We use a mechanism design approach to study the organization of interest groups in an informational model of lobbying. Interest groups influence the legislature only by communicating private information on their preferences and not by means of monetary transfers. Interest groups have private information on their ideal points in a one-dimensional policy space and may either compete or adopt more collusive behaviors. Optimal policies result from a trade-off between imposing rules which are non-responsive to the groups' preferences and flexibility that pleases groups better. Within a strong coalition, interest groups credibly share information which facilitates communication of their joint interests, helps screening by the legislature and induces flexible policies responsive to the groups' joint interests (an informativeness effect). Competing interest groups better transmit information on their individual preferences (a screening effect). The socially and privately optimal organization of lobbying favors competition between groups only when their preferences are not too congruent with those of the legislature. With more congruence, a strong coalition is preferred. Finally, within a weak coalition, interest groups must design incentive compatible collusive mechanisms to share information. Such weak coalitions are always inefficient.
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
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number
6989.
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.:
Jean-Jacques Laffont & David Martimort, 1998.
"Collusion and Delegation,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(2), pages 280-305, Summer.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Yair Tauman & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2006.
"Bargaining with a Bureaucrat,"
Discussion Paper Series
dp425, Center for Rationality and Interactive Decision Theory, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
[Downloadable!]
Manuel Amador & Iván Werning & George-Marios Angeletos, 2006.
"Commitment vs. Flexibility,"
Econometrica,
Econometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 365-396, 03.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Manuel Amador & Ivan Werning & George-Marios Angeletos, 2003.
"Commitment Vs. Flexibility,"
NBER Working Papers
10151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)