IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eth/wpswif/07-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Legislative Process with Open Rules

Author

Abstract

We examine the legislative game with open rules proposed by Baron and Ferejohn (1989). We first show that the three-group equilibrium suggested by Baron and Ferejohn does not always obtain. Second, we characterize the set of stationary equilibria for simple and super majority rules. Such equilibria are either of the three-group or four-group type. The latter type tends to occur when the size of the legislature becomes larger. Moreover, four-group equilibria imply large delay costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Theresa Fahrenberger & Hans Gersbach, 2007. "Legislative Process with Open Rules," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 07/64, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    • Handle: RePEc:eth:wpswif:07-64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/mtec/cer-eth/cer-eth-dam/documents/working-papers/wp_07_64.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harrington, Joseph Jr., 1986. "A non-cooperative bargaining game with risk averse players and an uncertain finite horizon," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 9-13.
    2. David Primo, 2007. "A comment on Baron and Ferejohn (1989): The Open Rule Equilibrium and Coalition Formation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 129-135, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Balistreri, Edward J. & Hillberry, Russell H. & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2011. "Structural estimation and solution of international trade models with heterogeneous firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 95-108, March.
    2. Gersbach, Hans & Britz, Volker, 2018. "Open Rule Legislative Bargaining," CEPR Discussion Papers 12966, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    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. Kibris, Ozgur, 2002. "Misrepresentation of Utilities in Bargaining: Pure Exchange and Public Good Economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 91-110, April.
    2. Gersbach, Hans & Britz, Volker, 2018. "Open Rule Legislative Bargaining," CEPR Discussion Papers 12966, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Levent Celik & Bilgehan Karabay, 2016. "Veto players and equilibrium uniqueness in the Baron–Ferejohn model," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 33-52, June.
    4. Ali Yekkehkhany & Timothy Murray & Rakesh Nagi, 2021. "Stochastic Superiority Equilibrium in Game Theory," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 153-168, June.
    5. Randolph Sloof, 2005. "Finite Horizon Bargaining With Outside Options And Threat Points," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 109-142, March.
    6. Hans Gersbach & Bernhard Pachl, 2006. "Cake Division by Majority Decision," CESifo Working Paper Series 1872, CESifo.
    7. Evdokimov, Kirill S., 2020. "Uniqueness of equilibrium payoffs in the stochastic model of bargaining," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Baron/Ferejohn model; bargaining in legislatures; open rules; threegroup and four-group equilibria;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making

    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:eth:wpswif:07-64. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwethch.html .

    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.