IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bro/econwp/2011-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Strategic Disclosure of Feasible Options in Bargaining

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Most of the economic literature on bargaining has focused on situations where the set of possible outcomes is taken as given. This paper is concerned with situations where decision-makers rst need to identify the set of feasible outcomes before they bargain over which of them is selected. Our objective is to understand how di er- ent bargaining institutions a ect the incentives to disclose possible solutions to the bargaining problem, where ineciency may arise when both parties withold Pareto superior options. We take a rst step in this direction by proposing a simple, stylized model that captures the idea that bargainers may strategically withhold informa- tion regarding the existence of feasible alternatives that are Pareto superior. We characterize a partial ordering of \regular" bargaining solutions (i.e., those belonging to some class of \natural" solutions) according to the likelihood of disclosure that they induce. This ordering identi es the best solution in this class, which favors the \weaker" bargainer subject to the regularity constraints. We also illustrate our result in a simple environment where the best solution coincides with Nash, and where the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution is ranked above Rai a's simple coin-toss solution. The analysis is extended to a dynamic setting in which the bargainers can choose the timing of disclosure.

Suggested Citation

  • Geoffroy de Clippel & Kfir Eliaz, 2011. "On the Strategic Disclosure of Feasible Options in Bargaining," Working Papers 2011-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:bro:econwp:2011-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.brown.edu/sites/g/files/dprerj726/files/papers/2011-5_paper.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    2. Nicola Persico, 2004. "Committee Design with Endogenous Information," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(1), pages 165-191.
    3. Nicola Persico, 2000. "Information Acquisition in Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 135-148, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Randall Wright & Yuet‐Yee Wong, 2014. "Buyers, Sellers, And Middlemen: Variations On Search‐Theoretic Themes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55(2), pages 375-397, May.
    2. Yuan Ju, 2013. "Efficiency and compromise: a bid-offer–counteroffer mechanism with two players," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(2), pages 501-520, May.

    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. Geoffroy de Clippel & Kfir Eliaz, 2011. "On the Strategic Disclosure of Feasible Options in Bargaining," Working Papers 2011-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    2. Chen, Yan & He, YingHua, 2021. "Information acquisition and provision in school choice: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    3. Yan Chen & YingHua He, 2022. "Information acquisition and provision in school choice: a theoretical investigation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(1), pages 293-327, July.
    4. Gershkov, Alex & Szentes, Balázs, 2009. "Optimal voting schemes with costly information acquisition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 36-68, January.
    5. Moshe A. Barach & John Horton, 2017. "How Do Employers Use Compensation History?: Evidence from a Field Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 6559, CESifo.
    6. Bikhchandani, Sushil, 2010. "Information acquisition and full surplus extraction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2282-2308, November.
    7. Börgers, Tilman & Hernando-Veciana, Angel & Krähmer, Daniel, 2013. "When are signals complements or substitutes?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 165-195.
    8. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    9. M. Hinojosa & A. Mármol & J. Zarzuelo, 2008. "Inequality averse multi-utilitarian bargaining solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 37(4), pages 597-618, December.
    10. Matsui, Kenji, 2020. "Optimal bargaining timing of a wholesale price for a manufacturer with a retailer in a dual-channel supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(1), pages 225-236.
    11. Simon G�chter & Arno Riedl, "undated". "Moral Property Rights in Bargaining," IEW - Working Papers 113, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    12. Miettinen, Paavo, 2017. "Information acquisition during a descending price auction with asymmetrically informed players," Research Discussion Papers 5/2017, Bank of Finland.
    13. H Peyton Young, 2014. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Economics Series Working Papers 726, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    14. Erkki Koskela & Ronnie Schöb, 2002. "Alleviating Unemployment: The Case for Green Tax Reforms," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 20, pages 355-378, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Magni, Carlo Alberto, 2009. "Splitting up value: A critical review of residual income theories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(1), pages 1-22, October.
    16. Stefano Vannucci, 2015. "La teoria dei giochi e John Nash," Department of Economics University of Siena 722, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    17. Roland Kirstein & Matthias Peiss, 2013. "Quantitative Machtkonzepte in der Ökonomik," FEMM Working Papers 130004, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    18. Lau, Stephanie, 2011. "Investment incentives in bilateral trading," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 538-552.
    19. Miettinen, Paavo, 2017. "Information acquisition during a descending price auction with asymmetrically informed players," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 5/2017, Bank of Finland.
    20. Dirk Bergemann & Juuso Valimaki, 2002. "Information Acquisition and Efficient Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 1007-1033, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bro:econwp:2011-5. 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: Brown Economics Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.