ECARES, Universite Libre de Bruxelles
50 avenue Franklin Roosevelt
1050 Brussels BELGIUM
Information about this author at RePEc
NBER Working Papers and Publications
|May 2018||Come Together: Firm Boundaries and Delegation|
with Laura Alfaro, Nicholas Bloom, Paola Conconi, Harald Fadinger, Andrew Newman, Raffaella Sadun, John Van Reenen: w24603
Little is known theoretically, and even less empirically, about the relationship between firm boundaries and the allocation of decision rights within firms. We develop a model in which firms choose which suppliers to integrate and whether to delegate decisions to integrated suppliers. We test the predictions of the model using a novel dataset that combines measures of vertical integration and delegation for a large set of firms from many countries and industries. In line with the model's predictions, we obtain three main results: (i) integration and delegation co-vary positively; (ii) producers are more likely to integrate suppliers in input sectors with greater productivity variation (as the option value of integration is greater); and (iii) producers are more likely to integrate supp...
|May 2012||Industrial Policy and Competition|
with Philippe Aghion, Mathias Dewatripont, Luosha Du, Ann Harrison: w18048
Using a comprehensive dataset of all medium and large enterprises in China between 1998 and 2007, we show that industrial policies allocated to competitive sectors or that foster competition in a sector increase productivity growth. We measure competition using the Lerner Index and include as industrial policies subsidies, tax holidays, loans, and tariffs. Measures to foster competition include policies that are more dispersed across firms in a sector or measures that encourage younger and more productive enterprises.
Published: Philippe Aghion & Jing Cai & Mathias Dewatripont & Luosha Du & Ann Harrison & Patrick Legros, 2015. "Industrial Policy and Competition," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 1-32, October. citation courtesy of
|February 1993||The Economic Consequences of Legislative Oversight: Theory and Evidencefrom the Medical Profession|
with Shawn Everett Kantor: w4281
This paper provides a positive analysis of how formal, periodic legislative oversight of regulatory agencies can influence market outcomes and the welfare of regulated industries. Whereas previous research has focused on the political distinction between passive and active legislative oversight, this paper shows that there exists an important economic difference between two mechanisms as well. We develop a principal-agent model that describes how a regulatory agent's incentives are influenced if its actions are publicly scrutinized. Our empirical analysis supports our claim that formal oversight leads to measurable economic effects.