Knowledge that Transforms

An organization makes collective decisions through neither markets nor contracts. Instead, rational agents voluntarily choose to follow a leader. In many cases, incentive problems are solved: the unique nondegenerate equilibrium achieves the first best, even though every agent has incentives to free ride. The leader has no special talents but is distinguished by getting exclusive access to information. A crucial feature is that the leader reveals part but not all of her information. It is this maintenance of informational asymmetry that permits achieving the first best. (JEL D23, M54)

What role does labor play in firms' market value? We use a production-based asset pricing model with factor adjustment costs and forward-looking agents to explore this question. We posit that the hiring of labor is akin to investment in capital and that the two interact, with the interaction being a crucial determinant of the dynamic behavior of market value. Using aggregate US corporate sector data, we estimate firms' optimal hiring and investment decisions and the consequences for firms' value. (JEL E22, E24, G31, G32, M51)

Bounding Revenue Comparisons across Multi-Unit Auction Formats under ε-Best Response by James T. E. Chapman, David McAdams and Harry J. Paarsch. Published in volume 97, issue 2, pages 455-458 of American Economic Review, May 2007

We consider a seller who faces several buyers and lacks access to an institution to credibly close a sale. If buyers anticipate that the seller may negotiate further, they will prefer to wait before making their best and final offers. This in turn induces the seller to bargain at length with buyers, even if doing so is costly. When the seller's cost of soliciting another round of offers is either very large or very small, the seller credibly commits to an auction and experiences negligible bargaining costs. Otherwise, there may be several rounds of increasing offers and significant seller losses. In these situations, an intermediary with a sufficiently valuable reputation and/or weak marginal incentives regarding price can create value by credibly committing to help sell the object without delay. (JEL C78, D44)

This paper presents a theory of trade agreements where "politics" play an central role. This stands in contrast with the standard theory, where even politically-motivated governments sign trade agreements only to deal with terms-of-trade externalities. We develop a model where governments may be motivated to sign a trade agreement both by the presence of standard terms-of-trade externalities and by the desire to commit vis-a-vis domestic industrial lobbies. The model is rich in implications. In particular, it predicts that trade agreements result in deeper trade liberalization when governments are more politically motivated (provided capital mobility is sufficiently high) and when capital can move more freely across sectors. Also, governments tend to prefer a commitment in the form of tariff ceilings rather than exact tariff levels. In a fully dynamic specification of the model, trade liberalization occurs in two stages: an immediate slashing of tariffs and a subsequent gradual reduction of tariffs. The immediate tariff cut is a reflection of the terms-of-trade motive for the agreement, while the domestic-commitment motive is reflected in the gradual phase of trade liberalization. Finally, the speed of trade liberalization is higher when capital is more mobile across sectors.

A sequentially rationalizable choice function is a choice function that can be retrieved by applying sequentially to each choice problem the same fixed set of asymmetric binary relations (rationales) to remove inferior alternatives. These concepts translate into economic language some human choice heuristics studied in psychology and explain cyclical patterns of choice observed in experiments. We study some properties of sequential rationalizability and provide a full characterization of choice functions rationalizable by two and three rationales. (JEL D01).

Preferences for redistribution, as well as the generosity of welfare states, differ significantly across countries. This paper tests whether there exists a feedback process of the economic regime on individual preferences. We exploit the experiment of German separation and reunification to establish exogeneity of the economic system. We find that, after German reunification, East Germans are more in favor of state intervention than West Germans. This effect is especially strong for older cohorts. We further find that East Germans' preferences converge toward those of West Germans. It will take one to two generations for preferences to converge completely. (JEL D12, D72, H11, H23, P26)

During the last several decades, a growing body of laboratory research has shown that human subjects do not always choose to maximize material payoffs. Economists following the lead of

Situations in which agents’ choices depend on choices of those in close proximity, be it social or geographic, are ubiquitous. Selecting a new computer platform, signing a political petition, or even catching the flu are examples in which social interactions have a significant role. While some behaviors or states propagate and explode within the population (e.g., Windows OS, the HIV virus) others do not (e.g., certain computer viruses). Our goal in this paper is twofold. First, we provide a general dynamic model in which agents’ choices depend on the underlying social network of connections. Second, we show the usefulness of the model in determining when a given behavior expands within a population or disappears as a function of the environment’s fundamentals. We study a framework in which agents face a choice between two actions, 0 and 1 (e.g., whether to pursue a certain level of education, switch to Linux OS, etc.). Agents are linked through a social network, and an agent’s payoffs from each action depend on the number of neighbors she has and her neighbors’ choices. The diffusion process is defined so that at each period, each agent best responds to the actions taken by her neighbors in the previous period, assuming that her neighbors follow the population distribution of actions (a mean-field approximation). Steady states correspond to equilibria of the static game. Under some simple conditions, equilibria take one of two forms. Some are stable, so that a slight perturbation to any such equilibrium would lead the diffusion process to converge back to that equilibrium point. Other equilibria are unstable, so that a slight change in the distribution of actions leads to a new distribution of actions and eventually to a stable steady state. We call such equilibria tipping points. We analyze how the environment’s fundamentals (cost distribution, payoffs, and network structure) affect the set of equilibria, and characterize the adoption patterns within the network. The paper relates to recent work on network games and network diffusion, including work by Stephen Morris (2000); Pastor-Satorras and Vespignani (2000); Mark E. J. Newman (2002); Dunia López-Pintado (2004); Jackson and Brian W. Rogers (2007); Jackson and Yariv (2005); and Andrea Galeotti et al. (2005, henceforth GGJVY). Its contribution is in characterizing diffusion of strategic behavior and analyzing the stability properties of equilibria, and employing methods that allow us to make comparisons across general network structures and settings. Given that social networks differ substantially and systematically in structure across settings (e.g., ethnic groups, professions, etc.), understanding the implications of social structure on diffusion is an important undertaking for a diverse set of applications.

The paper generalizes the Taylor principle—the proposition that central banks can stabilize the macroeconomy by raising their interest rate instrument more than one-for-one in response to higher inflation—to an environment in which reaction coefficients in the monetary policy rule change regime, evolving according to a Markov process. We derive a long-run Taylor principle which delivers unique bounded equilibria in two standard models. Policy can satisfy the Taylor principle in the long run, even while deviating from it substantially for brief periods or modestly for prolonged periods. Macroeconomic volatility can be higher in periods when the Taylor principle is not satisfied, not because of indeterminacy, but because monetary policy amplifies the impacts of fundamental shocks. Regime change alters the qualitative and quantitative predictions of a conventional new Keynesian model, yielding fresh interpretations of existing empirical work. (JEL E31, E43, E52)