IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notcdx/2012-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coalitional Games with Veto Players: Myopic and Rational Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • J Arin

    (Dpto. Ftos. A. Económico I, University of the Basque Country)

  • V Feltkamp

    (Maastricht School of Management)

  • M Montero

    (School of Economics, University of Nottingham)

Abstract

This paper studies a noncooperative allocation procedure for coali- tional games with veto players. The procedure is similar to the one presented by Dagan et al. (1997) for bankruptcy problems. According to it, a player, the proposer, makes a proposal that the remaining play-ers must accept or reject. We present a model where the proposer can make sequential proposals over n periods. If responders are myopic maximizers (i.e. consider each period in isolation), the only subgame perfect equilibrium outcome is the serial rule of Arin and Feltkamp (2012) regardless of the order of moves. If all players are rational, the serial rule still arises as the unique subgame perfect equilibrium outcome if the order of moves is such that stronger players must respond to the proposal after weaker ones.

Suggested Citation

  • J Arin & V Feltkamp & M Montero, 2012. "Coalitional Games with Veto Players: Myopic and Rational Behavior," Discussion Papers 2012-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    • Handle: RePEc:not:notcdx:2012-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cedex/documents/papers/cedex-discussion-paper-2012-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arin, J. & Feltkamp, V., 2012. "Coalitional games: Monotonicity and core," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(1), pages 208-213.
    2. 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.
    3. Arin, J. & Feltkamp, V., 2007. "Coalitional games with veto players: Consistency, monotonicity and Nash outcomes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(7-8), pages 855-870, September.
    4. Peleg, B, 1986. "On the Reduced Game Property and Its Converse," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 15(3), pages 187-200.
    5. Moulin, Herve & Shenker, Scott, 1992. "Serial Cost Sharing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1009-1037, September.
    6. Vincent Feltkamp & Javier Arin, 1997. "The Nucleolus and Kernel of Veto-Rich Transferable Utility Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 26(1), pages 61-73.
    7. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    8. Maschler, Michael, 1992. "The bargaining set, kernel, and nucleolus," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 591-667, Elsevier.
    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. María Gómez-Rúa & Juan Vidal-Puga, 2014. "Bargaining and membership," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(2), pages 800-814, July.

    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. J. Arin & V. Feltkamp & M. Montero, 2015. "A bargaining procedure leading to the serial rule in games with veto players," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 229(1), pages 41-66, June.
    2. repec:ehu:ikerla:11102 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Katsev, Ilya & Arin Aguirre, Francisco Javier, 2011. "The SD-prenucleolus for TU games," IKERLANAK 2011-56, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Fundamentos del Análisis Económico I.
    4. repec:ehu:ikerla:34464 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:ehu:ikerla:6230 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Arin, J. & Feltkamp, V., 2007. "Coalitional games with veto players: Consistency, monotonicity and Nash outcomes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(7-8), pages 855-870, September.
    7. repec:ehu:ikerla:6489 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Potters, Jos & Sudholter, Peter, 1999. "Airport problems and consistent allocation rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 83-102, July.
    9. Arin, Javier & Inarra, Elena, 1998. "A Characterization of the Nucleolus for Convex Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 12-24, April.
    10. Sudholter, Peter, 1998. "Axiomatizations of Game Theoretical Solutions for One-Output Cost Sharing Problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 142-171, July.
    11. Pedro Calleja & Francesc Llerena, 2017. "Rationality, aggregate monotonicity and consistency in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 197-220, January.
    12. Yair Tauman & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2010. "On (non-) monotonicity of cooperative solutions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(1), pages 171-175, March.
    13. repec:ehu:ikerla:18238 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. 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.
    15. Theo Driessen & Cheng-Cheng Hu, 2013. "An axiomatization of the kernel for TU games through reduced game monotonicity and reduced dominance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 1-12, January.
    16. Elena Iñarra & Roberto Serrano & Ken-Ichi Shimomura, 2020. "The Nucleolus, the Kernel, and the Bargaining Set: An Update," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 71(2), pages 225-266.
    17. Camelia Bejan & Juan Gómez, 2012. "Axiomatizing core extensions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 885-898, November.
    18. William Thomson, 2011. "Consistency and its converse: an introduction," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(4), pages 257-291, December.
    19. Béal, Sylvain & Rémila, Eric & Solal, Philippe, 2010. "On the number of blocks required to access the core," MPRA Paper 26578, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Montero, M.P., 2002. "Two-Stage Bargaining with Reversible Coalitions : The Case of Apex Games," Other publications TiSEM 7dba0283-bc13-4f2c-8f5e-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    21. Driessen, Theo S.H. & Fragnelli, Vito & Katsev, Ilya V. & Khmelnitskaya, Anna B., 2011. "On 1-convexity and nucleolus of co-insurance games," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 217-225, March.
    22. Izquierdo, Josep M. & Rafels, Carles, 2001. "Average Monotonic Cooperative Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 174-192, August.
    23. Pedro Calleja & Francesc Llerena & Peter Sudhölter, 2020. "Monotonicity and Weighted Prenucleoli: A Characterization Without Consistency," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 1056-1068, August.
    24. Llerena, Francesc & Mauri, Llúcia, 2017. "On the existence of the Dutta–Ray’s egalitarian solution," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 92-99.
    25. René van den Brink & Ilya Katsev & Gerard van der Laan, 2008. "An Algorithm for Computing the Nucleolus of Disjunctive Additive Games with An Acyclic Permission Structure," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 08-104/1, Tinbergen Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    veto players; noncooperative bargaining; myopic behavior; serial rule;
    All these keywords.

    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:not:notcdx:2012-11. 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: Jose V Guinot Saporta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdnotuk.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.