Nash demand game and the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution
We introduce two new variations on the Nash demand game. In one, as in all past variants of Nash demand games, the Nash bargaining solution is the equilibrium outcome. The other demand game allows for probabilistic continuation in cases of infeasible joint demands. Specifically, with probability (1-p) the game terminates and the players receive their disagreement payoffs; but with probability p the game continues to a second stage in which one of the two incompatible demands is randomly selected and implemented. Surprisingly, the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution is always the outcome of the most robust equilibrium of this game. Moreover, ranking other solution concepts is impossible.
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.:
- Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
- Bigelow, John Payne & Anbarci, Nejat, 1993. "Non-dictatorial, Pareto-monotonic, cooperative bargaining : An impossibility theorem," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 551-558, November.
- Howard, J. V., 1992. "A social choice rule and its implementation in perfect equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 142-159, February.
- Kalai, Ehud & Smorodinsky, Meir, 1975. "Other Solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(3), pages 513-518, May.
- Ehud Kalai, 1977.
"Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons,"
179, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Kalai, Ehud, 1977. "Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1623-1630, October.
- Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
- Nejat Anbarci, 1995. "Reference Functions and Balanced Concessions in Bargaining," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 675-682, August.
- Miyagawa, Eiichi, 2002. "Subgame-perfect implementation of bargaining solutions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 292-308, November.
- Anbarci, Nejat & Bigelow, John P., 1994. "The area monotonic solution to the cooperative bargaining problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 133-142, October.
- Chun, Youngsub, 1988. "The equal-loss principle for bargaining problems," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 103-106.
- Rubinstein, Ariel & Safra, Zvi & Thomson, William, 1992. "On the Interpretation of the Nash Bargaining Solution and Its Extension to Non-expected Utility Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1171-1186, September.
- Nejat Anbarci, 1993. "Noncooperative Foundations of the Area Monotonic Solution," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(1), pages 245-258.
- Ken Binmore, 1998. "Game Theory and the Social Contract - Vol. 2: Just Playing," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 2, number 0262024446.
- Yusuke Samejima, 2005. "A Note on Implementation of Bargaining Solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 175-191, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:71:y:2011:i:1:p:14-22. 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: (Dana Niculescu)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.