Why Industrial Policies Fail: Limited Commitment
The strategic effects of subsidies on output and subsidies on investment differ substantially in dynamic models where a government's commitment ability is limited. Output subsidies remain effective even as the period of commitment vanishes, but investment subsidies may become completely ineffective. This difference has been obscured because most existing models of strategic trade policy are static.
|Date of creation:||01 Sep 1993|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 207 Giannini Hall #3310, Berkeley, CA 94720-3310|
Phone: (510) 642-3345
Fax: (510) 643-8911
Web page: http://www.escholarship.org/repec/are_ucb/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Larry M. Ausubel & Raymond J. Deneckere, 1989. "Reputation in Bargaining and Durable Goods Monopoly," Levine's Working Paper Archive 201, David K. Levine.
- Krishna, Kala & Thursby, Marie, 1991.
"Optimal policies with strategic distortions,"
Journal of International Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 31(3-4), pages 291-308, November.
- Kala Krishna & Marie Thursby, 1988. "Optimal Policies with Strategic Distortions," NBER Working Papers 2527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Krishna, K. & Thursby, M., 1991. "Optimal Polocies with Strategic Distortions," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1004, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
- Markusen, James R. & Venables, Anthony J., 1988. "Trade policy with increasing returns and imperfect competition : Contradictory results from competing assumptions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3-4), pages 299-316, May.
- Markusen, James R. & Venables, Anthony J, 1986. "Trade Policy with Increasing Returns and Imperfect Competition: Contradictory Results from Competing Assumptions," CEPR Discussion Papers 120, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
- James A. Brander & Barbara J. Spencer, 1984. "Export Subsidies and International Market Share Rivalry," NBER Working Papers 1464, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Matsuyama, Kiminori, 1990. "Perfect Equilibria in a Trade Liberalization Game," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 480-492, June.
- Kiminori Matsuyama, 1987. "Perfect Equilibria in a Trade Liberalization Game," Discussion Papers 738, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Karp, Larry S & Perloff, Jeffrey M, 1989. "Dynamic Oligopoly in the Rice Export Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(3), pages 462-470, August.
- Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
- Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1983. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," NBER Working Papers 1236, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Robert Driskill & Stephen McCafferty, 1989. "Dynamic Duopoly with Output Adjustment Costs in International Markets: Taking the Conjecture out of Conjectural Variations," NBER Chapters,in: Trade Policies for International Competitiveness, pages 125-144 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Eaton, Jonathan & Engers, Maxim, 1990. "Intertemporal Price Competition," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(3), pages 637-659, May.
- Epstein, Larry G & Denny, Michael G S, 1983. "The Multivariate Flexible Accelerator Model: Its Empirical Restrictions and an Application to U.S. Manufacturing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(3), pages 647-674, May.
- Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1988. "Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly: Reply," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 603-607. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)