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

Peter Bogetoft and Henrik Ballebye Olesen

European Review of Agricultural Economics, 2002, vol. 29, issue 2, 185-204

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.

Date: 2002
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (42)

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

Related works:
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:oup:erevae:v:29:y:2002:i:2:p:185-204

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

European Review of Agricultural Economics is currently edited by Timothy Richards, Salvatore Di Falco, Céline Nauges and Vincenzina Caputo

More articles in European Review of Agricultural Economics from Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().