IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/dyngam/v15y2025i3d10.1007_s13235-024-00577-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Stability of Nonlinear Armsbuilding Security Games

Author

Listed:
  • Jean Hénaff

    (CEA/DAM/Direction de l’Analyse Stratégique
    Univ. of Lille, Centrale Lille)

  • Jed Boufaied

    (Univ. of Lille, Centrale Lille)

  • Hélène Cadre

    (Univ. of Lille, Centrale Lille)

Abstract

We formulate a security game in a context of mixed armament acquisition, involving a finite set of Nations in strategic relationship, with utility functions which are nonlinear and non-differentiable on the boundary of their sets of definition. Since we want to study the long-term effect of the Nations’ investment in nuclear weapons, we focus on the steady-state analysis of the game. This requires us to extend the classical results from Rosen on compact-concave games, to unbounded concave games, relying on the uniform coercivity property of the Nations’ utility functions. In addition, we prove the existence and uniqueness, under mild assumptions, of an interior point Nash Equilibrium solution of the game. To learn the interior point Nash Equilibrium, we provide a decentralized proximal point-type algorithm, and derive a closed form expression of its convergence rate. Simulations are performed in case of a duopoly, illustrating the utility improvement and stabilizing effects of nuclear armaments, by comparison with the conventional-only setting. We subsequently generalize this result to an arbitrarily large, but finite, number of Nations. The problem is extended further by allowing arms trades between Nations, split into suppliers on the one side, and recipients—interpreted as opponents—on the other side. It is widely recognized that arms trades can have negative externalities on the international system’s security, and there are benefits to cooperate. Forming an export coalition enables the socialization of the operational costs among the coalition members and reallocation according to an ex-post cost allocation mechanism, while ensuring the maximization of the sum of the coalition members’ security functions. For a given coalition structure, we develop a partial equilibrium model of the international arms market. We prove the existence and uniqueness of a market equilibrium in arms trade prices and supply. Finally, we derive conditions on the exports, arms trade prices, and cost allocation mechanism guaranteeing the stability of the export coalition, thus highlighting the viability of a common defense policy for the export coalition.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean Hénaff & Jed Boufaied & Hélène Cadre, 2025. "On Stability of Nonlinear Armsbuilding Security Games," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 729-768, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:dyngam:v:15:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s13235-024-00577-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s13235-024-00577-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13235-024-00577-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13235-024-00577-4?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Simaan & J. B. Cruz, Jr., 1975. "Nash Equilibrium Strategies for the Problem of Armament Race and Control," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 96-105, September.
    2. Deger, Saadet & Sen, Somnath, 1984. "Optimal control and differential game models of military expenditure in less developed countries," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 153-169, May.
    3. Dunne, J. Paul & Smith, Ron P., 2007. "The Econometrics of Military Arms Races," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 28, pages 913-940, Elsevier.
    4. M. Simaan & J. B. Cruz, 1975. "Formulation of Richardson's Model of Arms Race from a Differential Game Viewpoint," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 42(1), pages 67-77.
    5. Levine, Paul & Smith, Ron, 2000. "The Arms Trade Game: From Laissez-Faire to a Common Defence Policy," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 357-380, April.
    6. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "The Theory of Learning in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061945, December.
    7. Majeski, Stephen J., 1984. "Arms races as iterated prisoner's dilemma games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 253-266, 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. van der Ploeg, F. & de Zeeuw, A.J., 1987. "Conflict over arms accumulation in market and command economies," Research Memorandum FEW 265, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Chang, Wen-ya & Tsai, Hsueh-fang & Lai, Ching-chong, 2002. "Anticipated foreign military threat, arms accumulation, and the current account in a small open economy," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(7), pages 1035-1052, December.
    3. Zou, Heng-fu, 1995. "A dynamic model of capital and arms accumulation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 371-393.
    4. Gong, Liutang & Zou, Heng-fu, 2003. "Military spending and stochastic growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 153-170, October.
    5. Ronen Bar-El & Kobi Kagan & Asher Tishler, 2010. "Forward-Looking versus Shortsighted Defense Budget Allocation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 54(4), pages 638-662, August.
    6. Charles H. Anderton, 1989. "Arms Race Modeling," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 33(2), pages 346-367, June.
    7. Jhy-Yuan Shieh & Wen-Ya Chang & Ching-Chong Lai, 2007. "An Endogenous Growth Model Of Capital And Arms Accumulation," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 557-575.
    8. Santiago J. Rubio, 2002. "On The Coincidence Of The Feedback Nash And Stackelberg Equilibria In Economic Applications Of Differential Games," Working Papers. Serie AD 2002-11, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    9. Cheng-Te Lee, 2007. "A New Explanation of Arms Races in the Third World: A Differential Game Model," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 3(2), pages 161-176, July.
    10. Michael D. Intriligator, 1982. "Research on Conflict Theory," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 26(2), pages 307-327, June.
    11. Deng-Shan Wang & Yan Wang & Yifang Liu & Heng-fu Zou, 2009. "Optimal Military Spending, Trade and Stochastic Economic Growth," CEMA Working Papers 373, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    12. Galbiati, Marco & Soramäki, Kimmo, 2011. "An agent-based model of payment systems," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 859-875, June.
    13. Ianni, A., 2002. "Reinforcement learning and the power law of practice: some analytical results," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 203, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    14. ,, 2011. "Manipulative auction design," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(2), May.
    15. Benaïm, Michel & Hofbauer, Josef & Hopkins, Ed, 2009. "Learning in games with unstable equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1694-1709, July.
    16. Dieter Balkenborg & Rosemarie Nagel, 2016. "An Experiment on Forward vs. Backward Induction: How Fairness and Level k Reasoning Matter," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(3), pages 378-408, August.
    17. William L. Cooper & Tito Homem-de-Mello & Anton J. Kleywegt, 2015. "Learning and Pricing with Models That Do Not Explicitly Incorporate Competition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(1), pages 86-103, February.
    18. repec:osf:osfxxx:9vm5t_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Siegfried Berninghaus & Werner Güth & M. Vittoria Levati & Jianying Qiu, 2006. "Satisficing in sales competition: experimental evidence," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-32, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    20. Ball, Richard, 2017. "Violations of monotonicity in evolutionary models with sample-based beliefs," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 100-104.
    21. Tsakas, Elias & Voorneveld, Mark, 2009. "The target projection dynamic," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 708-719, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:dyngam:v:15:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s13235-024-00577-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.