If banks have an informational monopoly about their clients, borrowers may curtail their effort level for fear of being exploited via high interest rates in the future. Banks can correct this incentive problem by committing to share private information with other lenders. The fiercer competition triggered by information sharing lowers future interest rates and future profits of banks. But, provided banks retain an initial informational advantage, their current profits are raised by the borrowers' higher effort. This trade-off determines the banks' willingness to share information. Their decision affects credit market competition, interest rates, volume of lending, and social welfare.

If banks have an informational monopoly about their clients, borrowers may curtail their effort level for fear of being exploited via high interest rates in the future. Banks can correct this incentive problem by committing to share private information with other lenders. The fiercer competition triggered by information sharing lowers future interest rates and future profits of banks. But, provided banks retain an initial informational advantage, their current profits are raised by the borrowers’ higher effort. This trade-off determines the banks’ willingness to share information. Their decision affects credit market competition, interest rates, volume of lending, and social welfare.

[Financially intermediated and stock market consumption-investment allocations, with and without governmental interventions, are compared in a welfare sense in overlapping generation economies with (and without) shocks to agents' intertemporal preferences. We first show that, in economies with preference shocks, governmental interventions subject to the same informational requirements as those imposed on financial intermediaries, lead to stock market allocations that are not inferior to those attained under financial intermediation. Second, we argue that the necessary interventions are qualitatively no different from those required to implement stationary optimal allocations in OLG models without shocks to agents' intertemporal consumption preferences.]

Financially intermediated and stock market consumption-investment allocations, with and without governmental interventions, are compared in a welfare sense in overlapping generation economies with (and without) shocks to agents’ intertemporal preferences. We first show that, in economies with preference shocks, governmental interventions subject to the same information requirements as those imposed on financial intermediaries, lead to stock market allocations that are not inferior to those attained under financial intermediation. Second, we argue that the necessary interventions are qualitatively no different from those required to implement stationary optimal allocations in OLG models without shocks to agents’ intertemporal consumption preferences.