The possibility of treason by a close associate has been a nightmare of most dictators throughout history. Better informed viziers are also better able to discriminate among potential plotters, and this makes them more risky subordinates for the dictator. To avoid this, dictators, especially those which are weak and vulnerable, sacrifice the competence of their agents, hiring mediocre but loyal subordinates. However, any use of incentive schemes by a dictator is limited by the fact that all punishments are conditional on the dictator’s own survival, and a dictator is typically unable to commit to the optimal (i.e., less than capital) punishment for those who unsuccessfully plotted against him. We endogenize loyalty and competence in a principal-agent game between a dictator and his (probably, few) viziers in both static and dynamic settings. The dynamic model allows us to focus on the succession problem that insecure dictators face.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR) in its series Working Papers with number
w0043.
Length: 32 pages Date of creation: Oct 2004 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:cfr:cefirw:w0043
Contact details of provider: Postal: 117418 Russia, Moscow, Nakhimovsky pr., 47, office 720 Phone: +7 (495) 105 50 02 Fax: +7 (495) 105 50 03 Email: Web page: http://www.cefir.ru More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Julia Babich) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Julia Babich to update the entry or send us the correct address..
References listed on IDEAS 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.:
Mike Burkart & Fausto Panunzi & Andrei Shleifer, 2002.
"Family Firms,"
NBER Working Papers
8776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Andrei Shleifer & Fausto Panunzi & Mike Burkart, 2002.
"Family Firms,"
FMG Discussion Papers
dp406, Financial Markets Group.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2004.
"Do Institutions Cause Growth?,"
Journal of Economic Growth,
Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 271-303, 09.
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
Edward L. Glaeser & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silane & Andrei Shleifer, 2004.
"Do Institutions Cause Growth?,"
NBER Working Papers
10568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Cited by: (explanations, 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.)
Ticchi, Davide & Vindigni, Andrea, 2007.
"War and Endogenous Democracy,"
Papers
03-10-2008, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.
[Downloadable!]