Forming and Dissolving Partnerships in Cooperative Game Situations
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.)
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 15 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 (04)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1097-3923|
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=1097-3923|
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.:
- Andrew Postlewaite & Robert W. Rosenthal, 1973.
40, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Dutta, Bhaskar & Ray, Debraj, 1989. "A Concept of Egalitarianism under Participation Constraints," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 615-35, May.
- repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-86382 is not listed on IDEAS
- Aumann, Robert J., 1973. "Disadvantageous monopolies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, February.
- 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.
- Curiel, Imma & Pederzoli, Giorgio & Tijs, Stef, 1989. "Sequencing games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 344-351, June.
- Meinhardt, Holger, 1999. " Common Pool Games Are Convex Games," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 1(2), pages 247-70.
- Andrew Postlewaite, 1974. "Disadvantageous Syndicates in Exchange Economies," Discussion Papers 105, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-154243 is not listed on IDEAS
- Derks, J. & Tijs, S.H., 2000. "On merge properties of the Shapley value," Other publications TiSEM f9a2d218-87e0-4dc7-af3f-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Haviv, Moshe, 1995. "Consecutive amalgamations and an axiomatization of the Shapley value," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 7-11, July.
- Haller, Hans, 1994. "Collusion Properties of Values," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 261-81.
- Ilya Segal, 2003. "Collusion, Exclusion, and Inclusion in Random-Order Bargaining," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(2), pages 439-460.
- 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.
- Patrick Legros, 1987.
"Disadvantageous syndicates and stable cartels: the case of the nucleolus,"
ULB Institutional Repository
2013/7046, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Lehrer, E, 1988. "An Axiomatization of the Banzhaf Value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 89-99.
- Hart, Sergiu & Kurz, Mordecai, 1983. "Endogenous Formation of Coalitions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 1047-64, July.
- 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 678-84, Part I Se.
- 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.
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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.