Monotonicity and equal-opportunity equivalence in bargaining
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we study two-person bargaining problems represented by a space of alternatives, a status quo point, and the agents’ preference relations on the alternatives. The notion of a family of increasing sets is introduced, which reflects a particular way of gradually expanding the set of alternatives. For any given family of increasing sets, we present a solution which is Pareto optimal and monotonic with respect to this family, that is, makes each agent weakly better off if the set of alternatives is expanded within this family. The solution may be viewed as an expression of equal-opportunity equivalence as defined in Thomson [19]. It is shown to be the unique solution that, in addition to Pareto optimality and the monotonicity property mentioned above, satisfies a uniqueness axiom and unchanged contour independence. A non-cooperative bargaining procedure is provided for which the unique backward induction outcome coincides with the solution.
منابع مشابه
Bargaining under Monotonicity Constraints
We study bargaining on the division of a surplus in the presence of monotonicity constraints. The monotonicity constraints specify a complete order on the players, which has to be respected by the shares in the surplus the players obtain in any bargaining outcome. A player higher in the order should not receive a lower share of the surplus. We analyze the resulting subgame perfect equilibria in...
متن کاملRelative Disagreement-Point Monotonicity of Bargaining Solutions
Prominent bargaining solutions are disagreement-point monotonic. These solutions’ disagreement-point monotonicity ranking, on the other hand, is impossible to establish. In a large class of bargaining problems, however, a ranking of the relative disagreement-point monotonicity of these prominent bargaining solutions can be obtained. Using the ‘Constant Elasticity of Substitution’ class of barga...
متن کاملThe Nash Bargaining Solution and Interpersonal Utility Comparisons
Bargaining theory has a conceptual dichotomy at its core: according to one view, the utilities in the bargaining problem are meaningless numbers (v-N.M utilities), while according to another view they do have concrete meaning (willingness to pay). The former position is assumed by the Nash and Kalai-Smorodinsky solutions, and the latter is assumed by the egalitarian, utilitarian, and equal-loss...
متن کاملOn Maskin monotonicity of solution based social choice rules
Howard (1992) argues that the Nash bargaining solution is not Nash implementable, as it does not satisfy Maskin monotonicity. His arguments can be extended to other bargaining solutions as well. However, by defining a social choice correspondence that is based on the solution rather than on its realizations, one can overcome this shortcoming. We even show that such correspondences satisfy a str...
متن کاملDivision of the Humanities and Social Sciences California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 91125 Testable Implications of Bargaining Theories
We develop the testable implications of well-known theories of bargaining over money. Given a finite data set of bargaining outcomes, where utility functions are unknown, we ask if a given theory could have generated the observations. When the data come with a fixed disagreement point, we show that the Nash, utilitarian, and the egalitarian maxmin bargaining solutions are all observationally eq...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Mathematical Social Sciences
دوره 49 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2005