IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea89/270510.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analysis Of Grain Shipper/Railroad Contract Disclosure: An Experimental Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ruppel, Fred J.
  • Fuller, Stephen
  • McKnight, Mary

Abstract

The Staggers Rail Act (1980) permitted confidential railroad contracts. Later legislation required disclosure of certain contract terms to allay small shipper claims of injury. This study uses experimental economics to analyze the effects of information disclosure. An oligopolistic market structure vas designed to simulate the market for rail services in the south/central Great Plains. Contract information vas disclosed to market participants under three scenarios: no disclosure, partial disclosure, and full disclosure. The analysis revealed favorable impacts on efficiency but no discernable effect on negotiated prices. An unexpected outcome vas profit enhancement by some participants under the partial disclosure format

Suggested Citation

  • Ruppel, Fred J. & Fuller, Stephen & McKnight, Mary, 1989. "Analysis Of Grain Shipper/Railroad Contract Disclosure: An Experimental Approach," 1989 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 2, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 270510, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea89:270510
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.270510
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270510/files/aaea-1989-046.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/270510/files/aaea-1989-046.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.270510?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James T. Hong & Charles R. Plott, 1982. "Rate Filing Policies for Inland Water Transportation: An Experimental Approach," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Federica Alberti & Werner Güth & Kei Tsutsui, 2023. "Experimental Effects of Institutionalizing Co-determination by a Procedurally Fair Bidding Rule," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(2), pages 445-458, May.
    2. Bester, H., 1991. "Bargaining V.S. Price Competition in a Market with Quality Uncertainty," Papers 9113, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
    3. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. List, John A. & Neilson, William S. & Price, Michael K., 2016. "The effects of group composition in a strategic environment: Evidence from a field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 67-85.
    5. Lata Gangadharan & Charles N. Noussair & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2019. "Introduction to the special issue in honor of Professor Charles R. Plott," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 577-584, September.
    6. John List, 2002. "Testing neoclassical competitive market theory in the field: Some pilot results," Framed Field Experiments 00172, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. Nagler, Amy M. & Menkhaus, Dale J. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Ehmke, Mariah D. & Coatney, Kalyn T., 2013. "Subsidy Incidence in Factor Markets: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(01), pages 1-17, February.
    8. List John A., 2007. "Field Experiments: A Bridge between Lab and Naturally Occurring Data," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-47, April.
    9. Kirchsteiger, G. & Niederle, M. & Potters, J.J.M., 1998. "The Endogenous Evolution of Market Institutions : An Experimental Investigation," Discussion Paper 1998-67, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. Brosig, Jeannette, 2006. "Communication channels and induced behavior," MPRA Paper 14035, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Hans-Theo Normann & Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2014. "Do short-term laboratory experiments provide valid descriptions of long-term economic interactions? A study of Cournot markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(3), pages 371-390, September.
    12. Charles Plott, 2014. "Public choice and the development of modern laboratory experimental methods in economics and political science," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 331-353, December.
    13. Claudia M. Landeo, 2018. "Law and economics and tort litigation institutions: theory and experiments," Chapters, in: Joshua C. Teitelbaum & Kathryn Zeiler (ed.), Research Handbook on Behavioral Law and Economics, chapter 9, pages 247-268, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    15. Omar Azfar & William Nelson, 2007. "Transparency, wages, and the separation of powers: An experimental analysis of corruption," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(3), pages 471-493, March.
    16. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel & Milam, Garrett H., 2003. "Bargaining versus posted price competition in customer markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 223-251, February.
    17. Kohamed Gomaa & Kiridaran Kanagaretnam & Stuart Mestelman & Mohamed Shehata, 2016. "Test-bedding the Replacement of the Incurred Credit Loss Model with an Expected Credit Loss Model: The Case of Trade Receivables," Department of Economics Working Papers 2016-05, McMaster University.
    18. Jose Apesteguia & Martin Dufwenberg & Reinhard Selten, 2007. "Blowing the Whistle," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 31(1), pages 143-166, April.
    19. Kai-Uwe Kuhn & Neslihan Uler, 2019. "Behavioral sources of the demand for carbon offsets: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 676-704, September.
    20. Dale J. Menkhaus & Owen R. Phillips & Allison F. M. Johnston & Alla V. Yakunina, 2003. "Price Discovery in Private Negotiation Trading with Forward and Spot Deliveries," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 89-107.

    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:ags:aaea89:270510. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.aaea.org .

    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.