IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/wpaper/129335.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mechanism Design with Costly Inspection

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmadzadeh, Amirreza
  • Waizmann, Stephan

Abstract

This paper studies how to combine screening menus and inspection in mechanism design. A Principal procures a good from an Agent whose cost is his private information. The Principal has three instruments: screening menus —i.e., quantities and transfers — and (ex-ante) inspection. Inspection is costly but reveals the Agent’s cost. The combination of inspection and screening menus mitigates inefficiencies: the optimal mechanism procures an efficient quantity from all Agents whose cost of production is sufficiently low, regardless of whether inspection has taken place. However, quantity distortions still necessarily occur in optimal regulation; the quantity procured from Agents with higher production costs is inefficiently low. Both results are true regardless of the magnitude of inspection costs. In contrast to settings without inspection, incentive compatibility con-straints do not bind locally. This paper provides a method to address this challenge, characterizing which constraints bind.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmadzadeh, Amirreza & Waizmann, Stephan, 2024. "Mechanism Design with Costly Inspection," TSE Working Papers 24-1533, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  • Handle: RePEc:tse:wpaper:129335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/wp/2024/wp_tse_1533.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2013. "Auctions with contingent payments — An overview," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 666-675.
    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. Vladimirov, Vladimir, 2015. "Financing bidders in takeover contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 534-557.
    2. Andrés Fioriti & Allan Hernandez-Chanto, 2022. "Leveling the Playing Field for Risk-Averse Agents in Security-Bid Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5441-5463, July.
    3. Kiho Yoon, 2020. "Bilateral trading with contingent contracts," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 445-461, June.
    4. Di Corato, Luca & Dosi, Cesare & Moretto, Michele, 2015. "Multidimensional auctions for long-term procurement contracts under the threat of early exit: the case of conservation auctions," Working Paper Series 2015:6, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    5. Bernhardt, Dan & Liu, Tingjun & Sogo, Takeharu, 2020. "Costly auction entry, royalty payments, and the optimality of asymmetric designs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Tymofiy Mylovanov & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2017. "Optimal Allocation with Ex Post Verification and Limited Penalties," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2666-2694, September.
    7. Tingjun Liu & Dan Bernhardt, 2021. "Rent Extraction with Securities Plus Cash," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(4), pages 1869-1912, August.
    8. Di Corato, Luca & Moretto, Michele, 2016. "Selling real assets: the impact of idiosyncratic project risk in an auction environment," Working Paper Series 2016:9, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
    9. Prest, Brian C. & Stock, James H., 2023. "Climate royalty surcharges," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Evan M. Herrnstadt & Ryan Kellogg & Eric Lewis, 2020. "The Economics of Time-Limited Development Options: The Case of Oil and Gas Leases," Working Papers 2020-66, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    11. Vasserman, Shoshana & Watt, Mitchell, 2021. "Risk aversion and auction design: Theoretical and empirical evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Sun, Wuqin & Wang, Dazhong & Zhang, Yue, 2018. "Optimal profit sharing mechanisms with type-dependent outside options," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-66.
    13. Liu, Tingjun, 2016. "Optimal equity auctions with heterogeneous bidders," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 94-123.
    14. Sogo, Takeharu, 2017. "Effects of seller’s information disclosure in equity auctions requiring post-auction investment," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 166-181.
    15. Mehmet Ekmekci & Nenad Kos & Rakesh Vohra, 2016. "Just Enough or All: Selling a Firm," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 223-256, August.
    16. Xun Chen & Shanmin Li & Dazhong Wang, 2022. "Optimal revenue-sharing mechanisms with seller commitment to ex-post effort," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(1), pages 141-159, January.
    17. Takeharu Sogo & Dan Bernhardt & Tingjun Liu, 2016. "Endogenous Entry to Security-Bid Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(11), pages 3577-3589, November.
    18. Byoung Jun & Elmar Wolfstetter, 2014. "Security bid auctions for agency contracts," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(4), pages 289-319, December.
    19. Evan Herrnstadt & Ryan Kellogg & Eric Lewis, 2024. "Drilling Deadlines and Oil and Gas Development," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 92(1), pages 29-60, January.
    20. Chen, Jiakai, 2021. "LIBOR's poker," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mechanism Design; Verification; Principal-Agent; Inspection; Procurement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation

    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:tse:wpaper:129335. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tsetofr.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.