International Trade, National Security, 

and Environmental Policy

• Krauss & Johnson (1974). General Equilibrium Analysis. Allen & Unwin. (K&J) [Available on Amazon, this is a great book, but the Kindle scan is horrible–so many errors that it is sometimes almost unreadable.]
• A number of articles online and on Canvas.

ADA/Accessibility Statement

Tulane University is committed to offering classes that are accessible. If you anticipate or encounter disability-related barriers in a course, please contact the Goldman Center for Student Accessibility to establish reasonable accommodations. If approved by Goldman, make arrangements with me as soon as possible to discuss your accommodations so that they may be implemented in a timely fashion. I will never ask for medical documentation from you to support potential accommodation needs. Goldman Center contact information: Email: goldman@tulane.edu; Phone (504) 862-8433; Website: accessibility.tulane.edu

Code of Academic Conduct

The Code of Academic Conduct applies to all undergraduate students, full-time and part-time, in Tulane University. Tulane University expects and requires behavior compatible with its high standards of scholarship. By accepting admission to the university, a student accepts its regulations (i.e., Code of Academic Conduct and Code of Student Conduct) and acknowledges the right of the university to take disciplinary action, including suspension or expulsion, for conduct judged unsatisfactory or disruptive.

Unless I indicate differently on instructions, all assignments and exams are to be completed individually and without any study aid, including textbooks, class notes, or online sites. If you have any question about whether a resource is acceptable, you must ask the instructor rather than assume. 

Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Statement (EDI)

“Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are important Tulane values that are key drivers of academic excellence in our learning environments. In our drive for academic excellence, we seek to ensure that students, faculty, and staff across diverse social identities, cultural backgrounds, and lived experiences can thrive – especially those from from underrepresented and underserved communities (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, social class, international, veterans, religious minorities, age, and any other classification protected by applicable law – see Tulane’s Nondiscrimination Policy). In order to build a supportive culture and climate for every member of our community, we recognize that we each of have unique EDI strengths to share with others and that we also have areas for EDI growth, learning, and change. This EDI commitment and cultural humility helps us collectively build a university community and culture where everyone experiences belonging.”

Title IX Syllabus language: Tulane University recognizes the inherent dignity of all individuals and promotes respect for all people. As such, Tulane is committed to providing an environment free of all forms of discrimination including sexual and gender-based discrimination, harassment, and violence like sexual assault, intimate partner violence, and stalking. If you (or someone you know) has experienced or is experiencing these types of behaviors, know that you are not alone. Resources and support are available: you can learn more at titleix.tulane.edu.  Any and all of your communications on these matters will be treated as either “Confidential” or “Private” as explained in the chart below. Please know that if you choose to confide in me I am mandated by the university to report to the Title IX Coordinator, as Tulane and I want to be sure you are connected with all the support the university can offer. You do not need to respond to outreach from the university if you do not want. You can also make a report yourself, including an anonymous report, through the form at tulane.edu/concerns.

Emergency Preparedness & Response:(REQUIRED by University Policy as stated here)

From: Tulane Office of Emergency Preparedness and Response

Religious accommodation policy

Per Tulane’s religious accommodation policy as stated at the bottom Tulane’s academic calendar, I will make every reasonable effort to ensure that students are able to observe religious holidays without jeopardizing their ability to fulfill their academic obligations. Excused absences do not relieve the student from the responsibility for any course work required during the period of absence. Students should notify me within the first two weeks of the semester about their intent to observe any holidays that fall on a class day or on the day of the final exam.

Econ 4970        SYLLABUS        Fall 2024

Topic I: Introduction

• 17 August: Course Introduction

• 19 August: Very Brief Review of Microeconomics

• 24 & 26 August: Introducing the Basic GE Model

Topic II: Some Economics of International Trade

• 1 & 8 September: Trade in the Basic Model, 1: Foundations of Trade (Technology, Endowments & Tastes)

• 10 & 15 September: Trade in the Basic Model, 2: Effects of Trade on Economic & Political Outcomes

• (Optional) Extending the Basic Model, 1: Unemployment & Monopolistic Competition

• (Optional) Extending the Basic Model, 2: Firms in Trade (Heterogeneity & Global Value Chains

Topic III: Trade Policy and the Theory of Economic Policy

• Trade Policy Instruments in the Basic Model

• The Theory of Economic Policy, 1: The Basic Framework

• The Theory of Economic Policy, 2: Trade Wars, Terms-of-Trade Externalities, etc.

• The Institutional Environment of Trade Policy

Topic V: Trade & the Environment

• How Does International Trade Affect the Environment?

• Trade Policy Analysis for the Environment

• WTO Rules and the Environment

Topic VI: Trade & National Security

• How Does International Trade Affect National Security?

• Trade Policy Analysis for National Security

• WTO Rules and National Security

Final Exam

Political Economy 6000

Firms and Varieties of Capitalism

Professor: Douglas Nelson

Office: Tilton 108 (Murphy Institute), Phone: 865-5317

Office Hours: Tuesday and Thursday, 3:30-5:30

Phone: 865-5317

email: dnelson@tulane.edu

Webpage: http://www.tulane.edu/~dnelson/

Much of modern political economy, and the political economy of globalization in particular, focuses on labor markets. This literature recognizes the fundamental importance of financial markets, but does so in an essentially ad hoc way. In this course we try to build toward an analysis of globalization focused on financial markets and corporate governance. Thus, we will begin with the firm and it’s relationship to financial markets. In the second part of the course we take a comparative perspective on corporate governance that draws on research in comparative law, economics and politics. We will conclude with analysis of the effects of globalization.

Readings for the course will be drawn from a large number of articles, available online, and:

Xavier Vives, ed. (2006). Corporate Governance: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. Cambridge: CUP. [Vives]

Mark Roe (2003). Political Determinants of Corporate Governance. Oxford: OUP. [Roe]

Peter Gourevitch and James Shinn (2005). Political Power and Corporate Control: The New Global Politics of Corporate Governance. Princeton: PUP. [Gourevitch & Shinn]

All readings on this syllabus are required. For more references, see the extended syllabus for this course at: http://www.tulane.edu/~dnelson/COURSES/PE_CorpGov/Syl_Corp_Gov.htm

Surveys and Textbooks: There have been a large number of survey articles and textbooks related to the material we will cover in this course. Among the best are:

Paul Milgrom and John Roberts (1988). “Theories of the Firm: Past, Present and Future”. Canadian Journal of Economics; V.21-#3, pp. 444-458.

Bengt Holmström and Jean Tirole (1989). “The Theory of the Firm”. In Richard Schmalensee and Robert Willig, eds. Handbook of Industrial Organization, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 61-133.

Oliver Williamson (1989). “Transaction Cost Economics”. In Richard Schmalensee and Robert Willig, eds. Handbook of Industrial Organization, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 135-182.

Milton Harris and Arthur Raviv (1991). “The Theory of Capital Structure”. Journal of Finance; V.46-#1, pp. 297-355.

Roy Radner (1992). “Hierarchy: The Economics of Managing”. Journal of Economic Literature; V.30-#3, pp. 1382-1415.

Andrei Shleifer and Robert Vishny (1997). “A Survey of Corporate Governance”. Journal of Finance; V.52-#2, pp. 737-783.

Jean Tirole (1999). “Incomplete Contracts: Where Do We Stand?”. Econometrica; V.97-#4, pp. 741-781.

Luigi Zingales (2000). “In Search of New Foundations”. Journal of Finance; V.55-#4, pp. 1623-1654.

John Cioffi (2000). “State of the Art: A Review Essay on Comparative Corporate Governance”. American Journal of Comparative Law; V.48-#3, pp. 501-534.

Richard Lambert (2001). “Contracting Theory and Accounting”. Journal of Accounting and Economics; V.32-#1-3, pp. 1-87. [comment by Magee]

Robert Bushman and Abbie Smith (2001). “Financial Accounting Information and Corporate Governance”. Journal of Accounting and Economics; V.32-#1-3, pp. 237-333. [comment by Sloan]

Peter Gourevitch (2002). “The Politics of Corporate Governance Regulation”. Yale Law Journal; V.112-#7, pp. 1829-1880.

Marco Becht, Patrick Bolton and Ailsa Röell (2003). “Corporate Governance and Control”. In G.M. Constantinides, M. Harris, and R. Stulz, eds. Handbook of Economics and Finance. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 1-109.

Jeremy Stein (2003). “Agency, Information and Corporate Investment”. In G.M. Constantinides, M. Harris, and R. Stulz, eds. Handbook of Economics and Finance. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 111-165.

Paul Milgrom and John Roberts (1992). Economics, Organization and Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kevin Keasey, Steve Thompson, and Michael Wright (2005). Corporate Governance: Accountability, Enterprise, and International Comparisons. Wiley.

Thomas Copeland, J. Fred Weston and Kuldeep Shastri (2005). Financial Theory and Corporate Policy. Boston: Pearson/Addison Wesley.

Patrick Bolton and Mathias Dewatripont (2005). Contract Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Jean Tirole (2006). The Theory of Corporate Finance. Princeton: PUP.

Capstone courses. This course is a senior seminar for the Murphy Institute. 1) Prerequisites. In addition to the exposure to a broad range of perspectives in the Murphy core courses, I will presume familiarity with microeconomics at the intermediate level (i.e. Economics 3010) and a level of familiarity (and comfort) with formal and statistical analysis at the same level. 2) Participation. This course will be run as a seminar which means attendance and active participation are mandatory. I will expect all members of the seminar to have read, and be prepared to discuss, all the assigned readings before the date on which we discuss them. The analytical comments (see below) are an aid to this.

Evaluation: Your performance in this course will be evaluated on the basis of 10 analytical comments (worth 100 points total); and 1 analytical review essay (worth 100 points). To receive an A, you must earn at least 90 percent of the points available. To pass the course you must earn at least 60 percent of the points available. Grades between these limits will be determined on the basis of your performance relative to that of the class as a whole.

Policy on analytical comments. The analytical comments are written assignments consisting of two parts: a comment on the assigned reading for the week (7 of 10 points); and 5 questions raised by the assigned reading for the week (3 of 10 points). The comment should be about 3 double-spaced pages long. Do not waste time summarizing the reading. The goal is to identify some aspect of the reading that strikes you as particularly interesting and to explain why you find it interesting. The questions should identify things you would like to see discussed in class. The comments are due on, or before, the start of the class in which the material is discussed. Late comments will not be accepted.

Review essays. Every member of the class is required to produce a review essay on one of the major topics in law & economics or political economy (i.e. Topics III-V, not theory of the firm). Broadly speaking, I expect papers in the 15-20 page range [if you have picked a topic that can be effectively exhausted in 10 pages, you have picked too narrow a topic]. These papers will involve extensive review of the literature on one of the major topics (involving, but not limited to, the non-required readings on the topic). A grade in the A-B range [i.e. 80-100] can only be earned by a paper that provides a synthesis of the literature under review. That is, if you only summarize the literature the best grade you can earn will be a C [note well: this is a maximum, you can earn a lower grade by doing a bad job of summarizing.]

            To ensure that topics are well-established and suitable for the course, I require a proposal due no later than 23 September. Late proposals will result in a 10 point penalty to be assessed on the paper’s final score. If you change your paper topic without my approval, 20 points will be deducted from your final mark. Review essays are due at the last regular meeting of the course (6 December). Late papers will not be accepted, and will earn a score of 0 points.

            These papers must be original work, plagiarism will not be tolerated. This includes: unattributed appropriation of someone else’s work; and excessive use (whether or not attributed) of a secondary source [including, in particular, any of the above survey articles.] If you are unclear as to what constitutes plagiarism, consult the Tulane University Honor Code on plagiarism.

SACS-Related Material

I am aware that Tulane students are able to read a standard university syllabus and determine the content of the course and its relation to the major and the individual student’s course of study. However, the administration of Tulane University, along with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS–which “accredits” primary and secondary schools as well as all varieties of 2 and 4 year undergraduate programs [with very little in the way of adjustment in rubrics, metrics, etc.]), has determined that you require additional information. I collect this material in a separate section so that you can refer to it, or discard it, as you consider appropriate.

STUDENT OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: By the end of the course, the student should be able to think, speak, and write fluently and competently about the ideas and issues covered in the course (as reflected in the course description and the syllabus). The student should have a solid understanding of the social, political, economic, and philosophical significance of ideas and concepts in the analysis of social networks and they should be familiar with major ideas and theories regarding explanations, interpretations, applications, and criticisms of work on social networks. The student should be able to formulate critical views concerning these issues and respond fluently and competently to questions concerning these views.

1. Students will be able to identify and recognize major themes, ideas, and concepts.

2. Students will analyze, interpret, and discuss these ideas in a scholarly and coherent manner.

3. Students will construct, formulate, and develop creative and critical scholarly assessments.

4. Students will appraise, evaluate, and appreciate the values and consequences of these ideas.

PECN 6000                                    SYLLABUS                                        Fall 2013

Topic I. Theory of the Firm

● 26 August: Transaction costs and the firm

■ Ronald Coase (1937). “The Theory of the Firm”. Economica; V.4-#16, pp. 386-405.

■ Benjamin Klein, Robert Crawford and Armen Alchian (1978). “Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents and the Competitive Contracting Process”. Journal of Law and Economics; V.21-#2, pp. 297-326.

■ Oliver Williamson (2002). “The Theory of the Firm as a Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract”. Journal of Economic Perspectives; V.16-#3, pp. 171-195.

● 9 September: Agency, Incomplete contracts, etc.

■ Armen Alchian and Harold Demsetz (1972). “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization”. American Economic Review; V.62-#5, pp. 777-795.

■ Michael Jensen and William Meckling (1976). “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Capital Structure”. Journal of Financial Economics; V.3-#4, pp. 305-360. [required: pp. 305-333]

■ Oliver Hart (1989). “An Economist’s Perspective on the Theory of the Firm”. Columbia Law Review; V.89-#7, pp. 1757-1774.

● 16 September: Why does capital hire labor?

■ Gregory Dow and Louis Putterman (1999). “Why Capital (Usually) Hires Labor: An Assessment of Proposed Explanations”. in M. Blair and M. Roe, eds. Employees and Corporate Governance. Washington, DC: Brookings, pp. 17-57.

■ Freeman, Richard B. and Edward P. Lazear (1995). “An Economic Analysis of Works Councils,” in J. Rogers and W. Streeck eds, Works Councils: Consultation, Representation, and Cooperation in Industrial Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press/NBER, 27-50.

■ Faleye, Olubunmi; Vikas Mehrotra and Randall Morck. 2006. “When Labor Has a Voice in Corporate Governance.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 41(3), 489-510.

Topic II. Law and Economics of Corporate Governance

● 23 September: Separation of ownership and control

■ Eugene Fama (1980). “Agency Problems and the Theory of the Firm”. Journal of Political Economy; V.88-#2, pp. 288-307.

■ Eugene Fama and Michael Jensen (1983). “Separation of Ownership and Control”. Journal of Law and Economics; V.26-#2, pp. 301-325.

■ Oliver Williamson (1983). “Organization Form, Residual Claimants and Corporate Control”. Journal of Law and Economics; V.26-#2, pp. 351-366.

■ Benjamin Klein (1983). “Contracting Costs and Residual Claims: The Separation of Ownership and Control”. Journal of Law and Economics; V.26-#2, pp. 367-374.

● 30 September: Capital markets and managerial control

■ Hart, Oliver. 1993. “Theories of Optimal Capital Structure: A Managerial Discretion Perspective,” in M. M. Blair ed The Deal Decade: What Takeovers and Leveraged Buyouts Mean for Corporate Governance. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 19-43.

■ Michael Jensen (1986). “Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow: Corporate Finance and Takeovers”. American Economic Review; V.76-#2, pp. 323-329.

■ Frederick Scherer (1988). “Corporate Takeovers: The Efficiency Arguments”. Journal of Economic Perspectives; V.15-#2, pp. 69-82.

■ Shleifer, Andrei and Robert Vishny (1990). “The Takeover Wave of the 1980s”. Science; V.249-#4970 (August 17), pp 745-749.

■ Bengt Holmström and Steven Kaplan (2001). “Corporate Governance and Merger Activity in the US: Making Sense of the 1980s and 1990s”. Journal of Economic Perspectives; V.15-#2, pp. 121-144.

● 7 October: Boards, Compensation and Control

■ Adams, Renee B.; Benjamin E. Hermalin and Michael S. Weisbach. 2010. “The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A Conceptual Framework and Survey.” Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 58-107.

■ Bebchuk, Lucian A. and Jesse M. Fried. 2003. “Executive Compensation as an Agency Problem.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17(3), 71-92.

■ Frydman, Carola and Dirk Jenter. 2010. “CEO Compensation.” Annual Review of Financial Economics, 2(1), 75-102.

● 14 October: Germany–Banks, Co-Determination and all that

■ Pistor, Katharina. 1999. “Codetermination: A Sociopolitical Model with Governance Externalities,” in M. M. Blair and M. J. Roe eds, Employees and Corporate Governance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 163-93.

■ Addison, John T.; Claus Schnabel and Joachim Wagner. 2004. “The Course of Research into the Economic Consequences of German Works Councils.” British Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(2), 255-81.

■ Franks, Julian and Colin Mayer. 2001. “Ownership and Control of German Corporations.” Review of Financial Studies, 14(4), 943-77.

■ Goergen, Marc; M. C. Manjon and Luc Renneboog. 2008. “Recent Developments in German Corporate Governance.” International Review of Law and Economics, 28(3), 175-93.

Topic III. Macro Analysis of Corporate Governance

● 21 October: Legal foundations of corporate governance

■ Franklin Allen and Douglas Gale (2000). “Corporate Governance and Competition”. Chapter 2 in Vives.

■ Frank Easterbrook (1997). “International Corporate Differences: Markets or Law?”. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance; V.9-#4, pp. 23-30.

■ La Porta, Rafael, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, and Andrei Shleifer (1999). “Corporate ownership around the world.” Journal of Finance 54 (2):471-517.

■ Julian Franks, Colin Mayer, and Hannes F. Wagner (2006). “The Origins of the German Corporation – Finance, Ownership and Control”. Review of Finance; V.10-#4, pp. 537-585.

■ Franks, Julian, Colin Mayer and Stefano Rossi (2009). “Ownership: Evolution and Regulation.” Review of Financial Studies, 22(10), 4009-56.

● 28 October: Quality of law and corporate governance

■ Rafael LaPorta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny (2000). “Investor Protection and Corporate Governance”. Journal of Financial Economics; V.58-#1/2, pp. 3-27.

■ Mark Roe (2003). Political Determinants of Corporate Governance. Oxford: OUP. [Section VI, pp. 159-196 for this topic.]

● 4 November: Legal structure, financial systems and growth

■ Wendy Carlin and Colin Mayer (2000). “How Do Financial Systems Affect Economic Performance?”. Vives, Chapter 4.

■ Raghuram Rajan and Luigi Zingales (2001). “Financial Systems, Industrial Structure and Growth”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy; V.17-#4, pp.

■ Thorsten Beck, Asli Demirgüç-Kunt, and Ross Levine (2001). “Legal Theories of Financial Development”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy; V.17-#4, pp. 483-501.

■ Randall Morck, Daniel Wolfenzon and Bernard Yeung (2005). “Corporate Governance, Economic Entrenchment and Growth”. Journal of Economic Literature; V.43-#3, pp. 655-720.

■ La Porta, Rafael; Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes and Andrei Shleifer (2008). “The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins.” Journal of Economic Literature, 46(2), 285-332.

■ Ross Levine (1997). “Financial Development and Economic Growth: Views and Agenda”. Journal of Economic Literature; V.35-#2, pp. 688-726.

Topic IV. Political Economy of Corporate Governance

● 11 November March: PE of Corporate Governance, I

■ Mark Roe (2003). Political Determinants of Corporate Governance. Oxford: OUP. [Pages 1-107 for this topic.]

■ Gourevitch & Shinn, Chapter 2-4

■ Raghuram Rajan and Luigi Zingales (2003). “The Great Reversals: The Politics of Financial Development in the Twentieth Century”. Journal of Financial Economics; V.69-#1, pp. 5-50. [Pages 1-17 for this topic.]

● 18 November: PE of Corporate Governance, II

■ Gourevitch & Shinn, Chapter 5

■ Mark Roe (2003). Political Determinants of Corporate Governance. Oxford: OUP. [Pages 109-158 & 197-204 for this topic.]

● 25 November: PE of Corporate Governance, III

■ Gourevitch & Shinn, Chapters 6 & 7

● 2 December: PE of Corporate Governance, IV

■ Raghuram Rajan and Luigi Zingales (2003). “The Great Reversals: The Politics of Financial Development in the Twentieth Century”. Journal of Financial Economics; V.69-#1, pp. 5-50. [Pages 17-50.]

■ Martin Hellwig (2006). “On the Economics and Politics of Corporate Finance and Corporate Control”. Chapter 3 in Vives.

■ Marco Pagano and Paolo Volpin (2001). “The Political Economy of Finance”. Oxford Review of Economic Policy; V.17-#4, pp. 502-519.