Limited liability and the risk–incentive relationship
AbstractSeveral empirical findings have challenged the traditional view on the trade-off between risk and incentives. By combining risk aversion and limited liability in a standard principal-agent model the empirical puzzle on the positive relationship between risk and incentives can be explained. Increasing risk leads to a less informative performance signal. Under limited liability, the principal may optimally react by increasing the weight on the signal and, hence, choosing higher-powered incentives.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Journal of Economics.
Volume (Year): 102 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=108909
Moral hazard; Limited liability; Risk–incentive relationship; D82; D86;
Other versions of this item:
- JÃ¶rg Budde & Matthias Kräkel, 2008. "Limited Liability and the Risk-Incentive Relationship," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers bgse6_2008, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Budde, Jörg & Kräkel, Matthias, 2008. "Limited Liability and the Risk-Incentive Relationship," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 232, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
- D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
- D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2004.
"Incentives and Prosocial Behavior,"
137, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Discussion Papers in Economics..
- Benabou, Roland & Tirole, Jean, 2005. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," IZA Discussion Papers 1695, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Bénabou, Roland & Tirole, Jean, 2004. "Incentives and Prosocial Behaviour," CEPR Discussion Papers 4633, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bénabou, Roland & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," IDEI Working Papers 389, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised Jan 2006.
- Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," NBER Working Papers 11535, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kim, Son Ku, 1995. "Efficiency of an Information System in an Agency Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 89-102, January.
- Sanford J Grossman & Oliver D Hart, 2001.
"An Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
391749000000000339, David K. Levine.
- Sanford Grossman & Oliver Hart, . "An Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem," Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers 15-80, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
- Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet & Carsten Helm, 2004.
"Output and Wages with Inequality Averse Agents,"
CIRANO Working Papers
- Demougin, Dominique & Fluet, Claude, 2001. "Monitoring versus incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1741-1764, October.
- Bushman, Robert M. & Indjejikian, Raffi J. & Smith, Abbie, 1996. "CEO compensation: The role of individual performance evaluation," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 161-193, April.
- Claude Fluet & Dominique Demougin, 2001.
"Ranking of information systems in agency models: an integral condition,"
Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 489-496.
- Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 1998. "Ranking of Information Systems in Agency Models: An Integral Condition," Cahiers de recherche CREFE / CREFE Working Papers 70, CREFE, Université du Québec à Montréal.
- Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1987.
"Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives,"
Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 303-28, March.
- Bengt Holmstrom & Paul R. Milgrom, 1985. "Aggregation and Linearity in the Provision of Intertemporal Incentives," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 742, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Dominique M. Demougin & Devon a. Garvie, 1991.
"Contractual Design with Correlated Information Under Limited Liability,"
815, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Dominique M. Demougin & Devon A. Garvie, 1991. "Contractual Design with Correlated Information under Limited Liability," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(4), pages 477-489, Winter.
- Serfes, Konstantinos, 2005. "Risk sharing vs. incentives: Contract design under two-sided heterogeneity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 343-349, September.
- Matthew Rabin, 2006.
"A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165, November.
- Koszegi, Botond & Rabin, Matthew, 2004. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt0w82b6nm, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Botond Koszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2004. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0407001, EconWPA.
- Botond Koszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2005. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000341, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Herweg, Fabian & Müller, Daniel & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2010. "Binary payment schemes: Moral hazard and loss aversion," Munich Reprints in Economics 19450, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Allen, Douglas & Lueck, Dean, 1992. "Contract Choice in Modern Agriculture: Cash Rent versus Cropshare," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35(2), pages 397-426, October.
- Fabian Herweg & Daniel Muller & Philipp Weinschenk, 2010.
"Binary Payment Schemes: Moral Hazard and Loss Aversion,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2451-77, December.
- Fabian Herweg & Daniel Müller & Philipp Weinschenk, 2010. "Binary Payment Schemes: Moral Hazard and Loss Aversion," Working Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2010_38, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
- Kragl, Jenny & Schmid, Julia, 2009. "The impact of envy on relational employment contracts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 766-779, November.
- Dominique Demougin & Oliver Fabel & Christian Thomann, 2009. "Implicit vs. Explicit Incentives: Theory and a Case Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 2645, CESifo Group Munich.
- John, George & Weitz, Barton A, 1988. "Forward Integration into Distribution: An Empirical Test of Transaction Cost Analysis," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 337-55, Fall.
- Zabojnik, Jan, 1996. "Pay-performance sensitivity and production uncertainty," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 291-296, December.
- Florian Englmaier & Achim Wambach, 2002.
"Contracts and Inequity Aversion,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
809, CESifo Group Munich.
- Michael Raith, 2003. "Competition, Risk, and Managerial Incentives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1425-1436, September.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.