Cartel Quotas under Majority Rule

Jonathan Cave and Stephen Salant

American Economic Review, 1995, vol. 85, issue 1, 82-102

Abstract: The authors examine the choice of quotas by legal volume-restricting organizations: cartels, commodity agreements, agricultural marketing boards, and prorationing boards. Unlike their illegal counterparts, legal cartels have published regulations and broader enforcement capabilities. However, differences in costs and size among cartel members still make quota selection contentious. Conflicts over quotas are typically resolved by voting. Side-payments to influence votes are prohibited. The authors examine the predicted effects of this real-world voting institution on prices and welfare. They also deduce the economic consequences of exogenous political changes, such as alterations in the voting weights or in the identity of the voters. Copyright 1995 by American Economic Association.

Date: 1995
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (23)

Downloads: (external link)
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8282%2819950 ... O%3B2-G&origin=repec full text (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.

Related works:
Chapter: Cartel Quotas under Majority Rule (1996)
Working Paper: Cartel Quotas Under Majority Rule (1992)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:85:y:1995:i:1:p:82-102

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/subscriptions

Access Statistics for this article

American Economic Review is currently edited by Esther Duflo

More articles in American Economic Review from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().