IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v15y2013i2p208-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forming and Dissolving Partnerships in Cooperative Game Situations

Author

Listed:
  • TRINE TORNØE PLATZ
  • LARS PETER ØSTERDAL

Abstract

A group of players in a cooperative game are partners (e.g., as in the form of a union or a joint ownership) if the prospects for cooperation are restricted such that cooperation with players outside the partnership requires the accept of all the partners. The formation of such partnerships through binding agreements may change the game implying that players could have incentives to manipulate a game by forming or dissolving partnerships. The present paper seeks to explore the existence of allocation rules that are immune to this type of manipulation. An allocation rule that distributes the worth of the grand coalition among players, is called partnership formation-proof if it ensures that it is never jointly profitable for any group of players to form a partnership and partnership dissolution-proof if no group can ever profit from dissolving a partnership. The paper provides results on the existence of such allocation rules for general classes of games as well as more specific results concerning well known allocation rules.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Trine Tornøe Platz & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2013. "Forming and Dissolving Partnerships in Cooperative Game Situations," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(2), pages 208-228, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:15:y:2013:i:2:p:208-228
    DOI: jpet.12015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jpet.12015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/jpet.12015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lehrer, E, 1988. "An Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 17(2), pages 89-99.
    2. Shapley, Lloyd S & Shubik, Martin, 1969. "On the Core of an Economic System with Externalities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(4), pages 678-684, Part I Se.
    3. Dutta, Bhaskar & Ray, Debraj, 1989. "A Concept of Egalitarianism under Participation Constraints," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 615-635, May.
    4. Legros, Patrick, 1987. "Disadvantageous syndicates and stable cartels: The case of the nucleolus," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 30-49, June.
    5. Jean Derks & Stef Tijs, 2000. "On Merge Properties Of The Shapley Value," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(04), pages 249-257.
    6. Driessen, Theo S.H. & Meinhardt, Holger I., 2005. "Convexity of oligopoly games without transferable technologies," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 102-126, July.
    7. Curiel, I. & Pederzoli, G. & Tijs, S.H., 1989. "Sequencing games," Other publications TiSEM cd695be5-0f54-4548-a952-2, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Hart, Sergiu & Kurz, Mordecai, 1983. "Endogenous Formation of Coalitions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 1047-1064, July.
    9. Haller, Hans, 1994. "Collusion Properties of Values," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 23(3), pages 261-281.
    10. Carreras, Francesc & Llongueras, Maria Dolors & Puente, María Albina, 2009. "Partnership formation and binomial semivalues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 487-499, January.
    11. Charnes, A. & Littlechild, S. C., 1975. "On the formation of unions in n-person games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 386-402, June.
    12. Andrew Postlewaite, 1974. "Disadvantageous Syndicates in Exchange Economies," Discussion Papers 105, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    13. Ilya Segal, 2003. "Collusion, Exclusion, and Inclusion in Random-Order Bargaining," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(2), pages 439-460.
    14. Postlewaite, Andrew & Rosenthal, Robert W., 1974. "Disadvantageous syndicates," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 324-326, November.
    15. Meinhardt, Holger, 1999. "Common Pool Games Are Convex Games," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 1(2), pages 247-270.
    16. Haviv, Moshe, 1995. "Consecutive amalgamations and an axiomatization of the Shapley value," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 7-11, July.
    17. Aumann, Robert J., 1973. "Disadvantageous monopolies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, February.
    18. Zhao, Jingang, 1999. "A necessary and sufficient condition for the convexity in oligopoly games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 189-204, March.
    19. Francesc Carreras & M. Llongueras & Antonio Magaña, 2005. "On the Convenience to Form Coalitions or Partnerships in Simple Games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 67-89, July.
    20. Curiel, Imma & Pederzoli, Giorgio & Tijs, Stef, 1989. "Sequencing games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 344-351, June.
    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. Peter Knudsen & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "Merging and splitting in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 763-774, November.
    2. O. Tejada & M. Álvarez-Mozos, 2016. "Vertical syndication-proof competitive prices in multilateral assignment markets," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 20(4), pages 289-327, December.
    3. Sylvain Béal & Amandine Ghintran & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2015. "The sequential equal surplus division for rooted forest games and an application to sharing a river with bifurcations," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 251-283, September.
    4. O. Tejada and M. Alvarez-Mozos, 2012. "Vertical Syndication-Proof Competitive Prices in Multilateral Markets," Working Papers in Economics 283, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia.
    5. Bloch, Francis & Ghosal, Sayantan, 1997. "Stable Trading Structures in Bilateral Oligopolies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 368-384, June.
    6. Besner, Manfred, 2021. "Disjointly productive players and the Shapley value," MPRA Paper 108241, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Besner, Manfred, 2021. "Disjointly and jointly productive players and the Shapley value," MPRA Paper 108511, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Ramón Flores & Elisenda Molina & Juan Tejada, 2019. "Evaluating groups with the generalized Shapley value," 4OR, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 141-172, June.
    9. van den Brink, Rene & van der Laan, Gerard, 2005. "A class of consistent share functions for games in coalition structure," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 193-212, April.
    10. Flip Klijn & Stef Tijs & Marco Slikker, 2001. "A Dual Egalitarian Solution," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(10), pages 1-8.
    11. Ilya Segal, 2000. "Collusion, Exclusion, and Inclusion in Random-Order Bargaining," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0738, Econometric Society.
    12. María Gómez-Rúa & Juan Vidal-Puga, 2017. "A monotonic and merge-proof rule in minimum cost spanning tree situations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 813-826, March.
    13. Joao Montez & Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda & Michael D. Ryall, 2018. "Competitive Intensity and Its Two-Sided Effect on the Boundaries of Firm Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2716-2733, 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;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 693-714, March.
    15. Duygu Yengin, 2012. "Characterizing the Shapley value in fixed-route traveling salesman problems with appointments," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(2), pages 271-299, May.
    16. McQuillin, Ben & Sugden, Robert, 2018. "Balanced externalities and the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 81-92.
    17. Gerard van der Laan & René van den Brink, 2002. "A Banzhaf share function for cooperative games in coalition structure," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 61-86, August.
    18. van den Brink, J.R. & van der Laan, G., 2001. "A Class of Consistent Share Functions For Games in Coalition Structure," Other publications TiSEM ba398b81-e24b-40d4-a281-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. M. Álvarez-Mozos & R. Brink & G. Laan & O. Tejada, 2017. "From hierarchies to levels: new solutions for games with hierarchical structure," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1089-1113, November.
    20. Mikel Álvarez-Mozos & René van den Brink & Gerard van der Laan & Oriol Tejada, 2015. "From Hierarchies to Levels: New Solutions for Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-072/II, Tinbergen Institute.

    More about this item

    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

    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:bla:jpbect:v:15:y:2013:i:2:p:208-228. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.html .

    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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.