IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cor/louvco/2024008.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Leniency in antitrust investigations as a cooperative game

Author

Listed:
  • Dehez, Pierre

    (Université catholique de Louvain, LIDAM/CORE, Belgium)

  • Ferey, Samuel

    (University of Lorraine)

Abstract

Leniency programs in antitrust investigations exist in Europe since the late nineties. They cover secret agreements and concerted practices between companies, and provide total or partial immunity to companies reporting evidence. This raises the question of assessing correctly the contribution of each company that take part in a leniency program. This question is formalized within a cooperative game with transferable utility. The resulting game being convex, its core is nonempty and contains the Shapley value in its center. It defines a reference allocation that treats the participants symmetrically. In practice, companies report sequentially leading to allocations that are vertices of the core.

Suggested Citation

  • Dehez, Pierre & Ferey, Samuel, 2024. "Leniency in antitrust investigations as a cooperative game," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2024008, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    • Handle: RePEc:cor:louvco:2024008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/en/object/boreal%3A287392/datastream/PDF_01/view
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dehez, Pierre & Mêgnigbêto, Eustache, 2024. "Measuring the extent of synergies among innovation actors and their contributions: the Helix as a cooperative game," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2024006, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    2. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. Mario Guajardo & Kurt Jörnsten & Mikael Rönnqvist, 2016. "Constructive and blocking power in collaborative transportation," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 38(1), pages 25-50, January.
    2. Peter Knudsen & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "Merging and splitting in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 763-774, November.
    3. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Philippe Solal, 2014. "Balanced collective contributions, the equal allocation of non-separable costs and application to data sharing games," Working Papers hal-01377926, HAL.
    4. Skorin-Kapov, Darko & Skorin-Kapov, Jadranka, 2005. "Threshold based discounting networks: The cost allocation provided by the nucleolus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 154-159, October.
    5. Gianfranco Gambarelli, 1999. "Maximax Apportionments," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(6), pages 441-461, November.
    6. H. Andrew Michener & Daniel J. Myers, 1998. "Probabilistic Coalition Structure Theories," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(6), pages 830-860, December.
    7. Gonzalez, Stéphane & Rostom, Fatma Zahra, 2022. "Sharing the global outcomes of finite natural resource exploitation: A dynamic coalitional stability perspective," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-10.
    8. Platz, T.T. & Hamers, H.J.M. & Quant, M., 2011. "Characterizing Compromise Stability of Games Using Larginal Vectors," Discussion Paper 2011-058, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Cruijssen, F. & Borm, P.E.M. & Fleuren, H.A. & Hamers, H.J.M., 2005. "Insinking : A Methodology to Exploit Synergy in Transportation," Other publications TiSEM 958be918-e7b4-4e46-9cbe-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Camelia Bejan & Juan Gómez, 2012. "Axiomatizing core extensions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 885-898, November.
    11. Zaporozhets, Vera & García-Valiñas, María & Kurz, Sascha, 2016. "Key drivers of EU budget allocation: Does power matter?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 57-70.
    12. Ginsburgh, Victor & Zang, Israël, 2012. "Shapley Ranking of Wines," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 169-180, November.
    13. Maria Montero & Alex Possajennikov, 2021. "An Adaptive Model of Demand Adjustment in Weighted Majority Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Brânzei, R. & Tijs, S.H., 2001. "Additivity Regions for Solutions in Cooperative Game Theory," Discussion Paper 2001-81, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Gerichhausen, M. & Berkhout, E.D. & Hamers, H.J.M. & Manyong, V.M., 2008. "A Game Theoretic Approach to Analyse Cooperation between Rural Households in Northern Nigeria," Discussion Paper 2008-62, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    16. Csóka, Péter, 2017. "Fair risk allocation in illiquid markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 228-234.
    17. Tamas Solymosi & Balazs Sziklai, 2015. "Universal Characterization Sets for the Nucleolus in Balanced Games," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1512, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    18. 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.
    19. Martin Shubik, 2007. "The Theory of Money and Financial Institutions: A Summary of a Game Theoretic Approach," The IUP Journal of Monetary Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(2), pages 6-26, May.
    20. Lejano, Raul P. & Davos, Climis A., 2001. "Siting noxious facilities with victim compensation: : n-person games under transferable utility," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 109-124.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competition law ; leniency programs ; core ; Shapley value;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games

    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:cor:louvco:2024008. 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: Alain GILLIS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/coreebe.html .

    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.