IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v3y1991i3p219-40.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commitment in Regulation: Defense Contracting and Extensions to Price Caps

Author

Listed:
  • Kovacic, William E

Abstract

Department of Defense regulation of weapons contracting uses incentive devices common to public utility regulation. This paper examines parallels between fixed-price contracts in weapons acquisition and the use of price caps to motivate public utilities. It uses defense contracting experience to identify limits to the efficiency and administrability benefits one can expect adoption of a price caps regime to produce in practice. Copyright 1991 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Kovacic, William E, 1991. "Commitment in Regulation: Defense Contracting and Extensions to Price Caps," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 219-240, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:3:y:1991:i:3:p:219-40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marcus Matthias Keupp, 2021. "Institutions and Armed Forces," Springer Books, in: Defense Economics, chapter 0, pages 23-65, Springer.
    2. Stephen P. Ferris & Jan Hanousek & Reza Houston, 2022. "Contractor default: Predictions, politics, and penalties in the procurement process," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(4), pages 1001-1039, December.
    3. William P. Rogerson, 1994. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 65-90, Fall.
    4. Lulfesmann, Christoph, 2002. "Partial monitoring, adverse selection, and the internal efficiency of the firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 1097-1118, October.
    5. Andreas Blume, 1998. "Contract Renegotiation with Time‐Varying Valuations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(3), pages 397-433, September.
    6. Dieter Bös, 1999. "Inefficient R&D in Public Procurement: Negative Consequences of a Separation between Award and Actual Contract," CESifo Working Paper Series 208, CESifo.
    7. Renaud Bellais & Martial Foucault & Jean-Michel Oudot, 2014. "Économie de la défense," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01052607, HAL.
    8. William P. Rogerson, 2003. "Simple Menus of Contracts in Cost-Based Procurement and Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 919-926, June.
    9. William P. Rogerson, 1993. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Discussion Papers 1078, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    10. Yossef Spiegel, 1996. "The Role of Debt in Procurement Contracts," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 379-407, September.
    11. Christoph Lülfesmann, 2021. "Strategic Shirking in Bilateral Trade," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(4), pages 1292-1313, October.
    12. William E. Kovacic & Dennis E. Smallwood, 1994. "Competition Policy, Rivalries, and Defense Industry Consolidation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 91-110, Fall.
    13. Chemla, Gilles & Faure-Grimaud, Antoine, 2001. "Dynamic adverse selection and debt," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1773-1792, October.
    14. Weisman, Dennis L., 2002. "Is there 'Hope' for price cap regulation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 349-370, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:3:y:1991:i:3:p:219-40. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.