Tax incidence with endogenous quality and costly bargaining: Theory and evidence from hybrid vehicle subsidies

2017 ◽  
Vol 155 ◽  
pp. 93-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumeet Gulati ◽  
Carol McAusland ◽  
James M. Sallee
2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Bideaux ◽  
Jérôme Laffite ◽  
Wilfrid Marquis-Favre ◽  
Serge Scavarda ◽  
Franck Guillemard

Author(s):  
Moeed Yusuf

This book is the first to theorize third party mediation in crises between regional nuclear powers. Its relevance flows from two of the most significant international developments since the end of the Cold War: the emergence of regional nuclear rivalries; and the shift from the Cold War’s bipolar context to today’s unipolar international setting. Moving away from the traditional bilateral deterrence models, the book conceptualizes crisis behavior as “brokered bargaining”: a three-way bargaining framework where the regional rivals and the ‘third party’ seek to influence each other to behave in line with their crisis objectives and in so doing, affect each other’s crisis behavior. The book tests brokered bargaining theory by examining U.S.-led crisis management in South Asia, analyzing three major crises between India and Pakistan: the Kargil conflict, 1999; the 2001-02 nuclear standoff; and the Mumbai crisis, 2008. The case studies find strong evidence of behavior predicted by the brokered bargaining framework. They also shed light on several risks of misperceptions and inadvertence due to the challenges inherent in signaling to multiple audiences simultaneously. Traditional explanations rooted in bilateral deterrence models do not account for these, leaving a void with serious practical consequences, which the introduction of brokered bargaining seeks to fill. The book’s findings also offer lessons for crises on the Korean peninsula, between China and India, and between potential nuclear rivals in the Middle East.


Author(s):  
Javier Corrales

Chapter 2 lays out the book’s main argument on the importance of power asymmetry. It draws from three strands in the literature. From the literature on democratization, this chapter borrows the notion of constitutions as pact-making. From bargaining theory is borrowed the notion of self-dealing: Incumbents will seek to advance the powers of the office that they hold. And from the literature on elite theories of regime formation, the chapter develops the argument that power asymmetries among elite actors are the fundamental drivers of balanced constitutions. This book also seeks to explain the origins of an important institution: constitutions. It takes seriously the insight from institutionalists that institutions emerge from actors’ de facto power and bargaining outcomes. Yet, this book does not assume that actors’ preferences are exogenous, or exclusively ideological, and partisan; rather, those who negotiate a constitution have preferences that depend on whether they are Incumbents or Opposition forces, often regardless of their ideologies and partisan orientation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document