IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notecp/06-09.html

Weak Links, Good Shots And Other Public Good Games: Building On Bbv

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Cornes
  • Roger Hartley

Abstract

We suggest an alternative way of analyzing the canonical Bergstrom-Blume-Varian model of non-cooperative voluntary contributions to a public good that avoids the proliferation of dimensions as the number of players is increased. We exploit this approach to analyze models in which the aggregate level of public good is determined as a more general social composition function of individual gifts – specifically, as a generalized CES form – rather than as an unweighted sum as well as the weakest-link and best-shot models suggested by Hirshleifer. In each case, we characterize the set of equilibria, in some cases establishing existence of a unique equilibrium as well as briefly pointing out some interesting comparative static properties. We also study the weakest-link and best-shot limits of the CES composition function and show how the former can be used for equilibrium selection and the latter to show that equilibria of some better-shot games are identical to those of the much simpler best-shot game.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2006. "Weak Links, Good Shots And Other Public Good Games: Building On Bbv," Discussion Papers 06/09, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:not:notecp:06/09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/documents/discussion-papers/06-09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:not:notecp:06/09. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/denotuk.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.