IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

A way to play bankruptcy problems

  • Giménez-Gómez, José Manuel

The commitment among agents has always been a difficult task, especially when they have to decide how to distribute the available amount of a scarce resource among all. On the one hand, there are a multiplicity of possible ways for assigning the available amount; and, on the other hand, each agent is going to propose that distribution which provides her the highest possible award. In this paper, with the purpose of making this agreement easier, firstly we use two different sets of basic properties, called Commonly Accepted Equity Principles, to delimit what agents can propose as reasonable allocations. Secondly, we extend the results obtained by Chun (1989) and Herrero (2003), obtaining new characterizations of old and well known bankruptcy rules. Finally, using the fact that bankruptcy problems can be analyzed from awards and losses, we define a mechanism which provides a new justification of the convex combinations of bankruptcy rules. Keywords: Bankruptcy problems, Unanimous Concessions procedure, Diminishing Claims mechanism, Piniles’ rule, Constrained Egalitarian rule. JEL classification: C71, D63, D71.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2072/169781
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2072/169781.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:urv:wpaper:2072/169781
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Avda. de la Universitat,1 - 43204 Reus (Tarragona)

Phone: 977 75 98 00
Fax: 977 75 98 10
Web page: http://www.urv.cat
Email:


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.:

as in new window
  1. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2007. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Working Papers Department of Economics ces0705, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
  2. Josep Enric Peris Ferrando & Begoña Subiza & María del Carmen Marco, 1995. "A Mechanism For Meta-Bargaining Problems," Working Papers. Serie AD 1995-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
  3. Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
  4. Dutta, Bhaskar & Ray, Debraj, 1989. "A Concept of Egalitarianism under Participation Constraints," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 615-35, May.
  5. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2001. "The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 307-328, November.
  6. 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.
  7. Ignacio García-Jurado & Julio González-Díaz & Antonio Villar, 2006. "A Non-cooperative Approach to Bankruptcy Problems," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 189-197, September.
  8. Cowell, F.A., 2000. "Measurement of inequality," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 87-166 Elsevier.
  9. van Damme, E.E.C., 1986. "The Nash bargaining solution is optimal," Other publications TiSEM b408f4e4-5094-48a1-a02f-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  10. J. Arin, 2007. "Egalitarian Distributions In Coalitional Models," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(01), pages 47-57.
  11. William Thomson & Chun-Hsien Yeh, 2006. "Operators for the adjudication of conflicting claims," RCER Working Papers 531, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  12. Chun, Youngsub, 1989. "A noncooperative justification for egalitarian surplus sharing," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 245-261, June.
  13. Damme, Eric van, 1986. "The Nash bargaining solution is optimal," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 78-100, February.
  14. William Thomson, 2007. "Lorenz rankings of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," RCER Working Papers 538, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  15. 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.
  16. Young, H. P., 1988. "Distributive justice in taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 321-335, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:urv:wpaper:2072/169781. 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: (Ariadna Casals)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.