Do Elections Always Motivate Incumbents? Experimentation vs. Career Concerns
This paper studies a principal-agent model of the relationship between an incumbent officeholder and the electorate, where the officeholder is initially uninformed about her ability. If officeholder effort and ability interact in the "production function" that determines performance in office, then an officeholder has an incentive to experiment-that is, raise effort so that performance becomes a more accurate signal of her ability. Elections reduce the experimentation effect, and the reduction in this effect may more than offset the positive "career-concerns" effect of elections on effort. Moreover, when this occurs, appointment of officeholders may Pareto-dominate elections.
|Date of creation:||01 Mar 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (202) 623-7000
Fax: (202) 623-4661
Web page: http://www.imf.org/external/pubind.htm
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/pubs/ord_info.htm|
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.:
- Dewatripont, Mathias & Jewitt, Ian & Tirole, Jean, 1999.
"The Economics of Career Concerns, Part II: Application to Missions and Accountability of Government Agencies,"
Review of Economic Studies,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 199-217, January.
- Mathias Dewatripont & Ian Jewitt & Jean Tirole, 1999. "The economics of career concerns: part 2 :application to missions and accountability of government agencies," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9641, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- Mirman, Leonard J & Samuelson, Larry & Urbano, Amparo, 1993.
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(3), pages 549-63, August.
- Amparo Urbano Salvador & Larry Samuelson & Leonard J. Mirman, 1990. "Monopoly experimentation," Working Papers. Serie AD 1990-04, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
- Mirman, L.J. & Samuelson, L. & Urbano, A., 1989. "Monopoly Experimentation," Papers 8-89-7, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
- Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
- le Borgne, E. & Lockwood, B., 2000. "Do Elections Always Motivate Incumbents?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 580, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- John Ferejohn, 1986. "Incumbent performance and electoral control," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 5-25, January.
- Dhillon, A. & Lockwood, B., 1999.
"When are Plurality Rule Voting Games Dominance-Solvable?,"
The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS)
549, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Dhillon, Amrita & Lockwood, Ben, 2004. "When are plurality rule voting games dominance-solvable?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 55-75, January.
- Gibbons, Robert & Waldman, Michael, 1999. "Careers in organizations: Theory and evidence," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 36, pages 2373-2437 Elsevier.
- Wittman, Donald, 1989. "Why Democracies Produce Efficient Results," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1395-1424, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:imf:imfwpa:03/57. 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: (Jim Beardow)or (Hassan Zaidi)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.