This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Efficient Mechanisms for Bilateral Trading with Cooperative Investment

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Rui Ray Zhao

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

This paper analyzes a bilateral trade problem where the seller makes hidden investment that influences the buyer's private valuation. Complete contracts can be written on observable trade decisions. It is shown that efficiency level in investment and trade is negatively related to the scope of trade: if the first-best efficient trade levels are positive for sufficiently many buyer types, then it is impossible for budget-balanced incentive compatible trading mechanisms to achieve first-best efficient investment \emph{and} efficient levels of trade, even if no (ex-ante, interim, or ex-post) participation constraints are required. This result differs from the Myerson-Satterthwaite inefficiency theorem for bilateral trade without investment, where interim participation constraints are required. To fully characterize the second-best trading mechanism, I solve a constrained-Pareto program with moral hazard on seller side and adverse selection on buyer side. I show that the first-order approach to characterizing the seller's incentive constraint is valid. I then derive the second-best nonlinear trading schedule. It displays several distinctive features, in comparison to standard adverse selection and moral hazard models: when there is no bunching at the bottom types, both the highest type and the lowest type receive first-best levels of trade; bunching can occur for the bottom types, and when it does, for a range of the lowest types trade levels are \emph{above} first-best, and both the highest type and some middle type receive first-best levels of trade. Furthermore, the second-best investment can be either below (under investment), above (over investment), or equal to the first-best level, so hidden investment does not necessarily mean under investment; when renegotiation is permitted, there is always under investment. These results shed light on bilateral trade problems when investment decisions are important.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Econometric Society in its series Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings with number 527.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 11 Aug 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ecm:nawm04:527

Contact details of provider:
Phone: 1 212 998 3820
Fax: 1 212 995 4487
Email:
Web page: http://www.econometricsociety.org/pastmeetings.asp
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: Bilateral Trading Mechanism; Cooperative Investment; Efficiency;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-2.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.