2004
DOI: 10.2307/4099361
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Firms, Courts, and Reputation Mechanisms: Towards a Positive Theory of Private Ordering

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
48
0
8

Year Published

2005
2005
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 97 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
48
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…The reputation mechanism works well in small groups, where low information costs and cultural homogeneity encourage retaliation and black-listing, with a real risk of losing future business. Indeed, the enforcement of commercial agreements in merchant communities has been extensively studied (for a survey see Richman 2004). …”
Section: Governance Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reputation mechanism works well in small groups, where low information costs and cultural homogeneity encourage retaliation and black-listing, with a real risk of losing future business. Indeed, the enforcement of commercial agreements in merchant communities has been extensively studied (for a survey see Richman 2004). …”
Section: Governance Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though many merchants remain 73. For a more formal model predicting when the limitations of public courts will induce merchants to pursue private ordering, see Richman (2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the past decade, American jurists (see Richman 2004) (Richman 2006), of the American cotton trade on the Memphis Cotton Exchange (Bernstein 2001), and dispute resolution among farmers in Shasta County (Ellickson 1991). The focus of these studies is thus not global or transnational but local and occupation-specific.…”
Section: A) Non-state Self-regulation In Micro-societies or Governancmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is that of Jewish diamond merchants in the New York Diamond Dealers Club (DDC), who trade in accordance with rules they set themselves under the aegis of the Club, which provides regular information about the business practices of its members, thus influencing their reputation and -in the event of repeated and significant loss of reputation -threatening them with expulsion. Barak D. Richman writes of "reputation-based enforcement" (Richman 2004(Richman , p. 2328) of the self-given rules, what can be called governance by reputation. To put it simply, such a mode of governance presupposes two things: a functioning exchange of information about the business practices of certain people (mostly merchants) and the existence of a social group or a social network for which the reputation of its members is important; we shall call such social groups reputation communities.…”
Section: A) Non-state Self-regulation In Micro-societies or Governancmentioning
confidence: 99%