IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equal Awards versus Equal Losses in Bankruptcy Problems


  • Alcalde, José

    () (University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory)

  • Peris, Josep E.

    () (University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory)


The Constrained Equal Awards and Equal Losses rules are traditional ways to solve bankruptcy problems. These rules are characterized by two parameters α and β that represent, respectively, the maximum amount a claimant receives, or the maximum amount a claimant loses. Moreover, these rules define a partition in the set of agents: those who are equally rationed, and those sustaining a lower rationing (because their maximal award and maximal loss cannot exceed their claim). We investigate the relationship between α and β, and the corresponding partitions they originate in the set of agents, by using a characteristic τ measuring the relative degree of conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Alcalde, José & Peris, Josep E., 2017. "Equal Awards versus Equal Losses in Bankruptcy Problems," QM&ET Working Papers 17-2, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:qmetal:2017_002

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Peris, Josep E., 2014. "A proportional approach to claims problems with a guaranteed minimum," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 109-116.
    2. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    3. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Bankruptcy Problem; Relative Degree of Conflict;

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ris:qmetal:2017_002. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julio Carmona). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.