Economists do not understand how bargains are struck. A bargain is the sharing of a pie between two or more people who are collectively entitled to the pie but cannot appropriate it until they agree how large each person's slice is to be. We know that people do strike bargains and that civilized life could not proceed otherwise. We do not know how the required agreement is reached. Theorists have solved the bargaining problem, but only by the imposition of strong, artificial and unrealistic constraints. Trusting that the existence of some complex solution has been demonstrated, applied economists are content to postulate a simple one: that bargainers split the difference in actual disputes. This paper begins with examples of imposed bargaining solutions in politics and corporation finance. There follows a critical examination of the principal bargaining theories - based on notions of fairness or of imposed bargaining procedures - with emphasis on the fragility of their assumptions and on their susceptibility to threats and blackmail. The paper closes with a brief discussion of connections among theories of bargaining, rent-seeking and conflict.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Queen's University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number
1001.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory
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.: