Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:04:07.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Régulation multidimensionnelle d'un monopole polluant et majorité politique aléatoire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Get access

Résumé

Le contrat de régulation optimale d'un monopole avec deux paramètres d'information privée et d'antisélection (productivité et niveau d'émissions polluantes) est caractérisé. Dans ce contexte de screening bidimension-nel, un aspect d'économie politique est introduit en considérant l'objectif du régulateur comme le résultat d'un processus électoral majoritaire. En fonction du régime politique, deux types de contrats apparaissent : l'un est séparateur, l'autre mélangeant. Leur occurrence dépend de la confrontation des incitations sociales et privées qui résultent de l'arbitrage effectuépar le régulateur entre l'extraction de la rente informationnelle et le gain d'efficacité allocative.

Summary

Summary

We characterize the optimal regulation contract of a monopoly with two private information parameters of adverse selection (productivity and polluting emissions levels). In this bidimensional screening framework, we introduce a political economy approach, considering that the social objective of the regulator depends on the outcome of a majority vote. Two main types of contracts appear: the first is a separating one, the second is a pooling or bunching one. Their occurrence depends on the conflict between We characterize the optimal regulation contract of a monopoly with two private information parameters of adverse selection (productivity and polluting emissions levels). In this bidimensional screening framework, we introduce a political economy approach, considering that the social objective of the regulator depends on the outcome of a majority vote. Two main types of contracts appear: the first is a separating one, the second is a pooling or bunching one. Their occurrence depends on the conflict between the private and social incentives, which are the result of the regulator's trade-off between informational rents extraction and allocative efficiency.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 2005 

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 the editors and to two anonymous referees for helpful suggestions. I also thank Pierre-Henri Morand and Lionel Thomas for their constructive remarks. The usual disclaimer applies.

**

CRESE, Université de Franche-Comté, 45 av. de l'Observatoire, 25030 Besançon Cedex, France.[email protected]

References

Références

Armstrong, M., (1999), “Optimal regulation with unknown demand and cost functions”, Journal of Economic Theory, Vol.84, Issue 2, pp. 196215.Google Scholar
Armstrong, M., Cowan, S. et Vickers, J. (1994), Regulatory reform, economic analysis and British experience, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Armstrong, M., et Rochet, J.C. (1999), “Multidimensional screening : a user's guide”, European Economic Review, Vol. 43, Issue 46, pp. 959979.Google Scholar
Baron, D., et Myerson, R. (1982), “Regulating a monopolist with unknown costs”, Econometrica, Vol. 50, pp. 911930.Google Scholar
Bonnet-Boisson, H., (2003), «Économie politique de l’intervention publique », thèse pour le Doctorat de Sciences Économiques, Université de Framche-Comté, UFR SJEGP de Besançon, France, 385 p.Google Scholar
Boyer, M., et Laffont, J.J. (1999), “Toward a political theory of the emergence of environmental incentive regulation”, RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 30, Issue 1, pp. 137157.Google Scholar
Cropper, M.L., et Oates, W.E. (1992), “Environmental economics : a survey”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 30, pp. 675740.Google Scholar
Damania, R., et Fredriksson, RG. (2000), “On the formation of industry lobby groups”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Vol. 41, pp. 315335.Google Scholar
Feldstein, M., (1999), “Tax avoidance and the deadweight loss of the income tax”, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 81, Issue 4, pp. 674680.Google Scholar
Fudenberg, D., et Tirole, J. (1991), Game theory, MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gonzalez, P., (2004), “Investment and screening under asymmetric endogenous information”, RAND Journal of Economics, Autumn, Vol. 35, No. 3.Google Scholar
Guesnerie, R., et Laffont, J.J. (1984), “A complete solution to a class of principal-agent problems with an application to the control of a self-managed firm”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 25, pp. 329369.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., (1994), “Regulation of pollution with asymmetric information”, in Dosi, C. et Graham-Tomasi, T., éds., nonpoint-source pollution regulation : issues and analysis, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., (1996), “Industrial policy and politics”, International Journal of Industrial Organisation, Vol. 14, pp. 127.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., Maskin, E. et Rochet, J.C. (1987), “Optimal non-linear pricing with two-dimensional characteristics”, in Groves, T., Radner, R. et Reiter, S., éds., Information, incentives and economic mechanisms, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., et Tirole, J. (1986), “Using cost information to regulate firms”, Journal of Poltical Economy, Vol. 64, pp. 614641.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., et Tirole, J. (1991), “The politics of government decision making : a theory of regulatory capture”, Quaterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 106, pp. 10891127.Google Scholar
Laffont, J.J., et Tirole, J. (1993), Incentives in procurement and regulation, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lewis, T.R., (1996), “Protecting theenvironment when costs and benefits are privately known”, RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 27, No.4, pp. 819847.Google Scholar
Lewis, T.R., et Sappington, D. (1988), “Countervailing incentives in agency problems”, Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 49, pp. 294313.Google Scholar
Loeb, M., et Magat, W. (1979), “A decentralized method of utility regulation” , Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 22, pp. 399404.Google Scholar
Myerson, R., (1991), Game theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rochet, J.C., et Choné, P. (1998), “Ironing, sweeping, and multidimensional screening”, Econometrica, Vol. 66, Issue 4, pp. 783826.Google Scholar
Rochet, J.C., et Stole, L.A. (2003), “The economics of multidimensional screening”, in Dewatripont, M., Hansen, L. et Turnovsky, S., éds., Advances in economic theory, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar