IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/gewipr/259267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Der Halbteilungsgrundsatz als Verhandlungslösung für handelbare Zahlungsansprüche – Eine Analyse vor dem Hintergrund axiomatischer Verhandlungslösungen sowie der Focal Point theory

Author

Listed:
  • Bahrs, E.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Bahrs, E., 2006. "Der Halbteilungsgrundsatz als Verhandlungslösung für handelbare Zahlungsansprüche – Eine Analyse vor dem Hintergrund axiomatischer Verhandlungslösungen sowie der Focal Point theory," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 41, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:gewipr:259267
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.259267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/259267/files/Bd41Nr24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.259267?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Muthoo,Abhinay, 1999. "Bargaining Theory with Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521576475, September.
    2. Sugden, Robert, 1995. "A Theory of Focal Points," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(430), pages 533-550, May.
    3. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    4. Kagel, John H. & Kim, Chung & Moser, Donald, 1996. "Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 100-110, March.
    5. Isermeyer, Folkhard, 2003. "Umsetzung des Luxemburger Beschlusses zur EU-Agrarreform in Deutschland - eine erste Einschätzung," Arbeitsberichte aus der vTI-Agrarökonomie 03/2003, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    6. Murnighan, J Keith & Roth, Alvin E & Schoumaker, Francoise, 1988. "Risk Aversion in Bargaining: An Experimental Study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 101-124, March.
    7. Roth, Alvin E & Schoumaker, Francoise, 1983. "Expectations and Reputations in Bargaining: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(3), pages 362-372, June.
    8. H. Peyton Young & Mary A. Burke, 2001. "Competition and Custom in Economic Contracts: A Case Study of Illinois Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 559-573, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher Bruce & Jeremy Clark, 2010. "The Efficiency of Direct Public Involvement in Environmental Policymaking: An Experimental Test," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 157-182, February.
    2. Colin F. Camerer & Gideon Nave & Alec Smith, 2019. "Dynamic Unstructured Bargaining with Private Information: Theory, Experiment, and Outcome Prediction via Machine Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1867-1890, April.
    3. Haimanti Bhattacharya & Subhasish Dugar, 2020. "The Hidden Cost Of Bargaining: Evidence From A Cheating‐Prone Marketplace," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(3), pages 1253-1280, August.
    4. H Peyton Young, 2014. "The Evolution of Social Norms," Economics Series Working Papers 726, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    5. Rasch, Alexander & Wambach, Achim, 2009. "Internal decision-making rules and collusion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 703-715, November.
    6. Pinkley, Robin L. & Conlon, Donald E. & Sawyer, John E. & Sleesman, Dustin J. & Vandewalle, Don & Kuenzi, Maribeth, 2019. "The power of phantom alternatives in negotiation: How what could be haunts what is," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 34-48.
    7. Embrey, Matthew & Hyndman, Kyle & Riedl, Arno, 2021. "Bargaining with a residual claimant: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 335-354.
    8. Ursula F Ott & Pervez N Ghauri, 2019. "Brexit negotiations: From negotiation space to agreement zones," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(1), pages 137-149, February.
    9. Joalland, Olivier & Pereau, Jean-Christophe & Rambonilaza, Tina, 2019. "Bargaining local compensation payments for the installation of new power transmission lines," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 75-85.
    10. Hwang, Sung-Ha & Rey-Bellet, Luc, 2021. "Positive feedback in coordination games: Stochastic evolutionary dynamics and the logit choice rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 355-373.
    11. Gerald Schneider & Daniel Finke & Stefanie Bailer, 2010. "Bargaining Power in the European Union: An Evaluation of Competing Game‐Theoretic Models," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(1), pages 85-103, February.
    12. Richard Watt, 2013. "Copyright law and royalty contracts," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse & Christian Handke (ed.), Handbook on the Digital Creative Economy, chapter 18, pages 197-208, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Venkat Venkatasubramanian & Yu Luo, 2018. "How much income inequality is fair? Nash bargaining solution and its connection to entropy," Papers 1806.05262, arXiv.org.
    14. Kunter, Marcus, 2012. "Coordination via cost and revenue sharing in manufacturer–retailer channels," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 477-486.
    15. Balachandran, Kashi R. & Wang, Hsiao-Wen & Li, Shu-Hsing & Wang, Taychang, 2013. "In-house capability and supply chain decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 473-484.
    16. D. Pinheiro & A. A. Pinto & S. Z. Xanthopoulos & A. N. Yannacopoulos, 2011. "A projected gradient dynamical system modeling the dynamics of bargaining," Papers 1105.1767, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2011.
    17. Feltovich, Nick & Swierzbinski, Joe, 2011. "The role of strategic uncertainty in games: An experimental study of cheap talk and contracts in the Nash demand game," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 554-574, May.
    18. Hanato, Shunsuke, 2019. "Simultaneous-offers bargaining with a mediator," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 361-379.
    19. Melvyn G. Coles & Abhinay Muthoo, 2000. "Bargaining Equilibrium in a Non-Stationary Environment," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0472, Econometric Society.
    20. Shin Kishimoto, 2020. "The welfare effect of bargaining power in the licensing of a cost-reducing technology," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 173-193, March.

    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:ags:gewipr:259267. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gewisea.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.