IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/6585.html

A Stochastic Multiple Players Multi-Issues Bargaining Model for the Piave River Basin

Author

Listed:
  • Carraro, Carlo
  • Sgobbi, Alessandra

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to investigate the usefulness of non-cooperative bargaining theory for the analysis of negotiations on water allocation and management. We explore the impacts of different economic incentives, a stochastic environment and varying individual preferences on players? strategies and equilibrium outcomes through numerical simulations of a multilateral, multiple issues, non-cooperative bargaining model of water allocation in the Piave River Basin, in the North East of Italy. Players negotiate in an alternating-offer manner over the sharing of water resources (quantity and quality). Exogenous uncertainty over the size of the negotiated amount of water is introduced to capture the fact that water availability is not known with certainty to negotiating players. We construct the players? objective function with their direct input. We then test the applicability of our multiple players, multi-issues, stochastic framework to a specific water allocation problem and conduct comparative static analyses to assess sources of bargaining power. Finally, we explore the implications of different attitudes and beliefs over water availability.

Suggested Citation

  • Carraro, Carlo & Sgobbi, Alessandra, 2007. "A Stochastic Multiple Players Multi-Issues Bargaining Model for the Piave River Basin," CEPR Discussion Papers 6585, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:6585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP6585
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Henry Penikas & Yulia Titova, 2012. "Modeling Policy Response to Global Systemically Important Banks Regulation," HSE Working papers WP BRP 02/FE/2012, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Janjua, Shahmir & An-Vo, Duc-Anh & Reardon-Smith, Kathryn & Mushtaq, Shahbaz, 2024. "Resolving water security conflicts in agriculture by a cooperative Nash bargaining approach," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    3. Carmen Marchiori, 2010. "Concern for Fairness and Incentives in Water Negotiations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(4), pages 553-571, April.
    4. Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Weijun He & Liang Yuan, 2017. "Monotonic Bargaining Solution for Allocating Critically Scarce Transboundary Water," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(9), pages 2627-2644, July.
    5. Alban Thomas & Vera Zaporozhets, 2017. "Bargaining Over Environmental Budgets: A Political Economy Model with Application to French Water Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(2), pages 227-248, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

    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:cpr:ceprdp:6585. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.