IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v29y2002i2p185-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ten rules of thumb in contract design: lessons from Danish agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Bogetoft
  • Henrik Ballebye Olesen

Abstract

Real contracts balance a number of conflicting objectives that characterise the contracting situation. Contract theory provides useful insights but the formal models used in theoretical analysis tend to focus on a few effects in stylised environments. The risk of a partial approach is that while improving one aspect of a contract, new and more serious problems may arise in other respects. Practical, theory-based contract design can therefore benefit from a more holistic, systemic approach. In this paper, we offer a checklist that can support such an approach. The checklist combines theory with experiences from Danish agricultural contracts. Copyright 2002, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Bogetoft & Henrik Ballebye Olesen, 2002. "Ten rules of thumb in contract design: lessons from Danish agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(2), pages 185-204, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:29:y:2002:i:2:p:185-204
    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.

    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:oup:erevae:v:29:y:2002:i:2:p:185-204. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.