IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rtv/ceisrp/432.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equilibrium Effort in Games with Homogeneous Production Functions and Homogeneous Valuation

Author

Listed:

Abstract

I analyze n-player games in which players exert effort to win part or all of a prize, whose value can either be exogenously given or itself a function of the efforts of an arbitrary subset of contenders. When the functions mapping the vector of efforts into the part of the prize that each player receives in the game and on its value, as well as the cost of effort, exhibit an arbitrary degree of homogeneity, I present a simple way to compute the equilibrium strategy and the sufficient conditions for the existence of a unique interior symmetric pure-strategy Nash equilibrium. The setup nests Malueg and Yates (2006), who exploit homogeneity within the class of rent-seeking contests, and extends it in two directions. In particular, it shows that the properties of homogeneous functions can be used to solve: i) a wider range of rent-seeking contests; ii) other classes of games, like Cournot games with non linear inverse demand and possibly non homogeneous goods.

Suggested Citation

  • Walter Ferrarese, 2018. "Equilibrium Effort in Games with Homogeneous Production Functions and Homogeneous Valuation," CEIS Research Paper 432, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 12 Nov 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:rtv:ceisrp:432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ceistorvergata.it/RePEc/rpaper/RP432.pdf
    File Function: Main text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Subhasish Chowdhury & Roman Sheremeta, 2011. "A generalized Tullock contest," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 413-420, June.
    2. David Malueg & Andrew Yates, 2006. "Equilibria in rent-seeking contests with homogeneous success functions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 27(3), pages 719-727, April.
    3. Menezes, Flavio M. & Quiggin, John, 2010. "Markets for influence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 307-310, May.
    4. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2005. "Asymmetric contests with general technologies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(4), pages 923-946, November.
    5. Chung, Tai-Yeong, 1996. "Rent-Seeking Contest When the Prize Increases with Aggregate Efforts," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 87(1-2), pages 55-66, April.
    6. Serge Svizzero, 1997. "Cournot equilibrium with convex demand," Post-Print hal-02167644, HAL.
    7. Shumei Hirai, 2012. "Existence and Uniqueness of Pure Nash Equilibrium in Asymmetric Contests with Endogenous Prizes," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 2744-2751.
    8. Jack Hirshleifer, 1989. "Conflict and rent-seeking success functions: Ratio vs. difference models of relative success," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 251-262, Springer.
    9. Shumei Hirai & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2013. "Existence And Uniqueness Of Equilibrium In Asymmetric Contests With Endogenous Prizes," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-9.
    10. Szidarovszky, Ferenc & Okuguchi, Koji, 1997. "On the Existence and Uniqueness of Pure Nash Equilibrium in Rent-Seeking Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 135-140, January.
    11. Alex Gershkov & Jianpei Li & Paul Schweinzer, 2009. "Efficient tournaments within teams," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(1), pages 103-119, March.
    12. Svizzero, Serge, 1997. "Cournot equilibrium with convex demand," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 155-158, February.
    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. Walter Ferrarese, 2022. "Equilibrium effort in games with homogeneous production functions and homogeneous valuation," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 18(2), pages 195-212, June.
    2. Damian S. Damianov & Shane Sanders & Anil Yildizparlak, 2018. "Asymmetric endogenous prize contests," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 435-453, October.
    3. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2022. "Stability of dynamic asymmetric contests with endogenous prizes," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 17(1), pages 29-40, January.
    4. Chung, A., 2024. "Target Setting in Contests with Sabotage," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2409, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Konrad, Kai A., 2007. "Strategy in contests: an introduction [Strategie in Turnieren – eine Einführung]," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Processes and Governance SP II 2007-01, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    6. Luis Corchón, 2007. "The theory of contests: a survey," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 11(2), pages 69-100, September.
    7. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Sheremeta, Roman M., 2011. "Multiple equilibria in Tullock contests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 216-219, August.
    8. XiaoGang Che & Brad Humphreys, 2014. "Contests with a Prize Externality and Stochastic Entry," Working Papers 14-19, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    9. Christian Ewerhart & Federico Quartieri, 2020. "Unique equilibrium in contests with incomplete information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(1), pages 243-271, July.
    10. Christian Ewerhart, 2015. "Contest success functions: the common-pool perspective," ECON - Working Papers 195, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    11. Jia, Hao & Skaperdas, Stergios & Vaidya, Samarth, 2013. "Contest functions: Theoretical foundations and issues in estimation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 211-222.
    12. Alex Dickson & Ian A. MacKenzie & Petros G. Sekeris, 2016. "Sharing contests with general preferences," Discussion Papers Series 573, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    13. Sakshi Gupta & Ram Singh, 2018. "On Existence and Properties of Pure-strategy Equilibria under Contests," Working Papers id:12840, eSocialSciences.
    14. Shumei Hirai, 2012. "Existence and Uniqueness of Pure Nash Equilibrium in Asymmetric Contests with Endogenous Prizes," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 2744-2751.
    15. Johannes Münster, 2009. "Group contest success functions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(2), pages 345-357, November.
    16. A. Aiche & E. Einy & O. Haimanko & D. Moreno & A. Sela & B. Shitovitz, 2019. "Information in Tullock contests," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 303-323, May.
    17. Alcalde, José & Dahm, Matthias, 2010. "Rent seeking and rent dissipation: A neutrality result," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1-2), pages 1-7, February.
    18. Cheikbossian, Guillaume, 2021. "The evolutionary stability of in-group altruism in productive and destructive group contests," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 236-252.
    19. Alberto Vesperoni, 2016. "A contest success function for rankings," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 905-937, December.
    20. Acemoglu, Daron & Jensen, Martin Kaae, 2013. "Aggregate comparative statics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 27-49.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Equilibrium effort; Homogeneous functions; Symmetric games.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:rtv:ceisrp:432. 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: Barbara Piazzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csrotit.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.