Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Monotonic rules
AbstractWe analyze bargaining situations where the agents' payoffs from disagreement depend on who among them breaks down the negotiations. We model such problems as a superset of the standard domain of Nash [Nash, J.F., 1950. The bargaining problem. Econometrica 18, 155-162]. On our extended domain, we analyze the implications of two central properties which, on the Nash domain, are known to be incompatible: strong monotonicity [Kalai, E., 1977. Proportional solutions to bargaining situations: Interpersonal utility comparisons. Econometrica 45, 1623-1630] and scale invariance [Nash, J.F., 1950. The bargaining problem. Econometrica 18, 155-162]. We first show that a class of monotone path rules uniquely satisfy strong monotonicity, scale invariance, weak Pareto optimality, and "continuity". We also show that dropping scale invariance from this list characterizes the whole class of monotone path rules. We then introduce a symmetric monotone path rule that we call the Cardinal Egalitarian rule and show that it is weakly Pareto optimal, strongly monotonic, scale invariant, symmetric and that it is the only rule to satisfy these properties on a class of two-agent problems.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Games and Economic Behavior.
Volume (Year): 68 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836
Disagreement matrix Axiomatic Monotonicity Monotone path rule Cardinal Egalitarian rule;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Volij, Oscar & Dagan, Nir & Winter, Eyal, 2002.
"A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution,"
Staff General Research Papers
5259, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Eyal Winter & Oscar Volij & Nir Dagan, 2002. "A characterization of the Nash bargaining solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 811-823.
- Nir Dagan & Oscar Volij & Eyal Winter, 2001. "A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution," Economic theory and game theory 013, Oscar Volij.
- Nir Dagan & Oscar Volij & Eyal Winter, 2000. "A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution," Economic theory and game theory 018, Nir Dagan, revised 21 Sep 2000.
- Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 1990. "Bargaining with Uncertain Disagreement Points," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 951-59, July.
- Chun, Y. & Thomson, W., 1989.
"Bargaining Problems With Claims,"
RCER Working Papers
189, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- JÕzsef SÂkovics & Clara PonsatÎ, 1998. "Rubinstein bargaining with two-sided outside options," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 667-672.
- Thomson, William, 1987. "Monotonicity of bargaining solutions with respect to the disagreement point," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 50-58, June.
- Kaushik Basu, 1996. "Bargaining with set-valued disagreement," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 61-74, January.
- Livne, Zvi A., 1988. "The bargaining problem with an uncertain conflict outcome," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 287-302, June.
- Ehud Kalai, 1977.
"Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons,"
179, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Kalai, Ehud, 1977. "Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1623-30, October.
- Kalai, Ehud & Smorodinsky, Meir, 1975. "Other Solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(3), pages 513-18, May.
- Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 1990.
"Nash solution and uncertain disagreement points,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 213-223, September.
- Shaked, Avner & Sutton, John, 1984. "Involuntary Unemployment as a Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(6), pages 1351-64, November.
- Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
- Sunil Gupta & Zvi A. Livne, 1988. "Resolving a Conflict Situation with a Reference Outcome: An Axiomatic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(11), pages 1303-1314, November.
- Livne, Zvi, 1986. "The bargaining problem: axioms concerning changes in the conflict point," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 131-134.
- Smorodinsky, Rann, 2005. "Nash's bargaining solution when the disagreement point is random," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 3-11, July.
- Corominas-Bosch, Margarida, 2000. "Bargaining with asymmetric threat points," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 333-339, December.
- Thomson, William, 1981. "Nash's Bargaining Solution and Utilitarian Choice Rules," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(2), pages 535-38, March.
- Kıbrıs, Özgür & Tapkı, İpek Gürsel, 2011. "Bargaining with nonanonymous disagreement: Decomposable rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 151-161.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.