The Time-Preference Nash Solution
The primitives of a bargaining problem consist of a set, S, of feasible utility pairs and a disagree- ment point in it. The idea is that the set S is induced by an underlying set of physical outcomes which, for the purposes of the analysis, can be abstracted away. In a very influential paper Nash (1950) gives an axiomatic characterization of what is now the widely known Nash bargaining solution. Rubinstein, Safra, and Thomson (1992) (RST in the sequel) recast the bargaining problem into the underlying set of physical alternatives and give an axiomatization of what is known as the ordinal Nash bargaining solution. This solution has a very natural interpretation and has the interesting property that when risk preferences satisfy the expected utility axioms, it induces the standard Nash bargaining solution of the induced bargaining problem. This property justifies the proper name in the solution’s appellation. The purpose of this paper is to give an axiomatic characterization of the rule that assigns the time-preference Nash outcome to each bargaining problem.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2001|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Feldman Building - Givat Ram - 91904 Jerusalem|
Web page: http://www.ratio.huji.ac.il/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Hans Peters & Eric Van Damme, 1991.
"Characterizing the Nash and Raiffa Bargaining Solutions by Disagreement Point Axioms,"
Mathematics of Operations Research,
INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 447-461, August.
- 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.
- Volij, Oscar & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 120-140, October.
- Oscar Volij, 1999. "On Risk Aversion and Bargaining Outcomes," Economic theory and game theory 010, Oscar Volij.
- Volij, Oscar & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "On Risk Aversion and Bargaining Outcomes," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10130, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Eyal Winter & Oscar Volij & Nir Dagan, 2002. "A characterization of the Nash bargaining solution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(4), pages 811-823.
- Nir Dagan & Oscar Volij & Eyal Winter, 2000. "A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution," Economic theory and game theory 018, Nir Dagan, revised 21 Sep 2000.
- Volij, Oscar & Dagan, Nir & Winter, Eyal, 2002. "A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5259, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Nir Dagan & Oscar Volij & Eyal Winter, 2001. "A Characterization of the Nash Bargaining Solution," Economic theory and game theory 013, Oscar Volij.
- Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
- Rubinstein, Ariel & Safra, Zvi & Thomson, William, 1992. "On the Interpretation of the Nash Bargaining Solution and Its Extension to Non-expected Utility Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1171-1186, September.
- Grant, Simon & Kajii, Atsushi, 1995. "A Cardinal Characterization of the Rubinstein-Safra-Thomson Axiomatic Bargaining Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(5), pages 1241-1249, September.
- Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
- Safra Zvi & Zilcha Itzhak, 1993. "Bargaining Solutions without the Expected Utility Hypothesis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 288-306, April.
- Zilcha & I. & Safra, Z., 1990. "Bargaining Solutions Without The Expected Utility Hypothesis," Papers 33-90, Tel Aviv.
- Hanany, Eran & Safra, Zvi, 2000. "Existence and Uniqueness of Ordinal Nash Outcomes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 254-276, February.
- Burgos, Albert & Grant, Simon & Kajii, Atsushi, 2002. "Bargaining and Boldness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 28-51, January. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)