To queue or not to queue: equilibrium behavior in queueing systems
In: International series in operations research & management science 59
14 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International series in operations research & management science 59
SSRN
In: Information economics and policy, Band 22, Heft 3, S. 276-286
ISSN: 0167-6245
In: Journal of theoretical politics, Band 13, Heft 4, S. 413-424
ISSN: 1460-3667
We consider a politician's choice of whether to be evaluated, either by subjecting himself to a detailed interview or by asking for the appointment of a special prosecutor. If politicians are risk-neutral, then in equilibrium all choose to be evaluated. If politicians are risk-averse, then whether when they do or do not know the quality of their own actions, stable equilibria may exist in which politicians can avoid evaluation, or prefer evaluation by a body which can poorly discriminate between good and bad actions. The ability of voters to distinguish between good and bad politicians may therefore be limited.
In: Journal of theoretical politics, Band 13, Heft 4, S. 413-424
ISSN: 0951-6298
In: Public choice, Band 102, Heft 3, S. 219-228
ISSN: 0048-5829
In: Public choice, Band 102, Heft 3-4, S. 219
ISSN: 0048-5829
In: Public choice, Band 94, Heft 1-2, S. 105-116
ISSN: 0048-5829
In: Public choice, Band 94, Heft 1-2, S. 105-115
ISSN: 0048-5829
Outcomes are considered when government cannot commit to programs. It is found that welfare can be higher when information is poor, government should at times commit to continuing a program it believes to have failed, & a government that fears losing power may acquire either too much or too little information. 2 Figures, 1 Appendix, 25 References. Adapted from the source document.
Consider a government that adopts a program, sees a noisy signal about its success, and decides whether to continue the program. Suppose further that the success of a program is greater if people think it will be continued. This paper considers the optimal decision rule for continuing the program, both when government can and cannot commit. We find that welfare can be higher when information is poor, that government should at times commit to continuing a program it believes had failed, and that a government which fears losing power may acquire either too much or too little information.
BASE
SSRN
Working paper
SSRN
SSRN