IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2401.04939.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Partition-form Cooperative Games in Two-Echelon Supply Chains

Author

Listed:
  • Gurkirat Wadhwa
  • Tushar Shankar Walunj
  • Veeraruna Kavitha

Abstract

Competition and cooperation are inherent features of any multi-echelon supply chain. The interactions among the agents across the same echelon and that across various echelons influence the percolation of market demand across echelons. The agents may want to collaborate with others in pursuit of attracting higher demand and thereby improving their own revenue. We consider one supplier (at a higher echelon) and two manufacturers (at a lower echelon and facing the customers) and study the collaborations that are `stable'; the main differentiator from the existing studies in supply chain literature is the consideration of the following crucial aspect -- the revenue of any collaborative unit also depends upon the way the opponents collaborate. Such competitive scenarios can be modeled using what is known as partition form games. Our study reveals that the grand coalition is not stable when the product is essential and the customers buy it from any of the manufacturers without a preference. The supplier prefers to collaborate with only one manufacturer, the one stronger in terms of market power; further, such collaboration is stable only when the stronger manufacturer is significantly stronger. Interestingly, no stable collaborative arrangements exist when the two manufacturers are nearly equal in market power.

Suggested Citation

  • Gurkirat Wadhwa & Tushar Shankar Walunj & Veeraruna Kavitha, 2024. "Partition-form Cooperative Games in Two-Echelon Supply Chains," Papers 2401.04939, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2401.04939
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.04939
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Changwen Li & Bin Cao & Yong-Wu Zhou & T. C. Edwin Cheng, 2023. "Pricing, coalition stability, and profit allocation in the pull assembly supply chains under competition," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 45(3), pages 977-1011, September.
    2. Mahesh Nagarajan & Greys Sošić, 2009. "Coalition Stability in Assembly Models," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 131-145, February.
    3. AUMANN, Robert J. & DREZE, Jacques H., 1974. "Cooperative games with coalition structures," LIDAM Reprints CORE 217, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. Fang Tian & Greys Sošić & Laurens Debo, 2019. "Manufacturers’ Competition and Cooperation in Sustainability: Stable Recycling Alliances," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(10), pages 4733-4753, October.
    2. Li, Tingting & Chen, Junlin, 2020. "Alliance formation in assembly systems with quality-improvement incentives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 931-940.
    3. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Mostapha Diss & Rodrigue Tido Takeng, 2024. "Cooperative games with diversity constraints," Working Papers hal-04447373, HAL.
    4. Caulier, Jean-François & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2015. "Allocation rules for coalitional network games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 80-88.
    5. Lukáš Adam & Tomáš Kroupa, 2017. "The intermediate set and limiting superdifferential for coalitional games: between the core and the Weber set," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 891-918, November.
    6. Antonio Magaña & Francesc Carreras, 2018. "Coalition Formation and Stability," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 467-502, June.
    7. Grabisch, Michel & Sudhölter, Peter, 2018. "On a class of vertices of the core," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 541-557.
    8. Sun, Ning & Trockel, Walter & Yang, Zaifu, 2008. "Competitive outcomes and endogenous coalition formation in an n-person game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(7-8), pages 853-860, July.
    9. Del Castillo, Maria Fernanda & Dimitrakopoulos, Roussos, 2016. "A multivariate destination policy for geometallurgical variables in mineral value chains using coalition-formation clustering," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 322-332.
    10. Hong Fu & Yongkai Ma & Debing Ni & Xiaoqiang Cai, 2017. "Coordinating a decentralized hybrid push–pull assembly system with unreliable supply and uncertain demand," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 257(1), pages 537-557, October.
    11. Sylvain Béal & Sylvain Ferrières & Philippe Solal, 2022. "The priority value for cooperative games with a priority structure," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(2), pages 431-450, June.
    12. Montero, M.P., 2002. "Two-Stage Bargaining with Reversible Coalitions : The Case of Apex Games," Other publications TiSEM 7dba0283-bc13-4f2c-8f5e-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Takaaki Abe, 2020. "Population monotonic allocation schemes for games with externalities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(1), pages 97-117, March.
    14. Tejada, O. & Álvarez-Mozos, M., 2018. "Graphs and (levels of) cooperation in games: Two ways how to allocate the surplus," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 114-122.
    15. Ray, Debraj & Vohra, Rajiv, 2015. "Coalition Formation," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    16. Joosung Lee, 2013. "Bargaining and Buyout," 2013 Papers ple701, Job Market Papers.
    17. Joosung Lee, 2015. "Multilateral Bargaining in Networks: On the Prevalence of Inefficiencies," Working Papers 2015.53, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Chander, Parkash & Tulkens, Henry, 2006. "Cooperation, Stability and Self-Enforcement in International Environmental Agreements: A Conceptual Discussion," Coalition Theory Network Working Papers 12170, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    19. Gabrielle Demange, 2017. "The stability of group formation," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 127(4), pages 495-516.
    20. Manfred Besner, 2022. "Harsanyi support levels solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 105-130, July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2401.04939. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.