IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ivi/wpasad/2010-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Noncooperative justifications for old bankruptcy rules

Author

Listed:
  • José M. Jiménez Gómez

    (Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena)

Abstract

In this paper we use two different sets of Commonly Accepted Equity Principles to provide new characterizations of well known bankruptcy rules from an strategic viewpoint. In this sense, we extend the results obtained by Chun, 1989, and Herrero, 2003, who followed the van Damme's approach, 1986, for solving Nash type bargaining problems, but in bankruptcy problems. Specifially, by using, on the one hand, the Unanimous Concessions mechanism we justify Piniles' and the Constrained Egalitarian rules, and, on the other hand, with the Diminishing Claims procedure we retrieve the Dual of Pinile's and the Dual of Constrained Egalitarian rules.

Suggested Citation

  • José M. Jiménez Gómez, 2010. "Noncooperative justifications for old bankruptcy rules," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-15, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    • Handle: RePEc:ivi:wpasad:2010-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ivie.es/downloads/docs/wpasad/wpasad-2010-15.pdf
    File Function: Fisrt version / Primera version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
    2. Cuberes, David & Dougan, William, 2009. "How Endogenous Is Money? Evidence from a New Microeconomic Estimate," MPRA Paper 17744, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-519, March.
    4. Ignacio García-Jurado & Julio González-Díaz & Antonio Villar, 2006. "A Non-cooperative Approach to Bankruptcy Problems," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 189-197, September.
    5. Marisa Hidalgo-Hidalgo & Iñigo Iturbe-Ormaetxe, 2012. "Should we transfer resources from college to basic education?," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 1-27, January.
    6. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Giovanni Ponti, 2010. "On the adjudication of conflicting claims: an experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(1), pages 145-179, January.
    7. Maliar, Lilia & Maliar, Serguei & Valli, Fernando, 2010. "Solving the incomplete markets model with aggregate uncertainty using the Krusell-Smith algorithm," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 42-49, January.
    8. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
    9. Dagan, Nir & Serrano, Roberto & Volij, Oscar, 1997. "A Noncooperative View of Consistent Bankruptcy Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
    10. Turino Francesco, 2010. "Non-Price Competition, Real Rigidities and Inflation Dynamics," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-61, July.
    11. María Dolores Furió & Vicente Meneu, 2009. "Expectations and Forward Risk Premium in the Spanish Power Market," Working Papers. Serie AD 2009-02, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    12. Menner, Martin, 2007. "The role of search frictions for output and inflation dynamics: a Bayesian assessment," UC3M Working papers. Economics we076235, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    13. Eric van Damme, 1984. "The Nash Bargaining Solution is Optimal," Discussion Papers 597, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    14. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    15. Young, H. P., 1988. "Distributive justice in taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 321-335, April.
    16. Chun, Youngsub, 1989. "A noncooperative justification for egalitarian surplus sharing," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 245-261, June.
    17. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    18. José J. Sempere Monerris & Rafael Moner Colonques & Amparo Urbano Salvador, 2010. "Trade liberalization in vertically related markets," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-09, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    19. Josep Enric Peris Ferrando & Begoña Subiza & María del Carmen Marco, 1995. "A Mechanism For Meta-Bargaining Problems," Working Papers. Serie AD 1995-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    20. Eric van Damme, 1984. "The Nash Bargaining Solution is Optimal," Discussion Papers 597, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    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. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & M. Marco-Gil, 2014. "A new approach for bounding awards in bankruptcy problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 447-469, August.
    2. Giménez-Gómez, José Manuel, 2011. "A way to play bankruptcy problems," Working Papers 2072/169781, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    3. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Giovanni Ponti, 2010. "On the adjudication of conflicting claims: an experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(1), pages 145-179, January.
    4. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    5. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez, 2014. "A Way to Play Claims Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 617-627, May.
    6. Carmen Herrero, 2000. "The Three Musketeers. Old Solutions to Bankruptcy Problems," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0609, Econometric Society.
    7. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    8. Elena Márquez & Belén Nieto Doménech & Gonzalo Rubio Irigoyen, 2010. "Consumption, liquidity and the cross-sectional variation of expected returns," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-24, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    9. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    10. Kıbrıs, Özgür & Kıbrıs, Arzu, 2013. "On the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 85-99.
    11. Büyükboyacı, Mürüvvet & Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kıbrıs, Arzu & Kıbrıs, Özgür, 2019. "An experimental study of the investment implications of bankruptcy laws," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 607-629.
    12. Schouten, Jop, 2022. "Cooperation, allocation and strategy in interactive decision-making," Other publications TiSEM d5d41448-8033-4f6b-8ec0-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Simon Gächter & Arno Riedl, 2006. "Dividing Justly in Bargaining Problems with Claims," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(3), pages 571-594, December.
    14. José M. Jiménez Gómez & María del Carmen Marco Gil & Pedro Gadea Blanco, 2010. "Some game-theoretic grounds for meeting people half-way," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-04, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    15. Sonia Oreffice & Climent Quintana, 2009. "Anthropometry and Socioeconomics in the Couple: Evidence from the PSID," Working Papers 2009-22, FEDEA.
    16. Long, Yan & Sethuraman, Jay & Xue, Jingyi, 2021. "Equal-quantile rules in resource allocation with uncertain needs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    17. William Thomson, 2015. "For claims problems, another compromise between the proportional and constrained equal awards rules," RCER Working Papers 592, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    18. Li, Jiawen & Ju, Yuan, 2023. "Divide and choose: An informationally robust strategic approach to bankruptcy problems," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    19. Cuberes, David & Dougan, William, 2009. "How Endogenous Is Money? Evidence from a New Microeconomic Estimate," MPRA Paper 17744, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Peris, Josep E. & Jiménez-Gómez, José M., 2012. "A Proportional Approach to Bankruptcy Problems with a guaranteed minimum," QM&ET Working Papers 12-7, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bankruptcy problems; strategic approach; noncooperative justifications; Piniles¿ rule; Constrained Egalitarian rule.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ivi:wpasad:2010-15. 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: Departamento de Edición (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ievages.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.