Voting in Cartels: Theory and Evidence from the Shipping Industry
We examine the choice of voting rules by legal cartels with enforcement capabilities in the presence of uncertainty about demand and costs. We show that cartels face a trade-off between the commitment advantages of more stringent majority requirements and the loss of flexibility resulting from them. Expected heterogeneity in costs or demand conditions leads away from simple majority toward more stringent rules, while larger membership to the cartel leads away from unanimity toward less restrictive rules. Evidence from the shipping conferences of the late 1950s largely supports our model. With few firms, the rule favored by heterogeneous conferences is unanimity. In larger cartels, the favored rule is either 2/3 or 3/4-majority rule.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
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.:
- John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 309.
- Cave, Jonathan & Salant, Stephen W, 1995.
"Cartel Quotas under Majority Rule,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 82-102, March.
- Pedro L. MarÌn & Richard Sicotte, 2003. "Exclusive Contracts And Market Power: Evidence From Ocean Shipping," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 193-214, 06.
- Peter Cramton & Thomas R. Palfrey, 1991.
"Cartel Enforcement with Uncertainty About Costs,"
Papers of Peter Cramton
90ier, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 09 Jun 1998.
- Schmalensee, Richard, 1987. "Competitive advantage and collusive optima," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 351-367.
- Giovanni Maggi & Massimo Morelli, 2006.
"Self-Enforcing Voting in International Organizations,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1137-1158, September.
- Giovanni Maggi & Massimo Morelli, 2003. "Self Enforcing Voting in International Organizations," NBER Working Papers 10102, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- George Deltas, 2003. "The Small-Sample Bias of the Gini Coefficient: Results and Implications for Empirical Research," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 226-234, February.
- Caplin, Andrew & Nalebuff, Barry, 1991.
"Aggregation and Social Choice: A Mean Voter Theorem,"
Econometric Society, vol. 59(1), pages 1-23, January.
- Andrew Caplin & Barry Nalebuff, 1990. "Aggregation and Social Choice: A Mean Voter Theorem," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 938, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984.
"Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model,"
Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-40, September.
- D. McFadden & J. Hausman, 1981. "Specification Tests for the Multinominal Logit Model," Working papers 292, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Caplin, Andrew S & Nalebuff, Barry J, 1988. "On 64%-Majority Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(4), pages 787-814, July.
- Harrington, Joseph E, Jr, 1991. "The Determination of Price and Output Quotas in a Heterogeneous Cartel," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 32(4), pages 767-92, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cla:levrem:122247000000000598. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (David K. Levine)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.