renegotiation may occur, this paper investigates why a complete contract is not offered. It shows that the lender does not need to stipulate the renegotiation procedure on the initial contract because he is indifferent about committing or not to the terms of a contract. This indicates that a complete contract gives the lender the same expected return as an incomplete contract, in which the renegotiation process is determined after the occurrence of default.Um contrato de débito geralmente não inclui uma cláusula sobre renegociação. O direito de liquidar os ativos do tomador e as regras do processo são habitualmente estipuladas no contrato. Tal promessa de não renegociar não é crível, já que a renegociação pode mitigar a perda bruta de se liquidar tomadores insolventes. Uma vez que o contrato inicial pode não considerar os procedimentos de renegociação, e esta pode, de fato, vir a ocorrer, este artigo investiga a razão de um contrato completo não ser ofertado. Mostra-se que o emprestador não precisa estipular os procedimentos de renegociação no contrato inicial porque ele é indiferente entre se comprometer ou não aos termos do contrato. Isto indica que um contrato completo dá ao emprestador o mesmo retorno esperado de um contrato incompleto, no qual os procedimentos de renegociação são determinados após a declaração de default

Work for Image and Work for Pay

Standard economic models with complete information predict a positive, monotonic relationship between pay and performance. This prediction does not always hold in experimental tests: offering a small payment may result in lower performance than not offering any payment. We test experimentally two main explanations that have been put forward for this result: the "incomplete contract" hypothesis views the payment rule as a signal given to subjects on purpose of the activity. The "informed principal" hypothesis views it as a signal concerning the characteristics of the agent or of the task. The incomplete contract view appears to offer the best overall explanation for our results. We also find that high-powered monetary incentives do not "crowd out" intrinsic motivation, but may elicit "too much" effort when intrinsic motivation is very high.

Social Welfare versus Inequality Concerns in an Incomplete Contract Experiment

We study a situation where two players first choose a sharing rule, then invest into a joint production process, and then split joint benefits. We investigate how social preferences determine investments. In our experiment we find that even the materially disadvantaged player cares more for social welfare than about inequality. Behavioral preferences of disadvantaged players actually increase inequality. We also investigate when players give up an advantageous sharing rule. Power-sharing can be successful in the experiment, even when it is not in a selfish world.experiments, incomplete contracts, relationship-specific investment, allocation of power, social preferences

Life’s a breach! Ensuring ‘permanence’ in forest carbon sinks under incomplete contract enforcement

As carbon sinks, forests play a critical role in helping to mitigate the growing threat from anthropogenic climate change. Forest carbon offsets transacted between GHG emitters in industrialised countries and sellers in developing countries have emerged as a useful climate policy tool. A model is developed that investigates the role of incentives in forestry carbon sequestration contracts. It considers the optimal design of contracts to ensure landowner participation and hence, permanence in forest carbon sinks in a context of uncertain opportunity costs and incomplete contract enforcement. The optimal contract is driven by the quality of the institutional framework in which the contract is executed, in particular, as it relates to contract enforcement. Stronger institutional frameworks tend to distort the seller’s effort upwards away from the full enforcement outcome. This also leads to greater amounts of carbon sequestered and higher conditional payments made to the seller. Further, where institutions are strong, there is a case for indexing the payment to the carbon market price if permanence is to be ensured. That is, as the carbon price increases, the payment could be raised and vice versa.forest carbon offsets, permanence, contract design, incomplete enforcement