Time Inconsistent Resource Conservation Contracts
AbstractAre commonly observed resource conservation contracts efficient? In this paper we construct a model that embodies common characteristics of resource contracts. Using this model, we analyze a large class of real-world resource contracts and find them to be economically inefficient. This inefficiency stems from a time inconsistency inherent in these contracts. There are two possible ways to overcome this time inconsistency. The first is to employ a sufficiently large penalty for early termination of the contract. The second and possibly easier method is to offer an upward sloping conservation payment schedule so far overlooked by resource contracts. Under this payment schedule, the agent's ex-ante and ex-post contract choices coincide, social externalities are fully internalized, and the contractual outcome is economically efficient even in the absence of a penalty for early termination.
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 InfoPaper provided by University of British Columbia, Food and Resource Economics in its series Working Papers with number 15838.
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;
Other versions of this item:
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.:
- Kenneth M. Chomitz & Franck Lecocq, 2003. "Temporary sequestration credits : an instrument for carbon bears," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3181, The World Bank.
- Antle, John & Capalbo, Susan & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward & Paustian, Keith, 2003. "Spatial heterogeneity, contract design, and the efficiency of carbon sequestration policies for agriculture," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 231-250, September.
- Feng, Hongli & Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2002. "Time Path and Implementation of Carbon Sequestration (The)," Staff General Research Papers 5068, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-91, June.
- Nick Hanley & Simanti Banerjee & Gareth D. Lennox & Paul R. Armsworth, 2012.
"How should we incentivize private landowners to ‘produce’ more biodiversity?,"
Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 93-113, Spring.
- Armsworth, Paul R & Banerjee, Simanti & Hanley, Nicholas & Lennox, Gareth D, 2012. "How should we incentivize private landowners to "produce" more biodive rsity?," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2012-02, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
- Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline & Sebastien Roussel, 2014. "Payments for Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils: Incentives for the Future and Rewards for the Past," CEEES Paper Series CE3S-01/14, European University at St. Petersburg, Department of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.