IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i12p3595-d576310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analysis of Countries’ Bargaining Power Derived from the Natural Gas Transportation System Using a Cooperative Game Theory Model

Author

Listed:
  • Mihai Daniel Roman

    (Faculty of Cybernetics, Statistics and Economic Informatics, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Diana Mihaela Stanculescu

    (Economic Cybernetics and Statistics Doctoral School, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, 010374 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

A large consumption of natural gas accompanied by reduced production capabilities makes Europe heavily dependent on imports from Russia. More than half of Russian gas is exported by transiting Ukraine, so in the context of the underlying conflict between the two, this is considered uncertain. Therefore, in this article, we modeled the natural gas transportation system using cooperative game theory in order to determine the bargaining power of the major players (Russia, Ukraine, Germany, and Norway) by using a form of the Shapley value. We described the interaction between countries as network games where utilities from transport routes are considered and proposed three scenarios where the gas flow from Russia to Ukraine is either diminished or completely interrupted, with the purpose of finding out how the bargaining power on this market is shifted in case of network redesign. In this context, we included in the analysis the scenario where the Nord Stream 2 pipeline will be finished. Results showed that Russia dominates the market in any scenario, and by avoiding Ukraine, its position is even further strengthened. Moreover, Germany’s position remains stable considering its diverse imports and large storage capabilities, and its bargaining power increases in the case of diminishing or avoiding the Ukrainian gas pipelines.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihai Daniel Roman & Diana Mihaela Stanculescu, 2021. "An Analysis of Countries’ Bargaining Power Derived from the Natural Gas Transportation System Using a Cooperative Game Theory Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:12:p:3595-:d:576310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/12/3595/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/12/3595/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCain , Roger, 2013. "Bargaining Power and Majoritarian Allocations," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2013-9, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    2. Paltsev, Sergey, 2014. "Scenarios for Russia's natural gas exports to 2050," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 262-270.
    3. Jackson, Matthew O., 2005. "Allocation rules for network games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 128-154, April.
    4. Samira Ortiz & Mandoye Ndoye & Marcel Castro-Sitiriche, 2021. "Satisfaction-Based Energy Allocation with Energy Constraint Applying Cooperative Game Theory," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Matúš Mišík & Andrej Nosko, 2017. "The Eastring gas pipeline in the context of the Central and Eastern European gas supply challenge," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(11), pages 844-848, November.
    6. J. Bilbao & J. Fernández & N. Jiménez & J. López, 2008. "The Shapley value for bicooperative games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 99-115, February.
    7. Khmelnitskaya, A. & Selçuk, O. & Talman, A.J.J., 2014. "The Shapley Value for Directed Graph Games," Discussion Paper 2014-064, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    8. Franz Hubert & Svetlana Ikonnikova, 2011. "Investment Options And Bargaining Power: The Eurasian Supply Chain For Natural Gas," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 85-116, March.
    9. Ríos-Mercado, Roger Z. & Borraz-Sánchez, Conrado, 2015. "Optimization problems in natural gas transportation systems: A state-of-the-art review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 536-555.
    10. Olexandr Yemelyanov & Anastasiya Symak & Tetyana Petrushka & Olena Zahoretska & Myroslava Kusiy & Roman Lesyk & Lilia Lesyk, 2019. "Changes in Energy Consumption, Economic Growth and Aspirations for Energy Independence: Sectoral Analysis of Uses of Natural Gas in Ukrainian Economy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-34, December.
    11. Nagayama, Daisuke & Horita, Masahide, 2014. "A network game analysis of strategic interactions in the international trade of Russian natural gas through Ukraine and Belarus," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 89-101.
    12. Cobanli, Onur, 2014. "Central Asian gas in Eurasian power game," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 348-370.
    13. Vidal-Puga, Juan, 2013. "A non-cooperative approach to the ordinal Shapley rule," MPRA Paper 43790, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Jesús Mario Bilbao & Julio R. Fernández & Nieves Jiménez & Jorge Jesús López, 2004. "The Shapley value for bicooperative games," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/56, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    15. Tiago Pinto & Zita Vale & Isabel Praça & E. J. Solteiro Pires & Fernando Lopes, 2015. "Decision Support for Energy Contracts Negotiation with Game Theory and Adaptive Learning," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-26, September.
    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. Aram Lee & Jeonghwan Kim, 2023. "Analysis of Bargaining Power between the EU and Russia by Altering Gas Supply Network Structure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-12, March.
    2. Michel Grabisch, 2011. "Ensuring the boundedness of the core of games with restricted cooperation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 137-154, November.
    3. Csercsik, Dávid & Hubert, Franz & Sziklai, Balázs R. & Kóczy, László Á., 2019. "Modeling transfer profits as externalities in a cooperative game-theoretic model of natural gas networks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 355-365.
    4. García-Martínez, Jose A. & Mayor-Serra, Antonio J. & Meca, Ana, 2020. "Efficient Effort Equilibrium in Cooperation with Pairwise Cost Reduction," MPRA Paper 105604, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Hubert, Franz & Orlova, Ekaterina, 2018. "Network access and market power," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 170-185.
    6. Churkin, Andrey & Pozo, David & Bialek, Janusz & Korgin, Nikolay & Sauma, Enzo, 2019. "Can cross-border transmission expansion lead to fair and stable cooperation? Northeast Asia case analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    7. Richter, Philipp M. & Holz, Franziska, 2015. "All quiet on the eastern front? Disruption scenarios of Russian natural gas supply to Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 177-189.
    8. Veronika Grimm & Lars Schewe & Martin Schmidt & Gregor Zöttl, 2019. "A multilevel model of the European entry-exit gas market," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 89(2), pages 223-255, April.
    9. Sziklai, Balázs R. & Kóczy, László Á. & Csercsik, Dávid, 2020. "The impact of Nord Stream 2 on the European gas market bargaining positions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    10. Roberto Roson & Franz Hubert, 2015. "Bargaining Power and Value Sharing in Distribution Networks: A Cooperative Game Theory Approach," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 71-87, March.
    11. Hubert Franz & Cobanli Onur, 2015. "Pipeline Power: A Case Study of Strategic Network Investments," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 75-110, June.
    12. Fabien Lange & Michel Grabisch, 2011. "New axiomatizations of the Shapley interaction index for bi-capacities," Post-Print hal-00625355, HAL.
    13. Balazs Sziklai & Laszlo A. Koczy & David Csercsik, 2018. "The geopolitical impact of Nord Stream 2," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1821, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    14. Girma T. Chala & Abd Rashid Abd Aziz & Ftwi Y. Hagos, 2018. "Natural Gas Engine Technologies: Challenges and Energy Sustainability Issue," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-44, October.
    15. Bilbao, J.M. & Jiménez, N. & López, J.J., 2010. "The selectope for bicooperative games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(3), pages 522-532, August.
    16. Nagayama, Daisuke & Horita, Masahide, 2014. "A network game analysis of strategic interactions in the international trade of Russian natural gas through Ukraine and Belarus," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 89-101.
    17. Caulier, Jean-François & Mauleon, Ana & Vannetelbosch, Vincent, 2015. "Allocation rules for coalitional network games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 80-88.
    18. Joost Vandenbossche & Thomas Demuynck, 2013. "Network Formation with Heterogeneous Agents and Absolute Friction," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 42(1), pages 23-45, June.
    19. Rasoulinezhad, Ehsan & Sung, Jinsok & Talipova, Amina & Taghizadeh-Hesary, Farhad, 2022. "Analyzing energy trade policy in Central Asia using the intercountry trade force approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 441-454.
    20. Aleksei Valentinovich Bogoviz & Svetlana Vladislavlevna Lobova & Yulia Vyacheslavovna Ragulina & Alexander Nikolaevich Alekseev, 2018. "Russia s Energy Security Doctrine: Addressing Emerging Challenges and Opportunities," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(5), pages 1-6.

    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:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:12:p:3595-:d:576310. 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.

    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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.