IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bep/dewple/2004-1-1089.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Inventories A Buffer Against Weak Legal Systems?

Author

Listed:
  • A.V. Raja

    (University of Hamburg)

  • Hans-Bernd Schäfer

    (University of Hamburg, Germany)

Abstract

Weak enforcement of contracts leads to inefficient breach of contract and to an overall increase of contract breaches for firms and individuals. Existing literature on contract enforcement has focussed on self-enforcing contracts and contracts within a relationship, family or clan. At the firm level the focus is on ownership structures and vertical integration. Here, we suggest that firms use inventory holdings as a means to counteract weak contract enforcement. We test the hypothesis that firms operating in weak legal environments have a higher ratio of inventories to net sales than firms operating in strong legal environments. We present a conceptual model and empirical evidence in support of the hypothesis using data from over three hundred firms from fourteen product groups across thirty nine countries.

Suggested Citation

  • A.V. Raja & Hans-Bernd Schäfer, "undated". "Are Inventories A Buffer Against Weak Legal Systems?," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2004-1-1089, Berkeley Electronic Press.
  • Handle: RePEc:bep:dewple:2004-1-1089
    Note: oai:bepress:
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1089&context=gwp
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan S. Blinder, 1986. "Can the Production Smoothing Model of Inventory Behavior be Saved?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 431-453.
    2. Martin Brown & Armin Falk & Ernst Fehr, 2004. "Relational Contracts and the Nature of Market Interactions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(3), pages 747-780, May.
    3. Bental, Benjamin & Eden, Benjamin, 1993. "Inventories in a Competitive Environment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(5), pages 863-886, October.
    4. José A. Scheinkman & Jack Schechtman, 1983. "A Simple Competitive Model with Production and Storage," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(3), pages 427-441.
    5. George Baker & Robert Gibbons & Kevin J. Murphy, 2002. "Relational Contracts and the Theory of the Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 39-84.
    6. Kahn, James A, 1987. "Inventories and the Volatility of Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 667-679, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Aboal, Diego & Noya, Nelson & Rius, Andrés, 2014. "Contract Enforcement and Investment: A Systematic Review of the Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 322-338.
    2. Sebastián Fleitas & Andrés Rius & Carolina Román & Henry Willebald, 2013. "Contract enforcement, investment and growth in Uruguay since 1870," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 13-01, Instituto de Economía - IECON.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wen, Yi, 2003. "The Power of Demand: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Multi-Stage-Fabrication Economy with Inventories," Working Papers 03-13r, Cornell University, Center for Analytic Economics.
    2. Marcel Fafchamps Jan Willem Gunning & Remco Oostendorp, "undated". "Inventories, Liquidity, and Contractual Risk in African Manufacturing," Working Papers 97020, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    3. Fafchamps, Marcel & Gunning, Jan Willem & Oostendorp, Remco, 2000. "Inventories and Risk in African Manufacturing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(466), pages 861-93, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bep:dewple:2004-1-1089. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.bepress.com/gwp/default/ .

    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.