Difference between revisions of "Dixit Grossman Helpman (1997) - Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making"
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Article | {{Article | ||
|Has page=Dixit Grossman Helpman (1997) - Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making | |Has page=Dixit Grossman Helpman (1997) - Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making | ||
| − | |Has title=Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making | + | |Has bibtex key= |
| − | |Has author= | + | |Has article title=Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making |
| + | |Has author=Dixit Grossman Helpman | ||
|Has year=1997 | |Has year=1997 | ||
|In journal= | |In journal= | ||
Latest revision as of 18:14, 29 September 2020
| Article | |
|---|---|
| Has bibtex key | |
| Has article title | Common Agency And Coordination General Theory And Application To Government Policy Making |
| Has author | Dixit Grossman Helpman |
| Has year | 1997 |
| In journal | |
| In volume | |
| In number | |
| Has pages | |
| Has publisher | |
| © edegan.com, 2016 | |
Reference(s)
Dixit, A., G. Grossman and E. Helpman (1997), Common Agency and Coordination: General Theory and Application to Government Policy Making, Journal of Political Economy 105, 752-69. pdf
Abstract
We develop a model of common agency with complete informa- tion and general preferences with nontransferable utility, and we prove that the principals' Nash equilibrium in truthful strategies implements an efficient action. We apply this theory to the construction of a positive model of public finance, where organized special interests can lobby the government for consumer and pro- ducer taxes or subsidies and targeted lump-sum taxes or transfers. The lobbies use only the nondistorting transfers in their noncoop- erative equilibrium, but their intergroup competition for transfers turns into a prisoners' dilemma in which the government captures all the gain that is potentially available to the parties.
