Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Implementing Cooperative Solution Concepts: a Generalized Bidding Approach

Contents:

Author Info

  • Yuan Ju

    ()
    (Keele University, Centre for Economic Research and School of Economic and Management Studies)

  • David Wettstein

    ()
    (Department of Economics, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev)

Abstract

This paper provides a framework for implementing and comparing several solution concepts for transferable utility cooperative games.We construct bidding mechanisms where players bid for the role of the proposer. The mechanisms differ in the power awarded to the proposer. The Shapley, consensus and equal surplus values are implemented in subgame perfect equilibrium outcomes as power shifts away from the proposer to the rest of the players. Moreover, an alternative informational structure where these solution concepts can be implemented without imposing any conditions of the transferable utility game is discussed as well.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/ec/wpapers/kerp0606.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Centre for Economic Research, Keele University in its series Keele Economics Research Papers with number KERP 2006/06.

as in new window
Length: 22 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:kee:kerpuk:2006/06

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics, University of Keele, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG - United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (0)1782 584581
Fax: +44 (0)1782 717577
Email:
Web page: http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/ec/cer/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Postal: Centre for Economic Research, Research Institute for Public Policy and Management, Keele University, Staffordshire ST5 5BG - United Kingdom
Email:
Web: http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/ec/cer/pubs_kerps.htm

Related research

Keywords: Implementation; bidding mechanism; Shapley value; consensus value; equal surplus value.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Moldovanu, Benny & Eyal Winter, 1993. "Core Implementation and Increasing Returns to Scale for Cooperation," Discussion Paper Serie B 289, University of Bonn, Germany.
  2. Eric Maskin & John Moore, 1999. "Implementation and Renegotiation," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1863, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  3. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-58, December.
  4. Krishna, V. & serrano, R., 1993. "Perfect Equilibria of a Model of N-Person Noncooperative Bargaining," Papers 10-93-31, Pennsylvania State - Department of Economics.
  5. Pham Do, K.H. & Norde, H.W., 2002. "The Shapley Value for Partition Function Form Games," Discussion Paper 2002-4, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  6. David Pérez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, . "Bidding For The Surplus: A Non-Cooperative Approach To The Shapley Value," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 461.00, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  7. Yuan Ju & Peter Borm & Pieter Ruys, 2007. "The consensus value: a new solution concept for cooperative games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 685-703, June.
  8. David P�rez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, 2002. "Choosing Wisely: A Multibidding Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1577-1587, December.
  9. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
  10. Macho-Stadler, Ines & Perez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2006. "Efficient bidding with externalities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 304-320, November.
  11. Dagan, N. & Serrano, R. & Volij, O., 1994. "A Non-Cooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Discussion Paper 1994-11, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  12. Juan Vidal-Puga, 2005. "A bargaining approach to the Owen value and the Nash solution with coalition structure," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 679-701, 04.
  13. Ju, Yuan & Borm, Peter, 2008. "Externalities and compensation: Primeval games and solutions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 367-382, February.
  14. Herve Moulin, 2004. "Fair Division and Collective Welfare," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262633116, December.
  15. Gul, Faruk, 1989. "Bargaining Foundations of Shapley Value," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 81-95, January.
  16. Sandeep Baliga & Sandro Brusco, 2000. "Collusion, renegotiation and implementation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 69-83.
  17. Moore, John & Repullo, Rafael, 1988. "Subgame Perfect Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(5), pages 1191-1220, September.
  18. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
  19. Winter, Eyal, 1994. "The Demand Commitment Bargaining and Snowballing Cooperation," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 255-73, March.
  20. Juan J. Vidal-Puga, 2004. "Bargaining with commitments," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 129-144, January.
  21. Faruk Gul, 1999. "Efficiency and Immediate Agreement: A Reply to Hart and Levy," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 913-918, July.
  22. Yuan Ju, 2007. "The Consensus Value For Games In Partition Function Form," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 437-452.
  23. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
  24. Sergiu Hart & Andreu Mas-Colell, 1994. "Bargaining and value," Economics Working Papers 114, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Feb 1995.
  25. Roth,Alvin E. (ed.), 2005. "The Shapley Value," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521021333, October.
  26. Young, H.P., 1994. "Cost allocation," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 34, pages 1193-1235 Elsevier.
  27. Serrano, Roberto, 1995. "Strategic bargaining, surplus sharing problems and the nucleolus," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 319-329.
  28. Ignacio García-Jurado & Julio González-Díaz & Antonio Villar, 2006. "A Non-cooperative Approach to Bankruptcy Problems," Spanish Economic Review, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 189-197, September.
  29. René van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2004. "Axiomatizations of a Class of Equal Surplus Sharing Solutions for Cooperative Games with Transferable Utility," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-136/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  30. Vidal-Puga, Juan & Bergantinos, Gustavo, 2003. "An implementation of the Owen value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 412-427, August.
  31. (*), Y. Stephen Chiu & Ani Dasgupta, 1998. "On implementation via demand commitment games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 161-189.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Rene van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2010. "Axiomatization and Implementation of Discounted Shapley Values," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-065/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  2. Gustavo Bergantiños & María Gómez-Rúa, 2010. "Minimum cost spanning tree problems with groups," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 227-262, May.
  3. Ju, Yuan & Borm, Peter, 2008. "Externalities and compensation: Primeval games and solutions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 367-382, February.
  4. Yuan Ju & Peter Borm, 2006. "A Non-cooperative Approach to the Compensation Rules for Primeval Games," Keele Economics Research Papers KERP 2006/18, Centre for Economic Research, Keele University.
  5. Rene van den Brink & Youngsub Chun & Yuan Ju, 2014. "Auctioning and Selling Positions: A Non-cooperative Approach to Queuing Conflicts," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-016/II, Tinbergen Institute.
  6. Pérez-Castrillo, David & Quérou, Nicolas, 2012. "Smooth multibidding mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 420-438.
  7. Rene van den Brink & Gerard van der Laan & Nigel Moes, 2012. "A Strategic Implementation of the Average Tree Solution for Cycle-Free Graph Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-050/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  8. René van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2007. "Consistency, Monotonicity and Implementation of Egalitarian Shapley Values," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-062/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  9. Ju, Y. & Borm, P.E.M. & Ruys, P.H.M., 2004. "The Consensus Value: A New Solution Concept for Cooperative Games," Discussion Paper 2004-50, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  10. Rene van den Brink & Gerard van der Laan & Nigel Moes, 2012. "A Strategic Implementation of the Average Tree Solution for Cycle-Free Graph Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-050/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  11. Ju, Yuan, 2012. "Reject and renegotiate: The Shapley value in multilateral bargaining," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 431-436.
  12. René van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2007. "Consistency, Monotonicity and Implementation of Egalitarian Shapley Values," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-062/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  13. Toyotaka Sakai, 2012. "Fair waste pricing: an axiomatic analysis to the NIMBY problem," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 499-521, June.
  14. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2013. "Reconciling marginalism with egalitarianism: consistency, monotonicity, and implementation of egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 693-714, March.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kee:kerpuk:2006/06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Martin E. Diedrich) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Martin E. Diedrich to update the entry or send us the correct address.

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.