A way to play bankruptcy problems
AbstractThe commitment among agents has always been a difficult task, especially when they have to decide how to distribute the available amount of a scarce resource among all. On the one hand, there are a multiplicity of possible ways for assigning the available amount; and, on the other hand, each agent is going to propose that distribution which provides her the highest possible award. In this paper, with the purpose of making this agreement easier, firstly we use two different sets of basic properties, called Commonly Accepted Equity Principles, to delimit what agents can propose as reasonable allocations. Secondly, we extend the results obtained by Chun (1989) and Herrero (2003), obtaining new characterizations of old and well known bankruptcy rules. Finally, using the fact that bankruptcy problems can be analyzed from awards and losses, we define a mechanism which provides a new justification of the convex combinations of bankruptcy rules. Keywords: Bankruptcy problems, Unanimous Concessions procedure, Diminishing Claims mechanism, Pinilesâ€™ rule, Constrained Egalitarian rule. JEL classification: C71, D63, D71.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2072/169781.
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Fallida; Jocs cooperatius; Economia del benestar; Elecció social; 33 - Economia;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
- D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
- D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011.
"Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims,"
International Journal of Game Theory,
Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
- Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2007. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Center for Economic Studies - Discussion papers ces0705, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën.
- Bosmans, Kristof & Lauwers, Luc, 2007. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Open Access publications from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven urn:hdl:123456789/120499, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
- Antonio Villar Notario & Carmen Herrero Blanco, 2000.
"The Three Musketeers: Four Classical Solutions To Bankruptcy Problems,"
Working Papers. Serie AD
2000-23, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
- Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2001. "The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 307-328, November.
- 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.
- Volij, Oscar & Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto, 1997.
"A Non-Cooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules,"
Staff General Research Papers
5130, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
- 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.
- Nir Dagan & Roberto Serrano & Oscar Volij, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Economic theory and game theory 005, Nir Dagan.
- Dutta, Bhaskar & Ray, Debraj, 1989. "A Concept of Egalitarianism under Participation Constraints," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 615-35, May.
- Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
- Josep Enric Peris Ferrando & Begoña Subiza & María del Carmen Marco, 1995. "A Mechanism For Meta-Bargaining Problems," Working Papers. Serie AD 1995-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
- José M. Jiménez Gómez & María del Carmen Marco Gil & Pedro Gadea Blanco, 2010. "Some game-theoretic grounds for meeting people half-way," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-04, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
- J. Arin, 2007. "Egalitarian Distributions In Coalitional Models," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(01), pages 47-57.
- Cowell, F.A., 2000. "Measurement of inequality," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 87-166 Elsevier.
- Young, H. P., 1988. "Distributive justice in taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 321-335, April.
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ariadna Casals).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.