A powerful local government's optimal discretion in simple menu contract of monopoly regulation

We analyse the optimal discretion of a powerful local government (LG) in deciding the instrument choice and setting standards of simple menu contracts (composed of a fixed price and a cost reimbursement) of monopoly regulation. Between the two, a fixed-price contract entails more incentives for efficiency than a cost-reimbursement contract, but ensures more profits for the firm. Due to a preference bias towards the firm's benefits between governments, an incentive reward, offered by the federal government (FG) to the powerful LG with informational advantage of efficiency gain from the regulation, is considered to induce an efficient regulatory policy. We find that under the FG's delegation mechanism, upper-level government conflict leads to a compromised policy as an exchange payoff and additional informational rent to the LG for part of their information value. For the remaining information, the reward is rejected, and the LG has the discretionary power to set policy criteria for simple contracts. The results suggest that bureaucratic political issues still lead to an excessive tendency towards either a fixed price or cost reimbursement scheme, depending on the bias direction of the LG's preferences regarding the monopoly. However, the delegation mechanism of hierarchical bureaucracy can effectively alleviate the influence of policy distortions caused by political factors.