IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/67558.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multilateral Bargaining with Discrete Surplus

Author

Listed:
  • Maurya, Amit Kumar

Abstract

Krishna and Serrano (1996) show a unique and efficient outcome in a model of multilateral bargaining. We show that the predictability of the model critically depends on the nature of the surplus i.e. whether it is continuous or discrete. We show that the model suffers from multiple equilibria and severe inefficiency when the surplus is discrete, not continuous as assumed in Krishna and Serrano (1996), and players are patient enough.

Suggested Citation

  • Maurya, Amit Kumar, 2015. "Multilateral Bargaining with Discrete Surplus," MPRA Paper 67558, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:67558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/67558/1/MPRA_paper_67558.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Roy Chowdhury, Prabal & Sengupta, Kunal, 2012. "Transparency, complementarity and holdout," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 598-612.
    3. Van Damme, Eric & Selten, Reinhard & Winter, Eyal, 1990. "Alternating bid bargaining with a smallest money unit," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 188-201, June.
    4. Cai, Hongbin, 2000. "Delay in Multilateral Bargaining under Complete Information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 260-276, August.
    5. Hongbin Cai, 2003. "Inefficient Markov perfect equilibria in multilateral bargaining," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 22(3), pages 583-606, October.
    6. Vijay Krishna & Roberto Serrano, 1996. "Multilateral Bargaining," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(1), pages 61-80.
    7. John Sutton, 1986. "Non-Cooperative Bargaining Theory: An Introduction," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 53(5), pages 709-724.
    8. Muthoo, Abhinay, 1991. "A Note on Bargaining over a Finite Number of Feasible Agreements," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(3), pages 290-292, July.
    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. Uyanik, Metin & Yengin, Duygu, 2023. "Expropriation power in private dealings: Quota rule in collective sales," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 548-580.
    2. Sang-Chul Suh & Quan Wen, 2009. "A multi-agent bilateral bargaining model with endogenous protocol," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(2), pages 203-226, August.
    3. Xiao, Jun, 2018. "Bargaining orders in a multi-person bargaining game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 364-379.
    4. Göller, Daniel & Hewer, Michael, 2015. "Breakdown in multilateral negotiations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 478-484.
    5. Gantner, Anita & Horn, Kristian & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Fair and efficient division through unanimity bargaining when claims are subjective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 56-73.
    6. Soumendu Sarkar & Dhritiman Gupta, 2023. "Bargaining for assembly," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 229-254, August.
    7. Roy Chowdhury, Prabal & Sengupta, Kunal, 2012. "Transparency, complementarity and holdout," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 598-612.
    8. Suh, Sang-Chul & Wen, Quan, 2006. "Multi-agent bilateral bargaining and the Nash bargaining solution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 61-73, February.
    9. Fershtman, Chaim, 2000. "A Note on Multi-Issue Two-Sided Bargaining: Bilateral Procedures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 216-227, February.
    10. Suchan Chae & Seho Kim, 2019. "The effects of third-party transfers in sequential anchored bargaining," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(1), pages 143-155, March.
    11. P. Jean-Jacques Herings & Harold Houba, 2022. "Costless delay in negotiations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(1), pages 69-93, July.
    12. Maurya, Amit Kumar, 2015. "A Comment on "Multilateral Bargaining"," MPRA Paper 67463, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Roy Chowdhury, Prabal & Sengupta, Kunal, 2008. "Multi-person Bargaining With Complementarity: Is There Holdout?," MPRA Paper 11517, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Sarkar, Shubhro, 2016. "Bargaining order and delays in multilateral bargaining with heterogeneous sellers," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1-20.
    15. Maurya, Amit Kumar, 2018. "Bargaining order in multilateral bargaining with imperfect compliments," MPRA Paper 89583, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Arnold Polanski & Emiliya Lazarova, 2015. "Dynamic multilateral markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 815-833, November.
    17. Soumendu Sarkar, 2022. "Optimal mechanism for land acquisition," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(1), pages 87-116, March.
    18. Binmore, Ken & Osborne, Martin J. & Rubinstein, Ariel, 1992. "Noncooperative models of bargaining," 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 7, pages 179-225, Elsevier.
    19. Cai, Hongbin, 2000. "Delay in Multilateral Bargaining under Complete Information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 260-276, August.
    20. Gao, Hong & Xu, Haibo, 2021. "Multilateral bargaining with an endogenously determined procedure," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multilateral bargaining; Discrete surplus; Inefficiency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

    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:pra:mprapa:67558. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.