IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/col/000174/010153.html

Elección estratégica de contratos forward y contratos de incentivos gerenciales en un contexto de competencia a la Cournot

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Liliana Miranda Forero
  • lXimena Poveda Berna
  • Flavio Hernando Jácome Liévano

Abstract

Resumen: El presente trabajo analiza los efectos de los contratos forward y de los contratos de incentivos gerenciales, herramientas que las empresas pueden elegir para competir estratégicamente con sus rivales en un mercado oligopólico. Se encuentra que cuando las dos empresas producen un bien homogéneo, pueden contratar gerentes y negociar contratos forward, en situación de equilibrio ambas empresas contratan gerente y no negocian tales contratos. En el caso de bienes diferenciados, cuando los bienes son sustitutos, las empresas contratan gerente y no negocian contratos forward; cuando los bienes son complementarios, una empresa contrata gerente y no negocia contratos forward y la otra no contrata gerente y negocia contratos forward. El mayor bienestar social se obtiene cuando las empresas utilizan contratos de incentivos gerenciales y contratos forward, y el más bajo se da cuando las empresas no utilizan estas herramientas estratégicas. Sin embargo, el nivel de bienestar social de equilibrio es un subóptimoAbstract: This paper analyzes the effects of forward contracts and managerial incentive contracts, which are tools that firms can use to compete strategically with their rivals in an oligopolistic market. The results show that when the two firms produce a homogeneous good, can hire managers and trade forward contracts, in equilibrium they hire managers and none of them negotiate forward contracts. In the case of differentiated goods, when the goods are substitutes, in equilibrium the firms hire managers and do not trade forward contracts; when the goods are complementary, one firm hires a manager and does not negotiate forward contracts whereas the other one does not hire a manager and negotiates forward contracts. The highest social welfare is achieved when the firms use managerial incentive contracts and forward contracts, and the lowest is achieved when the firms do not use these strategic tools. However, the equilibrium social welfare level is suboptimal.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Liliana Miranda Forero & lXimena Poveda Berna & Flavio Hernando Jácome Liévano, 2012. "Elección estratégica de contratos forward y contratos de incentivos gerenciales en un contexto de competencia a la Cournot," Revista Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, CIE.
    • Handle: RePEc:col:000174:010153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://aprendeenlinea.udea.edu.co/revistas/index.php/lecturasdeeconomia/article/view/12816/11547
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allaz Blaise & Vila Jean-Luc, 1993. "Cournot Competition, Forward Markets and Efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-16, February.
    2. Blaise Allaz & Jean-Luc Vila, 1993. "Cournot Competition, Forward Markets and Efficiency," Post-Print hal-00511806, HAL.
    3. Chaim Fershtman & Kenneth L. Judd, 2006. "Equilibrium Incentives in Oligopoly: Corrigendum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1367-1367, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Flavio Jácome Liévano & Andrés Mejía Villa & Karen Mendoza Manjarrés, 2014. "Integración vertical y contratos gerenciales: herramientas estratégicas en mercados imperfectos," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 16(31), pages 127-156, July-Dece.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert A. Ritz, 2018. "Oligopolistic competition and welfare," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume I, chapter 7, pages 181-200, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Hughes, John S. & Kao, Jennifer L., 1997. "Strategic forward contracting and observability," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 121-133, November.
    3. Benjamin F. Hobbs & Fieke A.M. Rijkers & Maroeska G. Boots, 2005. "The More Cooperation, The More Competition? A Cournot Analysis of the Benefits of Electric Market Coupling," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 69-98.
    4. Newbery, David M. & Greve, Thomas, 2017. "The strategic robustness of oligopoly electricity market models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 124-132.
    5. Luciano Fanti & Domenico Buccella, 2017. "Corporate social responsibility in a game-theoretic context," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 44(3), pages 371-390, September.
    6. Moritz Bohland & Sebastian Schwenen, 2020. "Technology Policy and Market Structure: Evidence from the Power Sector," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1856, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Mansur, Erin T, 2007. "Upstream Competition and Vertical Integration in Electricity Markets," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(1), pages 125-156, February.
    8. Ferreira, José Luis & Kujal, Praveen & Rassenti, Stephen, 2009. "The strategic motive to sell forward: experimental evidence," UC3M Working papers. Economics we092616, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    9. Arnedillo Blanco, Oscar, 2011. "¿Es competitivo el mercado eléctrico español? Indicadores de abuso de poder de mercado y aplicación al caso de España/Is the Spanish Electricity Wholesale Market Competitive? Indicators of Abuse of Do," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 29, pages 627-654, Agosto.
    10. Adelowo, Jacqueline & Bohland, Moritz, 2024. "Redesigning automated market power mitigation in electricity markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    11. Downie, David & Nosal, Ed, 2003. "A strategic approach to hedging and contracting," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 399-417, March.
    12. Robert A. Ritz, 2014. "On Welfare Losses Due to Imperfect Competition," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 167-190, March.
    13. Kfir Eliaz & Ran Spiegler, 2007. "A Mechanism-Design Approach to Speculative Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(3), pages 875-884, May.
    14. Schill, Wolf-Peter, 2011. "Electric Vehicles in Imperfect Electricity Markets: The case of Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 39(10), pages 6178-6189.
    15. Rubin, Ofir D. & Babcock, Bruce A., 2011. "A novel approach for modeling deregulated electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2711-2721, May.
    16. David Newbery, 2008. "Predicting market power in wholesale electricity markets," Working Papers EPRG 0821, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    17. Chernenko, Nadia, 2015. "Market power issues in the reformed Russian electricity supply industry," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 315-323.
    18. Sijm, Jos & Chen, Yihsu & Hobbs, Benjamin F., 2012. "The impact of power market structure on CO2 cost pass-through to electricity prices under quantity competition – A theoretical approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1143-1152.
    19. Amundsen, Eirik S. & Bergman, Lars, 2006. "Why has the Nordic electricity market worked so well?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 148-157, September.
    20. Bunn, Derek W. & Day, Christopher J., 2009. "Computational modelling of price formation in the electricity pool of England and Wales," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 363-376, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:col:000174:010153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Laura Maria Posada (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciantco.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.