IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20160042.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Axiomatic Analysis of Joint Liability Problems with Rooted -Tree Structure

Author

Listed:
  • Takayuki Oishi

    (Aomori Public University, Japan)

  • Gerard van der Laan

    (VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • René van den Brink

    (VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

Abstract

For joint liability problems concerning tort law, a legal compensation scheme may be based on lower and upper bounds of compensation for injury and on case-system consistency. Introducing several properties inspired from this observation, we analyze compensation schemes axiomatically under the situation where causation of the cumulative injury appears in multiple sequences of wrongful acts. The situation underlying the model is described by a rooted-tree graph. We show that there is a unique compensation scheme that satisfies three axioms, one about lower bounds of individual compensations, one about upper bounds of individual compensations, and one about case-system consistency. This unique compensation scheme is the nucleolus of an associated liability game.

Suggested Citation

  • Takayuki Oishi & Gerard van der Laan & René van den Brink, 2016. "An Axiomatic Analysis of Joint Liability Problems with Rooted -Tree Structure," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-042/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/16042.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. René Brink & P. Herings & Gerard Laan & A. Talman, 2015. "The Average Tree permission value for games with a permission tree," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(1), pages 99-123, January.
    2. Oishi, Takayuki & Nakayama, Mikio & Hokari, Toru & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2016. "Duality and anti-duality in TU games applied to solutions, axioms, and axiomatizations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 44-53.
    3. S. C. Littlechild & G. Owen, 1973. "A Simple Expression for the Shapley Value in a Special Case," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 370-372, November.
    4. Dehez, Pierre & Ferey, Samuel, 2013. "How to share joint liability: A cooperative game approach," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 44-50.
    5. Gilles, Robert P & Owen, Guillermo & van den Brink, Rene, 1992. "Games with Permission Structures: The Conjunctive Approach," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 20(3), pages 277-293.
    6. Rodica Brânzei & Tamás Solymosi & Stef Tijs, 2005. "Strongly essential coalitions and the nucleolus of peer group games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 33(3), pages 447-460, September.
    7. Samuel Ferey & Pierre Dehez, 2016. "Multiple Causation, Apportionment, and the Shapley Value," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 143-171.
    8. Takayuki Oishi & Mikio Nakayama, 2009. "Anti‐Dual Of Economic Coalitional Tu Games," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 60(4), pages 560-566, December.
    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. Takayuki Oishi & Gerard van der Laan & René van den Brink, 2018. "The Tort Law and the Nucleolus for Generalized Joint Liability Problems," Discussion Papers 37, Meisei University, School of Economics.
    2. René Brink, 2017. "Games with a permission structure - A survey on generalizations and applications," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 1-33, April.
    3. Takayuki Oishi & Gerard van der Laan & René van den Brink, 2023. "Axiomatic analysis of liability problems with rooted-tree networks in tort law," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(1), pages 229-258, January.
    4. Encarnacion Algaba & Rene van den Brink, 2021. "Networks, Communication and Hierarchy: Applications to Cooperative Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-019/IV, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. René van den Brink, 2017. "Games with a Permission Structure: a survey on generalizations and applications," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-016/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Jens Gudmundsson & Jens Leth Hougaard & Chiu Yu Ko, 2020. "Sharing sequentially triggered losses," IFRO Working Paper 2020/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    7. Tamás Solymosi, 2019. "Weighted nucleoli and dually essential coalitions (extended version)," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1914, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    8. Tamás Solymosi, 2019. "Weighted nucleoli and dually essential coalitions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(4), pages 1087-1109, December.
    9. Jens Gudmundsson & Jens Leth Hougaard & Chiu Yu Ko, 2022. "Sharing sequentially triggered losses: Automatic conflict resolution through smart contracts," IFRO Working Paper 2020/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    10. M. Álvarez-Mozos & R. Brink & G. Laan & O. Tejada, 2017. "From hierarchies to levels: new solutions for games with hierarchical structure," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1089-1113, November.
    11. Mikel Álvarez-Mozos & René van den Brink & Gerard van der Laan & Oriol Tejada, 2015. "From Hierarchies to Levels: New Solutions for Games," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-072/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Dehez, Pierre, 2023. "Sharing a collective probability of success," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 122-127.
    13. Pierre Dehez, 2017. "On Harsanyi Dividends and Asymmetric Values," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 1-36, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Yokote, Koji & Funaki, Yukihiko & Kamijo, Yoshio, 2017. "Coincidence of the Shapley value with other solutions satisfying covariance," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 1-9.
    16. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Tvede, Mich & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2017. "Sharing the proceeds from a hierarchical venture," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 98-110.
    17. Hao Wu & Rene van den Brink & Arantza Estevez-Fernandez, 2022. "The locally partial permission value for games with a permission structure," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 22-037/II, Tinbergen Institute.
    18. René Brink, 2012. "On hierarchies and communication," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(4), pages 721-735, October.
    19. Demuynck, Thomas & Rock, Bram De & Ginsburgh, Victor, 2016. "The transfer paradox in welfare space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1-4.
    20. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Liability problems; Tort law; Rooted-tree graph; Axiomatization; Nucleolus;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • K49 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Other

    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:tin:wpaper:20160042. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.