EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Reputation And The Allocation Of Ownership

Maija Halonen-Akatwijuka

Economic Journal, 2002, vol. 112, issue 481, 539-558

Abstract: The allocation of ownership matters even in long--term relationships. Ownership structure is chosen to encourage co--operation. The optimal ownership structure of the static game restricts the gain from deviation to be the lowest but also the punishment will be minimal. The worst ownership structure of the one--shot game is good in the repeated setting because it provides the highest punishment but bad because the gain from deviation is also the highest. When investment is inelastic, joint ownership is optimal. Allowing for renegotiation of ownership structure softens the punishment under joint ownership but it is still optimal for a wide parameter range. Copyright 2002 Royal Economic Society

Date: 2002
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (132)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Working Paper: Reputation and Allocation of Ownership (1995) Downloads
Working Paper: Reputation and allocation of ownership (1995) Downloads
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:ecj:econjl:v:112:y:2002:i:481:p:539-558

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... al.asp?ref=0013-0133

Access Statistics for this article

Economic Journal is currently edited by Martin Cripps, Steve Machin, Woulter den Haan, Andrea Galeotti, Rachel Griffith and Frederic Vermeulen

More articles in Economic Journal from Royal Economic Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing () and Christopher F. Baum ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-31
Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:112:y:2002:i:481:p:539-558