Advertisement

Atlantic Economic Journal

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 51–55 | Cite as

A note on the optimal investment policy of the regulated firm

  • David W. Peterson
  • James H. Vander Weide
Articles

Conclusions

We have demonstrated that, contrary to the spirit of much of the thinking based on the work of Averch and Johnson, it need not be true that rate-of-return regulation entices a firm to over-invest in productive capital. For a simple dynamic model featuring an imperfect capital market, we find that it may be optimal for the regulated firm to invest at every instant of time at a rate less than its unregulated counterpart. Our findings demonstrate once again the strong dependence on model specifications of the conclusions one draws in the study of regulatory problems.

Keywords

Model Specification International Economic Capital Market Public Finance Strong Dependence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    H. Averch and L. L. Johnson, “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint,”American Economic Review, 52, December 1962, pp. 1053–69.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    E. E. Bailey,Economic Theory of Regulatory Constraint, Lexington: Lexington Books, D. C. Heath and Company, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    W. J. Baumol and A. K. Klevorick, “Input Choices and Rate-of-Return Regulation: An Overview of the Discussion,”Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, No. 2, Autumn 1970, pp. 162–190.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    R. Eisner and R. H. Strotz, “Determinants of Business Investment,” Research Study Two inImpacts of Monetary Policy, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. El-Hodiri and A. Takayama, “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint: Clarification,”American Economic Review, 63, March 1973, pp. 235–237.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. P. Gould, “Adjustment Costs in the Theory of Investment of the Firm,”Review of Economic Studies, 35, 1968, pp. 47–56.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Alfred E. Kahn,Economics of Regulation: Principles and Institutions, 2, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1971, esp. pp. 49–55.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. E. Lucas, “Adjustment Costs and the Theory of Supply,”Journal of Political Economy, 75, 1967, pp. 321–334.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    David W. Peterson and James H. Vander Weide, “On Dynamic Behavior of the Regulated Firm,” G.S.B.A. Paper No. 102, Graduate School of Business Administration, Duke University, 1975.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Charles F. Phillips, Jr.,The Economics of Regulation, Homewood: Richard D. Irwin Inc., 1969.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    L. S. Pontryagin, V. G. Boltyanskii, R. V. Gamkrelidze, and E. F. Mishchenko,The Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes, trans. by K. N. Trirogoff, New York: Interscience Publishers, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1962.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    I. Pressman and A. Carol, “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint: Note,”American Economic Review, 61, March 1971, pp. 210–212.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. Takayama, “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint,”American Economic Review, 59, June 1969, pp. 255–260.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    A. B. Treadway, “On Rational Entrepreneurial Behavior and the Demand for Investment,”Review of Economic Studies, 36, April 1969, pp. 227–239.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    H. M. Trebing, ed.,Performance Under Regulation, East Lansing, 1968.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    E. E. Zajac, “A Geometrical Treatment of Averch-Johnson's Behavior of the Firm Model,”American Economic Review, 60, March 1970, pp. 117–125.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Atlantic Economic Society 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • David W. Peterson
    • 1
  • James H. Vander Weide
    • 1
  1. 1.Duke UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations