IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Efficiency and compromise: a bid-offer–counteroffer mechanism with two players

  • Yuan Ju

    ()

Registered author(s):

A bid-offer–counteroffer mechanism is proposed to solve a fundamental two-person decision choice problem with two alternatives. It yields a unique subgame perfect equilibrium outcome, and leads to an intuitive overall solution that offers a reconciliation between egalitarianism and utilitarianism. We then investigate the axiomatic foundation of the solution. Furthermore, we compare it with several conventional strategic approaches to this setting. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00182-012-0336-8
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Springer in its journal International Journal of Game Theory.

Volume (Year): 42 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
Pages: 501-520

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:42:y:2013:i:2:p:501-520
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00182/index.htm

Order Information: Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

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.:

as in new window
  1. Ariel Rubinstein, 2010. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Levine's Working Paper Archive 252, David K. Levine.
  2. Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 1990. "Egalitarian solutions and uncertain disagreement points," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 29-33, May.
  3. Youngsub Chun, 2000. "Agreement, separability, and other axioms for quasi-linear social choice problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 507-521.
  4. Geoffroy de Clippel & David Pérez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, 2010. "Egalitarian Equivalence under Asymmetric Information," Working Papers 431, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
  5. van Damme, E.E.C. & Hurkens, J.P.M., 1996. "Endogenous Stackelberg Leadership," Discussion Paper 1996-115, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  6. Green, Jerry, 2005. "Compensatory Transfers in Two-Player Decision Problems," Scholarly Articles 3204680, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  7. Moulin, Herve, 1981. "Implementing just and efficient decision-making," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 193-213, October.
  8. Fonseca, M.A. & Müller, W. & Normann, H.T., 2005. "Endogenous Timing in Duopoly : Experimental Evidence," Discussion Paper 2005-77, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  9. van Damme, E.E.C. & Peters, H., 1991. "Characterizing the Nash and Raiffa bargaining solutions by disagreement point axioms," Other publications TiSEM 4bd5eb9e-328a-45a0-aa0a-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  10. Maniquet, Francois, 2003. "A characterization of the Shapley value in queueing problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 90-103, March.
  11. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
  12. Richard R. W. Brooks & Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2010. "Trigger happy or gun shy? Dissolving common-value partnerships with Texas shootouts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 649-673.
  13. Chun, Y. & Thomson, W., 1988. "Nash Solution And Uncertain Disagreement Points," RCER Working Papers 134, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  14. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
  15. Roberto Serrano, 2005. "Fifty years of the Nash program, 1953-2003," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 29(2), pages 219-258, May.
  16. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-193647 is not listed on IDEAS
  17. Perez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2001. "Bidding for the Surplus : A Non-cooperative Approach to the Shapley Value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 274-294, October.
  18. Moore, John & Repullo, Rafael, 1988. "Subgame Perfect Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(5), pages 1191-1220, September.
  19. Hamilton, Jonathan H. & Slutsky, Steven M., 1990. "Endogenous timing in duopoly games: Stackelberg or cournot equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 29-46, March.
  20. Eric Maskin, 1998. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1829, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  21. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-154410 is not listed on IDEAS
  22. David P�rez-Castrillo & David Wettstein, 2002. "Choosing Wisely: A Multibidding Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1577-1587, December.
  23. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
  24. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
  25. Moulin, H, 1984. "The Conditional Auction Mechanism for Sharing a Surplus," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 157-70, January.
  26. Moulin, Herve, 1985. "Egalitarianism and Utilitarianism in Quasi-linear Bargaining," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(1), pages 49-67, January.
  27. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-154419 is not listed on IDEAS
  28. Geoffroy de Clippel & Kfir Eliaz, 2011. "On the Strategic Disclosure of Feasible Options in Bargaining," Working Papers 2011-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  29. Ning Sun & Zaifu Yang, 2009. "A Double-Track Adjustment Process for Discrete Markets With Substitutes and Complements," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 933-952, 05.
  30. Moulin, Herve, 1987. "The Pure Compensation Problem: Egalitarianism versus Laissez-Fairism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 769-83, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:42:y:2013:i:2:p:501-520. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.