IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hin/complx/1253092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bertrand Game with Nash Bargaining Fairness Concern

Author

Listed:
  • Wentao Yi
  • Chunqiao Tan

Abstract

The classical Bertrand game is assumed that players are perfectly rational. However, many empirical researches indicate that people have bounded rational behavior with fairness concern, which is important in the two-person game and has attracted much attention. In this paper, fairness concern is incorporated into the Bertrand game with two homogeneous products and the effect of fairness concern on this extended Bertrand game is explored. Nash bargaining solution of player is applied to be his own fairness reference point. Then, a Bertrand game model with fairness concern is established, and its equilibrium price is also derived and analyzed. It is shown from some numerical examples that fairness concern and bargaining power of players have a significant influence on their equilibrium price, expected profits, and utilities. As a player gets more fair-minded, if the other player has a less focus on fairness, the price competition between them will be intensified and both of them suffer loss. Thus, fairness concern may be advantageous or disadvantageous for players. In most situations, the fairness concern behavior is not beneficial for players. Additionally, the effect of bargaining power is relative to fairness concern. A player who manufactures a low-cost product should have a weak bargaining power if he terribly focuses on fairness and should have a strong bargaining power if he pays little attention to fairness. However, a player who manufactures a high-cost product should have a weak bargaining power if he is rarely concerned about fairness. Anyway, the same bargaining power is the best for two players.

Suggested Citation

  • Wentao Yi & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "Bertrand Game with Nash Bargaining Fairness Concern," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-22, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:hin:complx:1253092
    DOI: 10.1155/2019/1253092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2019/1253092.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2019/1253092.xml
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2019/1253092?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
    2. Ken Binmore & Ariel Rubinstein & Asher Wolinsky, 1986. "The Nash Bargaining Solution in Economic Modelling," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(2), pages 176-188, Summer.
    3. Chunsheng Cui & Zhongwei Feng & Chunqiao Tan, 2018. "Credibilistic Loss Aversion Nash Equilibrium for Bimatrix Games with Triangular Fuzzy Payoffs," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-16, December.
    4. Yang, Jing & Xie, Jinxing & Deng, Xiaoxue & Xiong, Huachun, 2013. "Cooperative advertising in a distribution channel with fairness concerns," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(2), pages 401-407.
    5. Steffen Hoernig, 2007. "Bertrand Games and Sharing Rules," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 31(3), pages 573-585, June.
    6. José Méndez Naya, 2011. "Mixed oligopoly, endogenous timing and mergers," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 7(3), pages 283-291, September.
    7. Harrison Cheng, 2002. "Bertrand vs. Cournot equilibrium with risk averse firms and cost uncertainty," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(3), pages 555-577.
    8. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    9. Joaquín Andaluz & Gloria Jarne, 2016. "Stability of vertically differentiated Cournot and Bertrand-type models when firms are boundedly rational," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 238(1), pages 1-25, March.
    10. Szech, Nora & Weinschenk, Philipp, 2013. "Rebates in a Bertrand game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 124-133.
    11. Chen, Wei & Wu, Te & Li, Zhiwu & Wang, Long, 2019. "Evolution of fairness in the mixture of the Ultimatum Game and the Dictator Game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 519(C), pages 319-325.
    12. Victor J. Tremblay & Carol Horton Tremblay & Kosin Isariyawongse, 2013. "Endogenous Timing And Strategic Choice: The Cournot-Bertrand Model," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 332-342, October.
    13. Huaqing Wang & Haresh Gurnani & Murat Erkoc, 2016. "Entry Deterrence of Capacitated Competition Using Price and Non-Price Strategies," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(4), pages 719-735, April.
    14. NISHIMURA, Takeshi & 西村, 健 & OKADA, Akira & 岡田, 章 & SHIRATA, Yasuhiro & 白田, 康洋, 2015. "Evolution of Fairness and Group Formation in Multi-Player Ultimatum Games," Discussion Papers 2015-06, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    15. Ke Wang & Jinwen Sun & Liang Liang & Xiaoyan Li, 2016. "Optimal contracts and the manufacturer’s pricing strategies in a supply chain with an inequity-averse retailer," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 107-125, March.
    16. Elsadany, A.A., 2012. "Competition analysis of a triopoly game with bounded rationality," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 45(11), pages 1343-1348.
    17. Lisa Anderson & Beth Freeborn & Jason Hulbert, 2012. "Risk Aversion and Tacit Collusion in a Bertrand Duopoly Experiment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 40(1), pages 37-50, February.
    18. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Christoph H. Loch & Yaozhong Wu, 2008. "Social Preferences and Supply Chain Performance: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1835-1849, November.
    20. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    21. Tony Haitao Cui & Jagmohan S. Raju & Z. John Zhang, 2007. "Fairness and Channel Coordination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(8), pages 1303-1314, August.
    22. Zhongwei Feng & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "Subgame Perfect Equilibrium in the Rubinstein Bargaining Game with Loss Aversion," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-23, March.
    23. Basak, Debasmita, 2017. "Cournot vs. Bertrand under centralised bargaining," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 124-127.
    24. Sigbjørn Birkeland & Bertil Tungodden, 2014. "Fairness motivation in bargaining: a matter of principle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 125-151, June.
    25. Partha Pratim Dube, 2018. "Bertrand Game Under Cost Function," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 489-496, December.
    26. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    27. Routledge, Robert R., 2010. "Bertrand competition with cost uncertainty," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 356-359, June.
    28. Teck-Hua Ho & Xuanming Su, 2009. "Peer-Induced Fairness in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2022-2049, December.
    29. Ahmed, E. & Elsadany, A.A. & Puu, Tonu, 2015. "On Bertrand duopoly game with differentiated goods," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 169-179.
    30. Patchara Phochanikorn & Chunqiao Tan, 2019. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model Based on Prospect Theory for Green Supplier Selection under Uncertain Environment: A Case Study of the Thailand Palm Oil Products Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, March.
    31. Wambach, Achim, 1999. "Bertrand competition under cost uncertainty," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(7), pages 941-951, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Messinger, Paul R., 2016. "The role of fairness in competitive supply chain relationships: An experimental studyAuthor-Name: Choi, Sungchul," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 798-813.
    2. Du, Shaofu & Nie, Tengfei & Chu, Chengbin & Yu, Yugang, 2014. "Reciprocal supply chain with intention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 389-402.
    3. Li, Zhong-Ping & Wang, Jian-Jun & Perera, Sandun & Shi, Jim (Junmin), 2022. "Coordination of a supply chain with Nash bargaining fairness concerns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Xujin Pu & Lei Gong & Guanghua Han, 2019. "A feasible incentive contract between a manufacturer and his fairness-sensitive retailer engaged in strategic marketing efforts," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 193-206, January.
    5. Ni Du & Qinglan Han, 2018. "Pricing and Service Quality Guarantee Decisions in Logistics Service Supply Chain with Fairness Concern," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 35(05), pages 1-41, October.
    6. Yadong Shu & Ying Dai & Zujun Ma, 2019. "Pricing Decisions in Closed-Loop Supply Chains with Peer-Induced Fairness Concerns," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Ruth Beer & Ignacio Rios & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Increased Transparency in Procurement: The Role of Peer Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7511-7534, December.
    8. Yoshio Kamijo & Koji Yokote, 2022. "Behavioral bargaining theory: Equality bias, risk attitude, and reference-dependent utility," Working Papers 2208, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    9. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    10. Liu Shuren & Chen Huina & Chen Lili, 2016. "Inventory and Pricing Decisions Under Wholesale Price Contract with Social Preferences," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 68-86, February.
    11. Takeuchi, Ai & Veszteg, Róbert F. & Kamijo, Yoshio & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2022. "Bargaining over a jointly produced pie: The effect of the production function on bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 169-198.
    12. Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok & Zhongwen Ma & Suresh Sethi, 2019. "Relationship-specific investment and hold-up problems in supply chains: theory and experiments," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 45-74, April.
    13. Kjell Hausken, 1997. "Game-theoretic and Behavioral Negotiation Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(6), pages 511-528, December.
    14. Qingfeng Meng & Zhen Li & Jianguo Du & Huimin Liu & Xiang Ding, 2019. "Negotiation for Time Optimization in Construction Projects with Competitive and Social Welfare Preferences," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-13, January.
    15. Ke Wang & Jinwen Sun & Liang Liang & Xiaoyan Li, 2016. "Optimal contracts and the manufacturer’s pricing strategies in a supply chain with an inequity-averse retailer," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 107-125, March.
    16. Fischer, Sven & Guth, Werner & Pull, Kerstin, 2007. "Is there as-if bargaining?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 546-560, August.
    17. Du, Shaofu & Chen, Yuan & Peng, Jing & Nie, Tengfei, 2022. "Incorporating risk fairness concerns into wine futures under quality uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    18. Nie, Tengfei & Du, Shaofu, 2017. "Dual-fairness supply chain with quantity discount contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 491-500.
    19. Schwaninger, Manuel, 2022. "Sharing with the powerless third: Other-regarding preferences in dynamic bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 341-355.
    20. Xia Yan & Shaofu Du & Li Hu, 2020. "Supply chain performance for a risk inequity averse newsvendor," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 897-921, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hin:complx:1253092. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mohamed Abdelhakeem (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.hindawi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.