Costly Monitoring, Dynamic Incentives, and Default
Gaetano Antinolfi ()
No 892, 2012 Meeting Papers from Society for Economic Dynamics
We study dynamic contracts between a lender and a borrower in the presence of costly state verification and hidden effort. The optimal contract minimizes social losses by mediating dynamic incentives and monitoring. Along the efficiency frontier, the threat of early termination is unavoidable for low levels of the borrower's promised utility; as the level increases, preventive monitoring is used to avoid future inefficient termination of the contractual relationship due to asymmetric information; for high level of promised utility, the threat of termination of the contractual relationship is no longer a useful tool to align dynamic incentives, preventive monitoring loses its role, and termination never occurs. Thus, the efficient contract optimizes the tradeoff between dynamic incentives and static incentives. Following the interpretation of the costly state verification literature, we can distinguish two levels of bankruptcy: one that leads to monitoring and the other that leads to liquidation.
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cta, nep-mic and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Journal Article: Costly monitoring, dynamic incentives, and default (2015)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:red:sed012:892
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in 2012 Meeting Papers from Society for Economic Dynamics Society for Economic Dynamics Marina Azzimonti Department of Economics Stonybrook University 10 Nicolls Road Stonybrook NY 11790 USA. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christian Zimmermann ().