IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v62y2024i4d10.1007_s00355-024-01513-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Collective or individual rationality in the Nash bargaining solution: efficiency-free characterizations

Author

Listed:
  • Kensei Nakamura

    (Hitotsubashi University)

Abstract

In the classical bargaining problem, we propose a very mild axiom of individual rationality, which we call possibility of utility gain. This requires that for at least one bargaining problem, there exists at least one player who reaches a higher utility level than their disagreement utility. This paper shows that the Nash solution (Nash in Econometrica 18(2):155–162, 1950) is characterized by possibility of utility gain and continuity with respect to feasible sets together with Nash’s axioms except weak Pareto optimality. We also show that in Nash’s theorem, weak Pareto optimality can be replaced by conflict-freeness (introduced by Rachmilevitch in Math Soc Sci 76(C):107–109, 2015). This demands that when the agreement most preferred by all players is feasible, this should be chosen. Furthermore, we provide alternative and unified proofs for other efficiency-free characterizations of the Nash solution. This clarifies the role of each axiom in the related results.

Suggested Citation

  • Kensei Nakamura, 2024. "Collective or individual rationality in the Nash bargaining solution: efficiency-free characterizations," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(4), pages 629-642, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:62:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s00355-024-01513-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-024-01513-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-024-01513-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-024-01513-6?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.

    More about this item

    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:spr:sochwe:v:62:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s00355-024-01513-6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.