The Advantage of Cooperatives under Asymmetric Cost Information



third set of constraints are the budget balancing (BC) constraints. They say
that the farmers can not get more than what is earned at the market place.1

The incentive compatibility constraints induce considerable structure on
the production and payment plans. For an arbitrary production and payment
scheme for fanner г, ¾(c) and sl(c), let <jt(ct) and
si(ci) be the corresponding
conditional expected production and payment when the types of the other
farmers have been integrated out, i.e.

¾(cj) := ¾ (¾(ci,c-j)) Vci
Si(ci) := ¾(sj(ci,c-i)) Vci

We now have the following useful proposition.

Proposition 1 The production and payment schemes ρ(.) = (ς⅛(.))i∈j and
s(.) = (si(.))ie/ are incentive compatible if and only if

• c,t > c" ≠> qi(di) ≤ qi(<ff) Vi,⅛(fi, and

• si(ci) = ki + ci ∙ qi(ci) + qi(ci) dci ∀t,ci

Proof. Initially, we note that by independence, the conditional expectar
tion operator
E£_. (.) does not depend on the specific value of the costs c⅛.
Therefore, the incentive compatibility constraints are equivalent to

¾(ci) - ci qi(ci) ≥ ¾(⅛) - ci ∙ ¾(ξ) ∀i, ci, ξ.             (1)

To show the two properties in the proposition, we consider a given i and note
that (1) for arbitrary
cfi and c" with di > ^implies

¾(c,i) - c; ∙ ⅛(ξ) ≥ s-i(c") - < ∙ ¾(<) = s-i(<) - < ■ ¾(<) + « -1⅛)¾(<)
Si(<) - < ∙ ¾(<⅞') ≥ ¾(⅛) - c" ∙ ¾(c,i) = 5i(c!) - C,i ■ ¾(c') + (ξ - e'')g,(eɔ

or equivalently

. <J'X ⅛⅛ - ⅛ ’ ft(⅛) - (*(<) - 4' ■ ¾W))      ∕√x /nʌ

-ft(ɑi ) ≤ --------------^⅛-⅛-------------- ~ ~¾(ci)    V2)

1We assume that the incentive problem is related to the cost types only. The planned
production levels can be implemented without additional incentive problems eg because
the chosen production levels are directly verifiable such that deviations can be avoided
with infinitely harsh p
unishment treats. We therefore do not need to let s∣(.) depend on
the actual production levels.



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. The Triangular Relationship between the Commission, NRAs and National Courts Revisited
4. THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF THE MEXICAN MARKET FOR U.S. COTTON: IMPACT OF THE ELIMINATION OF TEXTILE AND CLOTHING QUOTAS
5. Trade Openness and Volatility
6. Meat Slaughter and Processing Plants’ Traceability Levels Evidence From Iowa
7. Rent-Seeking in Noxious Weed Regulations: Evidence from US States
8. Behaviour-based Knowledge Systems: An Epigenetic Path from Behaviour to Knowledge
9. ADJUSTMENT TO GLOBALISATION: A STUDY OF THE FOOTWEAR INDUSTRY IN EUROPE
10. Impact of Ethanol Production on U.S. and Regional Gasoline Prices and On the Profitability of U.S. Oil Refinery Industry