Endogenous Institutions in Bureaucratic Compliance Games
AbstractWe consider a set-up where two governments have either conflicting or matching preferences on the provision of differentiated (local) goods supplied by a common monopoly bureau. We develop a two-stage game. At stage-1, the two governments decide whether or not to merge into a single institution. At stage-2, all players simultaneously and independently take their decisions in terms of production and rents, with perfect knowledge of the other players' strategies. We solve the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of this game, and show that, if the bureau immediately updatesits objective function to institutional changes, then the governments always prefer merging. However, if there is an initial bureaucratic inertia in adjusting the bureau's objective function to the institutional change, then ruling politicians may prefer decentralisation to centralisation, depending on the strategic properties of the compliance game and on their own discounting.
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 Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano in its series Departmental Working Papers with number 2000-03.
Date of creation: 01 Jan 2000
Date of revision:
Bureaucracy; Common agency; Repeated compliance games;
Other versions of this item:
- Silvia Fedeli & Michele Santoni, 2001. "Endogenous institutions in bureaucratic compliance games," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 203-229, November.
- D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
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.:
- Barbara Spencer, 1979. "Outside Information and the Degree of Monopoly Power of a Public Bureau," Working Papers 361, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Horn, Henrik & Wolinsky, Asher, 1988. "Worker Substitutability and Patterns of Unionisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 484-97, June.
- Niskanen, William A, 1975. "Bureaucrats and Politicians," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 617-43, December.
- Daems, A.J., 1990. "Budgeting the non-profit organization: An agency theoretic approach," Research Memorandum 451, Tilburg University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
- Henrick Horn & Asher Wolinsky, 1988.
"Bilateral Monopolies and Incentives for Merger,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 408-419, Autumn.
- Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. "Politicians and Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(4), pages 995-1025, November.
- Fedeli, Silvia, 1999. " Competing Bureaus and Politicians: A Compliance Approach to the Diversion of Public Funds," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 100(3-4), pages 253-70, September.
- Carlsen, Fredrik & Haugen, Kjetil, 1994. " Markov Perfect Equilibrium in Multi-period Games between Sponsor and Bureau," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 79(3-4), pages 257-80, June.
- Malcomson, James M., 1986. "Some analytics of the laffer curve," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 263-279, April.
- Besley, Timothy & Coate, Stephen, 1997.
"An Economic Model of Representative Democracy,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 112(1), pages 85-114, February.
- Tim Besley & Stephen Coate, . "An Economic Model of Representative Democracy," Penn CARESS Working Papers ecf70d639d700dba5327ab0c8, Penn Economics Department.
- Tim Besley & Stephen Coate, . ""An Economic Model of Representative Democracy''," CARESS Working Papres 95-02, University of Pennsylvania Center for Analytic Research and Economics in the Social Sciences.
- Bernheim, B Douglas & Whinston, Michael D, 1986. "Common Agency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 923-42, July.
- Chan, Kenneth S. & Mestelman, Stuart, 1988. "Institutions, efficiency and the strategic behaviour of sponsors and bureaus," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 91-102, October.
- Buchanan, James M & Lee, Dwight R, 1982. "Politics, Time, and the Laffer Curve," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(4), pages 816-19, August.
- Moene, Karl O., 1986. "Types of bureaucratic interaction," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 333-345, April.
- Breton, Albert & Wintrobe, Ronald, 1975. "The Equilibrium Size of a Budget-maximizing Bureau: A Note on Niskanen's Theory of Bureaucracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 83(1), pages 195-207, February.
- Silvia Fedeli & Michele Santoni, 2006. "The Government's Choice of Bureaucratic Organisation: An Application to Italian State Museums," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 41-72, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (DEMM Working Papers).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.