IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finlet/v97y2026ics1544612326003533.html

Equilibrium in secure strategies in the Tullock contest

Author

Listed:
  • Iskakov, Alexey
  • Iskakov, Mikhail

Abstract

The Tullock contest is widely used in economic theory, with applications in blockchain and decentralized finance systems. This study examines the contest under the concept of equilibrium in secure strategies (EinSS), which extends the Nash equilibrium in pure strategies to settings with cautious players who prioritize secure positions and avoid potential threats. Using a formal theoretical analysis, the study characterizes equilibrium outcomes under varying elasticity parameters. The analysis demonstrates that the Tullock contest may admit an asymmetric EinSS outcome when a firm finds it more profitable to increase its effort — thereby rendering the contest unprofitable for its rivals — than to compete symmetrically. Specifically, when the elasticity parameter is sufficiently high, an EinSS solution emerges in which one player sustains a high level of effort to create an entry barrier, while the others exert zero effort. When a symmetric Nash equilibrium does not exist (i.e., for elasticity parameters greater than two), the resulting monopolistic configuration constitutes the unique EinSS solution (up to player permutation) and yields lower rent dissipation than a mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium. These findings confirm the tendency toward winner-takes-all outcomes in Tullock contests with high elasticity and show that such outcomes may be stable and efficiency-enhancing under secure strategies. The results provide theoretical support for the emergence of dominant players and entry barriers in decentralized finance systems and transport edge computing, highlighting how contest sensitivity to effort shapes market concentration and rent dissipation.

Suggested Citation

  • Iskakov, Alexey & Iskakov, Mikhail, 2026. "Equilibrium in secure strategies in the Tullock contest," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:97:y:2026:i:c:s1544612326003533
    DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2026.109823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612326003533
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.frl.2026.109823?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • G18 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies

    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:eee:finlet:v:97:y:2026:i:c:s1544612326003533. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/frl .

    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.