Dyuti S. Banerjee, Panchali Banerjee, Vivekananda Mukherjee
{"title":"控制勒索与合谋:道德、同伴效应和惩罚之外的策略","authors":"Dyuti S. Banerjee, Panchali Banerjee, Vivekananda Mukherjee","doi":"10.1111/jpet.70061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>We explore the interaction between enforcement and individual-specific sensitivity to moral standards in determining the scope of extortion and collusion in a bureaucracy consisting of corruptible officers. The moral standard is determined by the number of corrupt officers in the bureaucracy, which is a function of both the penalty and the probability of conviction of collusion. Both a higher penalty and a more active independent auditor, like the media, keep the number of corrupt officers in check in a “low” and “medium” penalty situation and incentivize compliance. Extortion occurs only under a “low penalty, low compliance cost” situation. Increases in penalty or judicial accuracy in judging extortion cases or active independent auditing keep extortion in check. Controlling the rent of the firms induces compliance and reduces both extortion and collusion incidents in an economy, having a greater impact on collusion than extortion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Economic Theory","volume":"27 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Controlling Extortion and Collusion: Morality, Peer-Effect, and the Strategies Beyond Punishment\",\"authors\":\"Dyuti S. Banerjee, Panchali Banerjee, Vivekananda Mukherjee\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jpet.70061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>We explore the interaction between enforcement and individual-specific sensitivity to moral standards in determining the scope of extortion and collusion in a bureaucracy consisting of corruptible officers. The moral standard is determined by the number of corrupt officers in the bureaucracy, which is a function of both the penalty and the probability of conviction of collusion. Both a higher penalty and a more active independent auditor, like the media, keep the number of corrupt officers in check in a “low” and “medium” penalty situation and incentivize compliance. Extortion occurs only under a “low penalty, low compliance cost” situation. Increases in penalty or judicial accuracy in judging extortion cases or active independent auditing keep extortion in check. Controlling the rent of the firms induces compliance and reduces both extortion and collusion incidents in an economy, having a greater impact on collusion than extortion.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Economic Theory\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Economic Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpet.70061\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Economic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpet.70061","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Controlling Extortion and Collusion: Morality, Peer-Effect, and the Strategies Beyond Punishment
We explore the interaction between enforcement and individual-specific sensitivity to moral standards in determining the scope of extortion and collusion in a bureaucracy consisting of corruptible officers. The moral standard is determined by the number of corrupt officers in the bureaucracy, which is a function of both the penalty and the probability of conviction of collusion. Both a higher penalty and a more active independent auditor, like the media, keep the number of corrupt officers in check in a “low” and “medium” penalty situation and incentivize compliance. Extortion occurs only under a “low penalty, low compliance cost” situation. Increases in penalty or judicial accuracy in judging extortion cases or active independent auditing keep extortion in check. Controlling the rent of the firms induces compliance and reduces both extortion and collusion incidents in an economy, having a greater impact on collusion than extortion.
期刊介绍:
As the official journal of the Association of Public Economic Theory, Journal of Public Economic Theory (JPET) is dedicated to stimulating research in the rapidly growing field of public economics. Submissions are judged on the basis of their creativity and rigor, and the Journal imposes neither upper nor lower boundary on the complexity of the techniques employed. This journal focuses on such topics as public goods, local public goods, club economies, externalities, taxation, growth, public choice, social and public decision making, voting, market failure, regulation, project evaluation, equity, and political systems.