Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
Behavioral economics modeling assumes that the contractible commitments valued by sophisticated time-inconsistent agents come at a cost. This paper challenges this assumption by arguing that it disregards the benefits that providers derive from supplying commitment-based products. In our equilibrium model, the commitment embedded in an illiquid savings product is valuable to both market sides. Although sophisticated time-inconsistent agents value the commitment, they do not have to pay for contracting it. The necessary and sufficient conditions for having a costless commitment contract in the savings market combine strong liquidity constraints imposed on banks and the occurrence of harmful shocks. Our results have regulatory implications for social finance.