Spillovers, Investment Incentives and the Property Rights Theory of the Firm

Journal of Industrial Economics (Impact Factor: 1.04). 06/2004; 52(2):229-253. DOI: 10.1111/j.0022-1821.2004.00224.x
Source: RePEc


This paper examines the property rights theory of the firm when a manager's relationship-specific investment can be partially appropriated by the owner of an asset even if cooperation breaks down. The investments of non owners may then be devalued, but are seldom wholly lost to the owner. With such spillovers, the outside-option principle can be incorporated into the Grossman-Hart-Moore framework without implying that ownership demotivates. Enriched predictions on the determinants of integration emerge. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2004.

Download full-text


Available from: Ben Lockwood,
  • Source
    • "It is also worth mentioning that different bargaining approaches within property rights theory deliver the same results in the context of our paper. De Meza and Lockwood (2004) analyze a case where there are spillovers: part of the value of investment remains in the asset even if the employee leaves. Then the basic GHM result that ownership motivates holds regardless of the type of bargaining model applied if spillovers are large enough. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We apply the property rights theory of Grossman-Hart-Moore in the music industry and study the optimal allocation of copyright between the artists who create music and the labels who promote and distribute it. Digital technology opens up a role for new intermediaries. We find that entry of online platforms occurs only if they are sufficiently more productive in distribution than the incumbent label. Furthermore, entry leads to a change in bargaining positions and it can become optimal for the copyright to be shifted from the label to the artist.
    SSRN Electronic Journal 10/2004; DOI:10.2139/ssrn.603461
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Exclusive contracts prohibit one or both parties from trading with anyone else. Contrary to earlier findings, notably Segal and Whinston (2000), we show that investments that are specific to the contracted parties may be encouraged. Results depend on the nature of the investments and whether the bargaining is cooperative or non-cooperative. The major part of the analysis show that exclusive contracts designed to 'assure' the supply of essential inputs promote investment. Infinite penalties for breach, even if ex post renegotiable, may result in excessive investment, in which case a finite penalty for breach achieves the first-best outcome.
    The RAND Journal of Economics 07/2004; 38(1). DOI:10.1111/j.1756-2171.2007.tb00045.x · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper pinpoints optimal vertical arrangements in settings characterized by incomplete contracting and resale of an intermediate input (a "widget"). In the Grossman-Hart-Moore property rights theory, we conclude that sometimes strictly complementary assets should be owned separately to permit the emergence of a secondary market. In a richer model where the parties choose specific and nonspecific investments, vertical separation may also dominate joint ownership. The article then examines the profitability of three integration forms when the proposed bargaining model substitutes random-order values (e.g., the Shapley value). The conclusions differ markedly from existing claims. (JEL C70, C78, D23, L42) The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Yale University. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.
    Journal of Law Economics and Organization 05/2009; 25(1):211-234. DOI:10.1093/jleo/ewn012 · 1.02 Impact Factor
Show more