IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v87y2013icp35-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflict leads to cooperation in demand bargaining

Author

Listed:
  • Rozen, Kareen

Abstract

We consider a multilateral Nash demand game in which short-sighted players come to the bargaining table with requests for both coalition partners and the potentially generated resource. We prove that the resulting process converges with probability one to a state in which all players agree on a strictly self-enforcing division of resources (i.e., a strict core allocation). Highlighting group dynamics, we show how the myopic actions of players may lead to the break up of groups in the short run, but can ultimately bring about a situation from which a strictly self-enforcing allocation can be reached.

Suggested Citation

  • Rozen, Kareen, 2013. "Conflict leads to cooperation in demand bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 35-42.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:87:y:2013:i:c:p:35-42
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268112002648
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.005?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Perry, Motty & Reny, Philip J, 1994. "A Noncooperative View of Coalition Formation and the Core," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 795-817, July.
    2. Armando Gomes & Philippe Jehiel, 2005. "Dynamic Processes of Social and Economic Interactions: On the Persistence of Inefficiencies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(3), pages 626-667, June.
    3. George J. Mailath, 1998. "Corrigenda [Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory]," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1941-1941, December.
    4. Nash, John, 1953. "Two-Person Cooperative Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), pages 128-140, April.
    5. Konishi, Hideo & Ray, Debraj, 2003. "Coalition formation as a dynamic process," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 1-41, May.
    6. Young H. P., 1993. "An Evolutionary Model of Bargaining," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 145-168, February.
    7. Howe, Roger E & Roemer, John E, 1981. "Rawlsian Justice as the Core of a Game," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 880-895, December.
    8. Saez-Marti, Maria & Weibull, Jorgen W., 1999. "Clever Agents in Young's Evolutionary Bargaining Model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 86(2), pages 268-279, June.
    9. Kalyan Chatterjee & Bhaskar Dutia & Debraj Ray & Kunal Sengupta, 2013. "A Noncooperative Theory of Coalitional Bargaining," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Bargaining in the Shadow of the Market Selected Papers on Bilateral and Multilateral Bargaining, chapter 5, pages 97-111, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Young, H Peyton, 1993. "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 57-84, January.
    11. Kandori, Michihiro & Mailath, George J & Rob, Rafael, 1993. "Learning, Mutation, and Long Run Equilibria in Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 29-56, January.
    12. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1991. "Adaptive and sophisticated learning in normal form games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 82-100, February.
    13. Murali Agastya, 1997. "Adaptive Play in Multiplayer Bargaining Situations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(3), pages 411-426.
    14. George J. Mailath, 1998. "Do People Play Nash Equilibrium? Lessons from Evolutionary Game Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1347-1374, September.
    15. Hart, Sergiu & Kurz, Mordecai, 1983. "Endogenous Formation of Coalitions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 1047-1064, July.
    16. Gale, John & Binmore, Kenneth G. & Samuelson, Larry, 1995. "Learning to be imperfect: The ultimatum game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 56-90.
    17. Arnold, Tone & Schwalbe, Ulrich, 2002. "Dynamic coalition formation and the core," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 363-380, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Montero & Alex Possajennikov, 2021. "An Adaptive Model of Demand Adjustment in Weighted Majority Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Heinrich Nax & Bary Pradelski, 2015. "Evolutionary dynamics and equitable core selection in assignment games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 903-932, November.
    3. Nax, Heinrich H. & Pradelski, Bary S. R., 2015. "Evolutionary dynamics and equitable core selection in assignment games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 65428, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Vicario, Eugenio, 2024. "Memory retrieval in the demand game with a few possible splits: Unfair conventions emerge in fair settings," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    5. Sawa, Ryoji, 2019. "Stochastic stability under logit choice in coalitional bargaining problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 633-650.
    6. Maria Montero & Alex Possajennikov, 2024. "“Greedy” demand adjustment in cooperative games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 336(3), pages 1461-1478, May.
    7. Sawa, Ryoji, 2021. "A prospect theory Nash bargaining solution and its stochastic stability," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 692-711.
    8. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2021. "Evolutionary stability of behavioural rules in bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 399-414.
    9. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2022. "Expected utility versus cumulative prospect theory in an evolutionary model of bargaining," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    10. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.

    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. Sawa, Ryoji, 2019. "Stochastic stability under logit choice in coalitional bargaining problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 633-650.
    2. Rozen, Kareen, 2008. "Conflict Leads to Cooperation in Nash Bargaining," Working Papers 39, Yale University, Department of Economics.
    3. Newton, Jonathan, 2012. "Recontracting and stochastic stability in cooperative games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 364-381.
    4. Demichelis, Stefano & Ritzberger, Klaus, 2003. "From evolutionary to strategic stability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 51-75, November.
    5. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2022. "Expected utility versus cumulative prospect theory in an evolutionary model of bargaining," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    6. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    7. Sawa, Ryoji, 2021. "A prospect theory Nash bargaining solution and its stochastic stability," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 692-711.
    8. Ellingsen, Tore & Robles, Jack, 2002. "Does Evolution Solve the Hold-Up Problem?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 28-53, April.
    9. László Á. Kóczy, 2018. "Partition Function Form Games," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-319-69841-0, December.
    10. Murali Agastya, 1997. "Adaptive Play in Multiplayer Bargaining Situations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(3), pages 411-426.
    11. Ray, Debraj & Vohra, Rajiv, 2015. "Coalition Formation," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    12. Roberto Serrano & Oscar Volij, 2008. "Mistakes in Cooperation: the Stochastic Stability of Edgeworth's Recontracting," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1719-1741, October.
    13. Wallace, Chris & Young, H. Peyton, 2015. "Stochastic Evolutionary Game Dynamics," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    14. Benndorf, Volker & Martínez-Martínez, Ismael & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2021. "Games with coupled populations: An experiment in continuous time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    15. Dawid, Herbert & MacLeod, W. Bentley, 2008. "Hold-up and the evolution of investment and bargaining norms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 26-52, January.
    16. Murali Agastya, 1995. "An Evolutionary Bargaining Model," Game Theory and Information 9503001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Olivier Compte & Philippe Jehiel, 2010. "The Coalitional Nash Bargaining Solution," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(5), pages 1593-1623, September.
    18. Hopkins, Ed, 1999. "Learning, Matching, and Aggregation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 79-110, January.
    19. Maria Montero & Alex Possajennikov, 2021. "An Adaptive Model of Demand Adjustment in Weighted Majority Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Demand bargaining; Strictly self-enforcing allocations; Strict core; Best response dynamics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:jeborg:v:87:y:2013:i:c:p:35-42. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jebo .

    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.