This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

An Experimental Study of the Holdout Problem in a Multilateral Bargaining Game

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
John Cadigan () (Department of Economics, Gettysburg College, 300 North Washington Street, Gettysburg, PA 17325, USA)
Pamela Schmitt () (Department of Economics, U.S. Naval Academy, 589 McNair Road, Annapolis, MD 21402, USA)
Robert Shupp () (Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, 211E Agricultural Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA)
Kurtis Swope1 () (Department of Economics, U.S. Naval Academy, 589 McNair Road, Annapolis, MD 21402, USA)
Abstract

When an economic exchange requires agreement by multiple independent parties, the potential exists for an individual to strategically delay agreement in an attempt to capture a greater share of the surplus created by the exchange. This ‘‘holdout problem’’ is a common feature of the land-assembly literature because development frequently requires the assembly of multiple parcels of land. We use experimental methods to examine holdout behavior in a laboratory bargaining game that involves multi-person groups, complementary exchanges, and holdout externalities. The results of six treatments that vary the bargaining institution, number of bargaining periods, and cost of delay demonstrate that holdout is common across institutions and is, on average, a payoff-improving strategy for responders. Both proposers and responders take a more aggressive initial bargaining stance in multi-period bargaining treatments relative to single-period treatments, but take a less aggressive bargaining stance when delay is costly. Nearly all exchanges eventually occur in our multi-period treatments, leading to higher overall efficiency relative to the single-period treatments, both with and without delay costs.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Southern Economic Association in its journal Southern Economic Journal.

Volume (Year): 76 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (October)
Pages: 344-457
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:sej:ancoec:v:76:2:y:2009:p:344-457

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.southerneconomic.org/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Laura Razzolini).

Related research
Keywords:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
K1 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law
J5 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You too can volunteer for RePEc, for example by encouraging others to use our services.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-3.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.