Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T02:24:03.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transaction Cost Economics and Contract Duration: An Empirical Analysis of EDF Coal Contracts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Stéphane Saussier
Stéphane Saussier*
Affiliation:
ADIS – Université de Paris XI Sceaux ATOM – Université de Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne
Get access

Summary

This paper studies duration of inter-firm contracts in a transaction cost perspective. The aim of the paper is to test the propositions that can be derived from a transaction-cost framework. We built a non-truncated database representing the entire contractual relationships of Electricité de France (EDF) with its coal carriers and coal unloaders over the period 1977–1997. Section I explores factors that can explain the choice of contract duration. Section II describes the relationships between EDF and its suppliers. In Section III, we test and confirm most propositions derived from transaction-cost theory that relate contract duration to transaction characteristics. We believe this study to be the first attempt (1) to confirm transaction cost economics propositions using French data and (2) to endogenize asset specificity level at stake in transactions.

Ce papier étudie la durée des contrats interfirmes au regard de la théorie des coûts de transaction. L’objectif est de tester les propositions qui peuvent être dérivées de ce cadre d’analyse. Pour ce faire, nous avons construit une base de données non tronquée de contrats représentant l’ensemble des relations contractuelles entre Electricité de France (EDF) et ses partenaires intervenant pour le transport et la manutention du charbon sur la période 1977–1997. La section I présente les facteurs à l’origine de la durée des contrats. La section II décrit les relations entre EDF et ses partenaires. Dans la section III, nous testons et confirmons les propositions dérivées de la théorie des coûts de transaction. Nous pensons qu’il s’agit là de la première étude (1) utilisant des données françaises pour tester économétriquement les propositions de la théorie des coûts de transaction et (2) tenant compte du caractère endogène du niveau des actifs spécifiques.

Keywords

L14L92L94L14L92L94
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 65 , Issue 1 , 1999 , pp. 3 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 1999 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

(*)

I am grateful to Eric Brousseau, Scott Masten, Claude Ménard, Oliver Williamson and two anonymous referees, as well as participants at the ATOM, ENSTB, and ADIS seminars where a preliminary draft of this paper was presented. The author has a particular debt towards Jean-Michel Glachant for his indispensable help in the realization of the in-house inquiry necessary to this study. The thoughts expressed in this paper are the author’s, not reflecting the views of EDF. Usual caveats apply. The author gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the Scientific Council of the University of Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne.

References

Coeurderoy, R. and Quélin, B. [1997], L’économie des coûts de transaction. Un bilan des études empiriques sur l’intégration verticale, Revue d’Economie Politique, 107(2), pp. 145–181.Google Scholar
Crocker, K.J. and Masten, S.E. [1988], Mitigating Contractual Hazard: Unilateral Options and Contract Length, Rand Journal of Economics, 19(3), pp. 327–343.Google Scholar
Crocker, K.J. and Masten, S.E. [1996], Regulation and Administered Contracts Revisited: Lessons from Transaction-Cost Economics for Public Utility Regulation, Journal of Regulatory Economics, 9(1), pp. 5–39.Google Scholar
Grossman, S.J. and Hart, O.D. [1986], The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical Integration, Journal of Political Economy, 94(4), pp. 69–719.Google Scholar
Joskow, P.L. [1987], Contract Duration and Relationship-Specific Investment: Empirical Evidence from Coal Markets, American Economic Review, 77(1), pp. 168–185.Google Scholar
Klein, B.V., Crawford, R.G. and Alchian, A. [1978], Vertical integration appropriable quasi-rents and the competitive contracting process, Journal of Law and Economics, 21(2), pp. 297–326.Google Scholar
Klein, P. and Shelanski, H. [1995], Empirical Research in Transaction Cost Economics: a Survey and Assessment, Journal of Law, Economic and Organization, 11(2), pp. 335–362.Google Scholar
Kreps, D.M. [1996], Markets and Hierarchies and (Mathematical) Economic Theory, Mimeo.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J. [1996], The French Electricity Industry, in Gilbert, R. J. and Kahn, E.P. (Eds), International Comparisons of Electricity Regulation, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Masten, S.E. [1995], Empirical Research in Transaction-Cost Economics: Challenges, Progress, Directions, in Groenewegen, J. (Ed.), Transaction Cost Economics and Beyond, Amsterdam, Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 43–64.Google Scholar
Masten, S.E. [1998], Nominal Terms, Real Intentions, and Contract Interpretation, 2nd international conference on New Institutional Economics, Paris, September.Google Scholar
Masten, S.E. and Saussier, S. [1998], Econometrie des contrats: un bilan des développements récents de la théorie des coûts de transaction, XLVIIe congrès annuel de l’Association Française de Sciences Economiques (AFSE), Paris, Septembre.Google Scholar
Riordan, M.H. and Williamson, O.E. [1985], Asset Specificity and Economic Organization, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 3(3), pp. 365–378.Google Scholar
Salanié, B. [1997], Contract Theory: A Primer, Cambridge, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Saussier, S. [1997], Choix contractuels et coûts de transaction, thèse de doctorat, Université ParisI, Panthéon-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
Saussier, S. [1998a], Contractual Incompleteness and Transaction Costs: An Econometrical Test, Working Paper ATOM, Université Paris I, Panthéon-Sorbonne.Google Scholar
Saussier, S. [1998b], When Incomplete Contract Theory Meets Transaction Cost Economics, Working Paper ATOM, 2nd international conference on New Institutional Economics, Paris, September.Google Scholar
Williamson, O.E. [1985], The Economic Institutions of Capitalism, New-York, Free Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, O.E. [1991], Comparative Economic Organization: The Analysis of Discrete Structure alternatives, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2), pp. 269–296.Google Scholar
Williamson, O.E. [1993], The Economic Analysis of Institutions and Organisations – In General and With Respect to Country Studies, Working Paper n. 133, OCDE.Google Scholar
Williamson, O.E. [1996], The Mechanisms of Governance, Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar