On the sensitivity matrix of the Nash bargaining solution

In this note we provide a characterization of a subclass of bargaining problems for which the Nash solution has the property of disagreement point monotonicity. While the original d-monotonicity axiom and its stronger notion, strong d-monotonicity, were introduced and discussed by Thomson (J Econ Theory, 42: 50–58, 1987), this paper introduces local strong d-monotonicity and derives a necessary and sufficient condition for the Nash solution to be locally strongly d-monotonic. This characterization is given by using the sensitivity matrix of the Nash bargaining solution w.r.t. the disagreement point d. Moverover, we present a sufficient condition for the Nash solution to be strong d-monotonic.     

Inequality averse multi-utilitarian bargaining solutions

This paper introduces and analyzes the class of inequality averse multi-utilitarian solutions for cooperative bargaining problems. We show that generalized Gini solutions and inequality averse Choquet solutions are particular cases of this new multi-valued solution concept and provide a complete characterization in which an invariance property, consisting of a weakening of both the linear invariance axiom in Blackorby et al. (Econometrica 62:1161–1178, 1994) and the restricted invariance axiom in Ok and Zhou (Games Econ Behav 33:249–264, 2000), plays an important role. Moreover, by relaxing the assumptions involved in the characterization, the class is extended to include inequality loving multi-utilitarian solutions which are also studied in the paper.     

Disagreement point axioms and the egalitarian bargaining solution

We provide new characterizations of the egalitarian bargaining solution on the class of strictly comprehensive n-person bargaining problems. The main axioms used in all of our results are Nash’s IIA and disagreement point monotonicity—an axiom which requires a player’s payoff to strictly increase in his disagreement payoff. For n = 2 these axioms, together with other standard requirements, uniquely characterize the egalitarian solution. For n > 2 we provide two extensions of our 2-person result, each of which is obtained by imposing an additional axiom on the solution. Dropping the axiom of anonymity, strengthening disagreement point monotonicity by requiring player i’s payoff to be a strictly decreasing function of the disagreement payoff of every other player j ≠ i, and adding a “weak convexity” axiom regarding changes of the disagreement point, we obtain a characterization of the class of weighted egalitarian solutions. This “weak convexity” axiom requires that a movement of the disagreement point in the direction of the solution point should not change the solution point. We also discuss the so-called “transfer paradox” and relate it to this axiom.     

Kalai-Smorodinsky Bargaining Solution Equilibria

Multicriteria games describe strategic interactions in which players, having more than one criterion to take into account, don’t have an a-priori opinion on the relative importance of all these criteria. Roemer (Econ. Bull. 3:1–13, 2005) introduces an organizational interpretation of the concept of equilibrium: each player can be viewed as running a bargaining game among criteria. In this paper, we analyze the bargaining problem within each player by considering the Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution (see Kalai and Smorodinsky in Econometrica 43:513–518, 1975). We provide existence results for the so called Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution equilibria for a general class of disagreement points which properly includes the one considered by Roemer (Econ. Bull. 3:1–13, 2005). Moreover we look at the refinement power of this equilibrium concept and show that it is an effective selection device even when combined with classical refinement concepts based on stability with respect to perturbations; in particular, we consider the extension to multicriteria games of the Selten’s trembling hand perfect equilibrium concept (see Selten in Int. J. Game Theory 4:25–55, 1975) and prove that perfect Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution equilibria exist and properly refine both the perfect equilibria and the Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution equilibria.     

A fixed point characterization of the dominance-solvability of lattice games with strategic substitutes

We demonstrate that a lattice game with strategic substitutes is dominance-solvable if and only if there exists a unique fixed point of the function that results from an iteration of the best response function. This finding complements a result of Milgrom and Roberts’ (Econometrica 58:1255–1277, 1990) by which a lattice game with strategic complements is dominance-solvable if and only if there exists a unique Nash equilibrium. We illustrate our main result by an application to a model of Cournot outcome-competition.      

A characterization of the Kalai–Smorodinsky bargaining solution by disagreement point monotonicity

We provide a new axiomatization of the Kalai–Smorodinsky bargaining solution, which replaces the axiom of individual monotonicity by disagreement point monotonicity and a restricted version of Nash’s IIA.     

A dynamic solution in N-person cooperative game theory

We formulate a cooperative game as an extended form game in which each player in turn proposes payoffs to a coalition over M steps. Payoffs at time t are discounted by a penalty function f(t). If all players in a coalition agree to their payoffs, they receive them. Under a convergence hypothesis verified by computer for three players in many cases, we compute the payoffs resulting from a coalition pattern and give necessary conditions for particular patterns. The resulting solution is related to the Nash bargaining solution and the competitive solution.     

A bargaining game model for measuring performance of two-stage network structures

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a method for measuring the efficiency of peer decision making units (DMUs), where the internal structures of DMUs are treated as a black-box. Recently DEA has been extended to examine the efficiency of DMUs that have two-stage network structures or processes, where all the outputs from the first stage are intermediate measures that make up the inputs to the second stage. The resulting two-stage DEA model not only provides an overall efficiency score for the entire process, but also yields an efficiency score for each of the individual stages. The current paper develops a Nash bargaining game model to measure the performance of DMUs that have a two-stage structure. Under Nash bargaining theory, the two stages are viewed as players and the DEA efficiency model is a cooperative game model. It is shown that when only one intermediate measure exists between the two stages, our newly developed Nash bargaining game approach yields the same results as applying the standard DEA approach to each stage separately. Two real world data sets are used to demonstrate our bargaining game model.     

运输问题的合作对策求解方法

产地间或销地间往往存在竞争,在这种情况下,使用运输问题最优化方法是不合理的。因此,从个体理性的视角提出运输问题的合作对策求解方法,方法将运输问题看作是一个博弈问题,各个产地或销地是博弈的局中人,求解其纳什均衡与纳什讨价还价解。在此基础上,说明了运输问题的非合作形式是一个指派问题,并证明指派问题的最优解是一个纳什均衡点。接着,通过实验验证运输问题的最优解是一个纳什讨价还价解,满足产地或销地的自身利益。在此基础上,针对纳什讨价还价解不唯一的问题,从决策者的视角给出最大可能激励成本的计算方法。最后,为弥补纳什讨价还价解不唯一及纳什讨价还价解不允许出现子联盟的缺陷,给出运输收益分配或成本分摊的Shapely值计算方法。     

Paths leading to the Nash set for nonsmooth games

Maschler, Owen and Peleg (1988) constructed a dynamic system for modelling a possible negotiation process for players facing a smooth n-person pure bargaining game, and showed that all paths of this system lead to the Nash point. They also considered the non-convex case, and found in this case that the limiting points of solutions of the dynamic system belong to the Nash set. Here we extend the model to i) general convex pure bargaining games, and to ii) games generated by “divide the cake” problems. In each of these cases we construct a dynamic system consisting of a differential inclusion (generalizing the Maschler-Owen-Peleg system of differential equations), prove existence of solutions, and show that the solutions converge to the Nash point (or Nash set). The main technical point is proving existence, as the system is neither convex valued nor continuous. The intuition underlying the dynamics is the same as (in the convex case) or analogous to (in the division game) that of Maschler, Owen, and Peleg. Received August 1997/Final version May 1998     

The Tempered Aspirations solution for bargaining problems with a reference point

Gupta and Livne (1988) modified Nash’s (1950) original bargaining problem through the introduction of a reference point restricted to lie in the bargaining set. Additionally, they characterized a solution concept for this augmented bargaining problem. We propose and axiomatically characterize a new solution concept for bargaining problems with a reference point: the Tempered Aspirations solution. In Kalai and Smorodinsky (1975), aspirations are given by the so called ideal or utopia point. In our setting, however, the salience of the reference point mutes or tempers the negotiators’ aspirations. Thus, our solution is defined to be the maximal feasible point on the line segment joining the modified aspirations and disagreement vectors. The Tempered Aspirations solution can be understood as a “dual” version of the Gupta–Livne solution or, alternatively, as a version of Chun and Thomson’s (1992) Proportional solution in which the claims point is endogenous. We also conduct an extensive axiomatic analysis comparing the Gupta–Livne to our Tempered Aspirations solution.     

A bargaining approach to coordination in networks

This paper, presents a model in which players interact via the formation of costly links and the benefits of bilateral interactions are determined by a stag-hunt game. A novel contribution of this paper is that the fraction of the cost borne by each player involved in a bilateral link is not fixed exogenously, but results from bargaining. We analyze the model both in a static and a dynamic setting. Whereas the static game has multiplicity of equilibria, we show that only one is stochastically stable. This is a revised version of Chapter 1 of my Ph.D. Thesis presented at Universidad de Alicante. A previous version of this paper circulated with the title “Network Formation and Coordination: Bargaining the Division of Link Costs” (IVIE WP-AD 2002-27). I am indebted to Fernando Vega-Redondo for many helpful conversations, suggestions and encouragement. I am grateful to Julio González-Díaz, Antonio J. Morales, Ascensión Andina-Díaz and the Associate Editor for valuable suggestions. I also thank Jordi Brandts, Antonio Cabrales, Angel Hernando, Andrea Galeotti, Sanjeev Goyal, Christoph Kuzmics, Ana Lozano-Vivas, Paola Manzini, Juan Mora, Efe Ok, Juana Santamaría-García and José A. Silva for their comments. I gratefully acknowledge the hospitality of New York University, where part of this research was carried out, and the financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Education (ref. BEC2002-02852).     

The bargaining set of four-person balanced games

It is well known that in three-person transferable-utility cooperative games the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁ and the core coincide for any coalition structure, provided the latter solution is not empty. In contrast, five-person totally-balanced games are discussed in the literature in which the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁ (for the grand coalition) is larger then the core. This paper answers the equivalence question in the remaining four-person case. We prove that in any four-person game and for arbitrary coalition structure, whenever the core is not empty, it coincides with the bargaining set ℳⁱ ₁. Our discussion employs a generalization of balancedness to games with coalition structures. Received: August 2001/Revised version: April 2002     

The partition bargaining problem

Consider the problem of partitioning n items among d players where the utility of each player for bundles of items is additive; so, player r has utility for item i and the utility of that player for a bundle of items is the sum of the 's over the items i in his/her bundle. Each partition S of the items is then associated with a d-dimensional utility vector V^S whose coordinates are the utilities that the players assign to the bundles they get under S. Also, lotteries over partitions are associated with the corresponding expected utility vectors. We model the problem as a Nash bargaining game over the set of lotteries over partitions and provide methods for computing the corresponding Nash solution, to prescribed accuracy, with effort that is polynomial in n. In particular, we show that points in the pareto-optimal set of the corresponding bargaining set correspond to lotteries over partitions under which each item, with the possible exception of at most d(d-1)/2 items, is assigned in the same way.     

Communication and bargaining in the spatial model

This paper studies collective choice by participants possessing private information in policymaking institutions that involve cheap-talk communication and bargaining. The main result establishes a connection between the extent to which problems of this type posses fully-revealing equilibria that select policies in the full information majority rule core (when it is well-defined) and the extent to which a fictitious sender-receiver game possesses a fully revealing equilibria. This result allows us to extend Banks and Duggan’s (Am polit Sci Rev 94(1) 73–88, 2000) core equivalence results to the case of noisy policymaking environments with private information and communication when some combination of non exclusivity and preference alignment conditions are satisfied.     

Dynamic approach to solving bargaining games

The article examines the solution of bargaining games on the basis of the previously proposed paradigm of stationary strategies in supergames. The value of axiomatic bargaining theory for choosing the unique solution in agreement games is considered. The “splitting the dollar” game for two and three players is discussed as an application. __________ Translated from Prikladnaya Matematika i Informatika, No. 22, pp. 91–104, 2005.     

Minimum winning coalitions and endogenous status quo

I analyze a stochastic bargaining game in which a renewable surplus is divided among n ≥ 5 committee members in each of an infinite number of periods, and the division implemented in one period becomes the status quo allocation of the surplus in the ensuing period. I establish existence of equilibrium exhibiting minimum winning coalitions, assuming sufficiently mild concavity of stage preferences. The analysis highlights the role of proposal power in committee deliberations and yields a fully strategic version of McKelvey’s (J Econ Theory 12:472–482, 1976; Econometrica 47:1086–1112, 1979) dictatorial agenda setting.     

Quasi-variational inequalities, generalized Nash equilibria, and multi-leader-follower games

In Pang and Fukushima (Comput Manage Sci 2:21–56, 2005), a sequential penalty approach was presented for a quasi-variational inequality (QVI) with particular application to the generalized Nash game. To test the computational performance of the penalty method, numerical results were reported with an example from a multi-leader-follower game in an electric power market. However, due to an inverted sign in the penalty term in the example and some missing terms in the derivatives of the firms’ Lagrangian functions, the reported numerical results in Pang and Fukushima (Comput Manage Sci 2:21–56, 2005) are incorrect. Since the numerical examples of this kind are scarce in the literature and this particular example may be useful in the future research, we report the corrected results. The online version of the original article can be found under doi:.     

Dynamics and axiomatics of the equal area bargaining solution

We present an alternative formulation of the two-person equal area bargaining solution based on a dynamical process describing the disagreement point set. This alternative formulation provides an interpretation of the idea of equal concessions. Furthermore, it leads to an axiomatic characterization of the solution. Received: November 1998/Revised version: September 1999     

The semireactive bargaining set of a cooperative game

The semireactive bargaining set, a solution for cooperative games, is introduced. This solution is in general a subsolution of the bargaining set and a supersolution of the reactive bargaining set. However, on various classes of transferable utility games the semireactive and the reactive bargaining set coincide. The semireactive prebargaining set on TU games can be axiomatized by one-person rationality, the reduced game property, a weak version of the converse reduced game property with respect to subgrand coalitions, and subgrand stability. Furthermore, it is shown that there is a suitable weakening of subgrand stability, which allows to characterize the prebargaining set. Replacing the reduced game by the imputation saving reduced game and employing individual rationality as an additional axiom yields characterizations of both, the bargaining set and the semireactive bargaining set. Received September 2000/Revised version June 2001