Redistribution Through Markets

Policymakers frequently use price regulations as a response to inequality in the markets they control. In this paper, we examine the optimal structure of such policies from the perspective of mechanism design. We study a buyer‐seller market in which agents have private information about both their valuations for an indivisible object and their marginal utilities for money. The planner seeks a mechanism that maximizes agents' total utilities, subject to incentive and market‐clearing constraints. We uncover the constrained Pareto frontier by identifying the optimal trade‐off between allocative efficiency and redistribution. We find that competitive‐equilibrium allocation is not always optimal. Instead, when there is inequality across sides of the market, the optimal design uses a tax‐like mechanism, introducing a wedge between the buyer and seller prices, and redistributing the resulting surplus to the poorer side of the market via lump‐sum payments. When there is significant same‐side inequality that can be uncovered by market behavior, it may be optimal to impose price controls even though doing so induces rationing.

Multiregional Oligopoly with Capacity Constraints

We develop a model of Cournot competition between capacity-constrained firms that sell a single good to multiple regions. We provide a novel characterization for the unique equilibrium allocation of the good across regions and design an algorithm to compute it. We show that a reduction in transportation costs by a firm may negatively impact the profit of all firms and reduce aggregate consumer surplus if such a firm is capacity constrained. Our results imply that policies promoting free trade may have unintended consequences and reduce aggregate welfare in capacity-constrained industries. This paper was accepted by David Simchi-Levi, revenue management and market analytics.

Incomplete Contracts, Power and Efficiency: A Theoretical Analysis

This paper formalizes the idea that the allocation of tasks and adoption of technology in capitalist firms could be inefficient. Some previous studies have attempted this exercise, but the framework and results in this paper are different. The paper models contracts that are incomplete owing to the presence of unforeseen/indescribable contingencies, which opens up the possibility of renegotiation. Renegotiation can improve outcomes, but also leads to a hold-up problem. Given this, the equilibrium allocation is inefficient compared to other (non-hierarchical) alternatives. The extent of the inefficiency can be linked to the degree of incompleteness. This model captures insights from the literature on the microeconomic roots of inefficiency and the exercise of control and power. It also provides a concrete setting where indescribable contingencies do (and do not) matter—a much-debated issue. JEL Codes: D21, B1, B2

Selling with evidence

We study the informed‐principal problem in a bilateral asymmetric information trading setting with interdependent values and quasi‐linear utilities. The informed seller proposes a mechanism and voluntarily certifies information about the good's characteristics. When the set of certifiable statements is sufficiently rich, we show that there is an ex ante profit‐maximizing selling procedure that is an equilibrium of the mechanism proposal game. In contrast to posted price settings, the allocation obtained when product characteristics are commonly known (the unravelling outcome) may not be an equilibrium allocation, even when all buyer types agree on the ranking of product quality. Our analysis relies on the concept of strong Pareto optimal allocation, which was originally introduced by Maskin and Tirole (1990) in private value environments.

Sorting in the Labor Market

This review surveys the literature on sorting in the labor market. There are inherent differences in worker ability and across-firm productivity. Two fundamental questions are whether the exact composition of skills of workers and productivity of firms affects output and how this composition determines the equilibrium allocation of workers within a firm and between firms. There has been a surge of research investigating the causes and consequences of the process of allocation of heterogeneous workers to firms. The focus in this review is on theory that sheds light on open questions in macroeconomics, labor, and industrial organization, with a particular emphasis on the role of firm size. Those models allow us to infer from the observed sorting patterns (who matches with whom) what the underlying technological determinants are and how they have evolved in recent decades. Furthermore, they help us understand the technological origins of important labor market trends, such as the increase in wage inequality and the change in labor market and firm dynamics.

Bargaining over crowdfunding benefits

Purpose Crowdfunding creates multifaceted benefits for different agents who all desire to extract some of these benefits. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the allocation of crowdfunding benefits among crowdfunders, entrepreneurs, and venture capitalists. Design/methodology/approach The present paper develops a multi-stage bargaining model with a double-sided moral hazard. Findings It is demonstrated that higher entrepreneurial bargaining power vis-à-vis the crowd may not always be beneficial for the venture. Most importantly, this is due to the reduced success probability of crowdfunding resulting from higher bargaining power of the entrepreneur. Bargaining power and the value of outside options determine the equilibrium allocation of crowdfunding benefits, expected venture value, and thus expected wealth of all agents. Practical implications Entrepreneurs face a tradeoff between venture quality gains and worse outcomes from crowdfunding campaigns. Crowdfunding success and thus venture quality gains are the ultimate goal of policy makers if they aim to enhance the overall social welfare. Originality/value This paper is the first to investigate how multifaceted crowdfunding benefits are allocated between the crowd, entrepreneurs, and venture capitalists. The paper furthers the development of an appropriate regulatory framework for crowdfunding by depicting new and original effects related to crowdfunding.

BANK RUNS: THE PREDEPOSIT GAME

We analyze in some detail the full predeposit game in a simple, tractable, yet very rich, banking environment. How does run-risk affect the optimal deposit contract? If there is a run equilibrium in the postdeposit game, then the optimal contract in the predeposit game tolerates small-probability runs. However, this does not mean that small changes in run-risk are ignored. In some cases, the optimal contract becomes—as one would expect—strictly more conservative as the run-probability increases (until it switches to the best run-proof contract), and the equilibrium allocation is not a mere randomization over the equilibrium allocations from the postdeposit game. In other cases, the allocation is a mere randomization over the equilibria from the postdeposit game. In the first cases (the more intuitive cases), the incentive constraint does not bind. In the second cases, the incentive constraint does bind.

Competitive Search with Ex-post Opportunism

We consider a frictional market where an element of the terms of trade (price or quantity) is posted ex-ante (before the matching process) while the other is determined ex-post. By doing so, sellers can exploit their local monopoly power by adjusting prices or quantities once the local demand is realized. We find that when sellers can adjust quantities ex-post, there exists a unique symmetric equilibrium where an increase in the buyer-seller ratio leads to higher quantities and prices. When buyers instead can choose quantities ex-post, a higher buyer-seller ratio leads to higher prices but lower traded quantities. These equilibrium allocations are generically constrained inefficient in both intensive and extensive margins. When sellers post ex-ante quantities and adjust prices ex-post, a symmetric equilibrium exists where buyers obtain no surplus from trade. This equilibrium allocation is not constrained efficient either. If buyers choose prices ex-post, there is no trade in equilibrium when entry is costly.