The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Complexity and Renegotiation: A Foundation for Incomplete Contracts
Abstract
The paper considers a hold-up model where only one of n future trading opportunities will prove to be efficient, and where ex post renegotiation of the ex ante contract cannot be prevented. As the environment becomes more complex (n→∞), the outcome under any message-contingent long-term contract converges to that of the “incomplete contracting” model where trade is contractible ex post, but not ex ante. When trades are costly to describe, both ex ante and ex post, the incomplete contracting result is extended to a broader class of environments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Contractual Solutions to the Hold-Up Problem
Rogerson, W. P. (1992) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2297997 · Cited by 356
Cited by
Antràs, P., & Helpman, E. (2004) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/383099 · Cited by 1,158
Outsourcing in a Global Economy
Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (2005) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/0034-6527.00327 · Cited by 920
Metadata
- Authors
- Segal, I.
- Venue
- Review of Economic Studies
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-01
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 57-82
- ISSN
- 0034-6527 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-937X
- OpenAlex
- W2161306963
- Cited by
- 377
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 47.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Complexity and Renegotiation: A Foundation for Incomplete Contracts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-937x.00078
- The paper
- Segal, I. (1999). Complexity and Renegotiation: A Foundation for Incomplete Contracts. Review of Economic Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937x.00078
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
