Maritime transportation is critical for the global economy, with about 90% of goods traded by sea and volumes expected to triple by 2050. Despite rising demand, 40% to 50% of total miles are sailed empty (known as ballasting), causing significant economic and environmental costs. The oil transportation market is an ideal setting to study causes and remedies of ballasting, because: (i) oil tankers only carry a single cargo from origin to destination; and (ii) the market is highly fragmented.

We explore the welfare implications of data tracking technologies that enable firms to collect consumer data and potentially use it for price discrimination. The model we develop centers around two features: first, competition between firms and, second, consumers' level of sophistication. Our baseline environment features a firm that can collect information about the consumers it transacts with in a duopoly market, which it can then use in a second monopoly market. We characterize and compare the equilibrium outcomes in three settings of interest: (i) an economy with myopic consumers, who, when making purchase decisions, do not internalize the fact that firms have the ability to track their behavior and use this information in future transactions, (ii) an economy with forward-looking consumers, who take into account the implications of data tracking when determining their actions, and (iii) an economy where no data tracking technologies are used either due to technological or regulatory constraints.

Innovation contests have emerged as a viable alternative to the standard research and development process. They are particularly suited for settings that feature a high degree of uncertainty regarding the actual feasibility of the end goal. The objective of the contest designer is to maximize the probability of reaching the innovation goal while minimizing the time it takes to complete the project. Obviously here the important question is how to best design these contests. This paper departs from prior literature through three key modeling features. First, in our model, an agent's progress towards the goal is not a deterministic function of effort. As is typically the case in real-world settings, progress is positively correlated with effort but the mapping involves a stochastic component. Secondly and quite importantly, it is possible that the innovation in question is not attainable, either because the goal is actually infeasible or because it requires too much effort and resources that it makes little economic sense to pursue. We model such a scenario by having an underlying state of the world (whether the innovation is attainable or not) over which participants have some prior belief. Taken together, these two features imply that an agent's lack of progress may be attributed to either an undesirable underlying state (the innovation is not attainable) or simply to the fact that the agent was unlucky in how her effort was stochastically mapped to progress. Thirdly, we consider a dynamic framework that captures how competition between agents evolves over time and incorporates the fact that agents learn from each other's partial progress to discern the underlying reason for their own lack of progress. In particular, our modeling setup includes well-defined intermediate milestones that constitute partial progress towards the end goal.

The paper considers a model of competition among firms that produce a homogeneous good in a networked environment. A bipartite graph determines which subset of markets a firm can supply to. Firms compete a la Cournot and decide how to allocate their production output to the markets they are directly connected to. We assume that markets have inverse linear demand and firms have quadratic production costs. First, we show that the resulting Cournot game has a unique equilibrium for any given network and provide a characterization of the production quantities at equilibrium. Our results identify a close connection between the equilibrium outcome and supply paths in the underlying network structure. In particular, we show that whether two firms see their output in different markets as strategic substitutes or complements depends critically on the paths between those markets in the line graph induced by the original bipartite network.