IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v17y2001i2p285-318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Working and Shirking: Equilibrium in Public-Goods Games with Overlapping Generations of Players

Author

Listed:
  • Dickson, Eric S
  • Shepsle, Kenneth A

Abstract

In overlapping-generations models of public-goods provision, in which the contribution decision is binary and lifetimes are finite, the set of symmetric subgame-perfect equilibria can be categorized into three types: seniority equilibria, in which players contribute (effort) until a predetermined age and then shirk thereafter; dependency equilibria, in which players initially shirk, then contribute for a set number of periods, then shirk for the remainder of their lives; and sabbatical equilibria, in which players alternately contribute and shirk for periods of varying length before entering a final stage of shirking. In a world without discounting we establish conditions for equilibrium and demonstrate that for any dependency equilibrium there is a seniority equilibrium that Pareto dominates it ex ante. We proceed to characterize generational preferences over alternative seniority equilibria. We explore the aggregation of these preferences by embedding the public-goods provision game in a voting framework and solving for the majority-rule equilibria. In this way we can think of political processes as providing one natural framework for equilibrium selection in the original public-goods provision game. Copyright 2001 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Dickson, Eric S & Shepsle, Kenneth A, 2001. "Working and Shirking: Equilibrium in Public-Goods Games with Overlapping Generations of Players," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 285-318, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:285-318
    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. Ando, Munetomo & Kobayashi, Hajime, 2008. "Intergenerational conflicts of interest and seniority systems in organizations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(3-4), pages 757-767, March.
    2. Goerres, Achim, 2007. "Can we reform the welfare in times of grey majorities? The myth of an electoral opposition between younger and older voters in Germany," MPIfG Working Paper 07/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    3. Sita Nataraj Slavov, 2014. "Public Versus Private Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(2), pages 222-258, April.
    4. Christoph Engel & Heike Hennig‐Schmidt & Bernd Irlenbusch & Sebastian Kube, 2015. "On Probation: An Experimental Analysis," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 252-288, June.
    5. Ernesto Dal Bó & Martín Rossi, 2008. "Term Length and Political Performance," NBER Working Papers 14511, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Wildman, John & Hollingsworth, Bruce, 2009. "Blood donation and the nature of altruism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 492-503, March.

    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:jleorg:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:285-318. 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://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.