The Economic Institutions of Capitalism¶
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. Free Press.
Cited by¶
12 citations across 12 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Bargaining Power
- The renewal lands close to list price, and the tone of the negotiation has nothing to do with it.
This sourceDescribes the fundamental transformation by which relationship-specific investment converts a competitive supply situation into bilateral dependence at renewal.
- The renewal lands close to list price, and the tone of the negotiation has nothing to do with it.
- Credible Commitment
- Contract law and economic institutions. Enforceable contracts make promises legally costly to break, and collateral, escrow, performance bonds, and liquidated damages convert verbal promises into commitments whose breach is mechanically expensive.
This sourceDevelops credible commitments and specific-asset/hostage mechanisms (chs. 7-8) by which contracting parties make promises costly to break.
- Contract law and economic institutions. Enforceable contracts make promises legally costly to break, and collateral, escrow, performance bonds, and liquidated damages convert verbal promises into commitments whose breach is mechanically expensive.
- Exchange
- Incomplete Contract
- In economics and contract theory it is the transaction-cost origin of incomplete contracts, the property-rights view of ownership as residual control, and relational contracting in long-term supply relationships.
This sourceTransaction-cost origin of incomplete contracts, relationship-specific investment, hold-up, and relational contracting in long-term supply relationships.
- In economics and contract theory it is the transaction-cost origin of incomplete contracts, the property-rights view of ownership as residual control, and relational contracting in long-term supply relationships.
- Institution
- Economics & finance: Property rights, contracts, and money as the "rules of the game" that lower transaction costs and make exchange predictable; the entire program of new institutional economics rests on treating these rule-complexes as the determinants of economic performance, with Williamson (1985) developing the governance-structure account of how institutions economize on transaction costs.
This sourceFormalizes transaction-cost economics: the structure of an exchange (asset specificity, frequency, uncertainty, bounded rationality, opportunism) determines its coordination cost, and that cost determines which governance form — market, hybrid, or hierarchy — is efficient; the exchange relation rather than the transferable is the unit of analysis.
- Economics & finance: Property rights, contracts, and money as the "rules of the game" that lower transaction costs and make exchange predictable; the entire program of new institutional economics rests on treating these rule-complexes as the determinants of economic performance, with Williamson (1985) developing the governance-structure account of how institutions economize on transaction costs.
- Pivotality
- A supplier of a unique, non-substitutable component — a single foundry for a critical chip, the sole holder of an essential patent in a standard — is pivotal: the counterfactual test "would the product ship without this input?" returns no, so the supplier owns the marginal contribution and extracts rents far beyond its cost share, the classic hold-up.
This sourceDevelops the hold-up problem — a supplier of a non-substitutable input extracting rents beyond its cost share, the economic form of pivotality.
- A supplier of a unique, non-substitutable component — a single foundry for a critical chip, the sole holder of an essential patent in a standard — is pivotal: the counterfactual test "would the product ship without this input?" returns no, so the supplier owns the marginal contribution and extracts rents far beyond its cost share, the classic hold-up.
- Relationship Specific Investment
- Three roles are obligatory: an investing agent; a relationship or configuration in which the asset's value is realized; and a value gap between the asset's inside-relationship value and its next-best outside value — the quasi-rent, in transaction-cost terms.
This sourceDefines asset specificity, quasi-rents, hold-up, and governance as the transaction-cost response to relationship-specific investment.
- Three roles are obligatory: an investing agent; a relationship or configuration in which the asset's value is realized; and a value gap between the asset's inside-relationship value and its next-best outside value — the quasi-rent, in transaction-cost terms.
- Reversibility and Irreversibility
- The question is not "Can we preserve reversibility?" (sometimes yes, sometimes no) but "Is reversibility worth its cost in this context?"—a tension Williamson (1985) anchors in transaction-cost economics through the concept of asset specificity, where committed (irreversible) investments raise efficiency but reduce redeployability.
This sourceFormalizes transaction-cost economics: the structure of an exchange (asset specificity, frequency, uncertainty, bounded rationality, opportunism) determines its coordination cost, and that cost determines which governance form — market, hybrid, or hierarchy — is efficient; the exchange relation rather than the transferable is the unit of analysis.
- The question is not "Can we preserve reversibility?" (sometimes yes, sometimes no) but "Is reversibility worth its cost in this context?"—a tension Williamson (1985) anchors in transaction-cost economics through the concept of asset specificity, where committed (irreversible) investments raise efficiency but reduce redeployability.
- Transaction Costs
- ) had introduced the framework's core vocabulary; the 1985 book (
This sourceFormalizes transaction-cost economics: the structure of an exchange (asset specificity, frequency, uncertainty, bounded rationality, opportunism) determines its coordination cost, and that cost determines which governance form — market, hybrid, or hierarchy — is efficient; the exchange relation rather than the transferable is the unit of analysis.
- ) had introduced the framework's core vocabulary; the 1985 book (
Domain-specific¶
- Hold-up Problem
- The key inefficiency, as Williamson (1975, 1985) and Klein, Crawford, and Alchian (1978) established, is not the observed renegotiation but the anticipation of it
This sourceWilliamson's account of how anticipated ex post opportunism against transaction-specific assets drives ex ante safeguards and governance choice.
Supported in partVerified against the source
- The key inefficiency, as Williamson (1975, 1985) and Klein, Crawford, and Alchian (1978) established, is not the observed renegotiation but the anticipation of it
Mechanisms¶
- Cooperative Supply Contract
- … is that it ends the hold-up dynamic that starves specialized suppliers: a supplier asked to make a relationship-specific investment is exposed to opportunistic renegotiation once the money is sunk, and the cooperative contract's risk bands and power guard are precisely what make that investment safe to undertake.
This sourceExplains that transaction-specific investments create appropriable quasi-rents and expose parties to costly post-contractual bargaining hazards.
- … is that it ends the hold-up dynamic that starves specialized suppliers: a supplier asked to make a relationship-specific investment is exposed to opportunistic renegotiation once the money is sunk, and the cooperative contract's risk bands and power guard are precisely what make that investment safe to undertake.
- Supplier or Partner Specialization Contract
- When one side sinks investments specialized to the relationship — retooled lines, integrated systems, a shared recipe — that specificity raises switching costs until the other side can extract concessions the original deal never priced.
This sourceExplains that transaction-specific investments lose value outside the relationship, create costly exit and bilateral dependence, and expose the investing party’s quasi-rents to opportunistic expropriation.
- When one side sinks investments specialized to the relationship — retooled lines, integrated systems, a shared recipe — that specificity raises switching costs until the other side can extract concessions the original deal never priced.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 12 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 5 other ways.
- https://archive.org/details/economicinstitut0000will ×1
- https://openlibrary.org/works/OL3477537W/The_economic_institutions_of_capitalism ×1
- https://search.worldcat.org/title/The-economic-institutions-of-capitalism-%3A-firms-markets-relational-contracting/oclc/1438949776 ×1
- https://search.worldcat.org/title/economic-institutions-of-capitalism-firms-markets-relational-contracting/oclc/11030001 ×1
- https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Economic_Institutions_of_Capitalism/lj-6AAAAIAAJ ×1
Registry ID ref:ba8dbea1b4f7 · see in the full table