IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tky/fseres/2002cf161.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Modelling Negotiations within a Dynamic Multi-objective Programming Framework: Analysis of Risk Measurement with an Application to Large BOT Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng-Min Feng

    (Instituteof Traffic and Transportation, National Chiao Tung University)

  • Chao-Chung Kang

    (Instituteof Traffic and Transportation, National Chiao Tung University)

  • Haider Ali Khan

    (GSIS, University of Denver and CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo)

Abstract

The dynamic and multi-objective programming is used here to establish a risk measurement model. We develop an iterative algorithm and the convergence conditions for the model solution. The results obtained from the model developed here show that the sum of the interactive utility value (IUV) could determine whether or not the interactive relationship is characterized by independence among negotiators. In addition, the numerical example shows that this risk measurement model of the negotiation group can reflect risk assessment by the negotiation group for certain events and can analyze interaction characteristics among negotiators. We show the feasibility and applicability of the model and the exact solution algorithm, and their policy relevance for analyzing BOT projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng-Min Feng & Chao-Chung Kang & Haider Ali Khan, 2002. "On Modelling Negotiations within a Dynamic Multi-objective Programming Framework: Analysis of Risk Measurement with an Application to Large BOT Projects," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-161, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    • Handle: RePEc:tky:fseres:2002cf161
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/research/dp/2002/2002cf161.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Quiggin, John, 1991. "Comparative Statics for Rank-Dependent Expected Utility Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 339-350, December.
    2. Bose, Utpal & Davey, Anne M. & Olson, David L., 1997. "Multi-attribute utility methods in group decision making: Past applications and potential for inclusion in GDSS," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-706, December.
    3. Khan, Haider Ali & Hoshino, Eiichi, 1992. "Impact of foreign aid on the fiscal behavior of LDC governments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 1481-1488, October.
    4. Gang, Ira N. & Khan, Haider Ali, 1990. "Some determinants of foreign aid to India, 1960-1985," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 431-442, March.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, October.
    6. Luce, R Duncan & Fishburn, Peter C, 1995. "A Note on Deriving Rank-Dependent Utility Using Additive Joint Receipts," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 5-16, July.
    7. Daniels, Richard L & Keller, L Robin, 1990. "An Experimental Evaluation of the Descriptive Validity of Lottery-Dependent Utility Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 115-134, June.
    8. Binh, Tran-Nam & McGillivray, Mark, 1993. "Foreign aid, taxes and public investment A comment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 173-176, June.
    9. Carbone, Enrica, 1997. "Discriminating between Preference Functionals: A Monte Carlo Study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 29-54, October.
    10. Bleichrodt, Han & Quiggin, John, 1997. "Characterizing QALYs under a General Rank Dependent Utility Model," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 151-165, November.
    11. David E. Bell, 1995. "Risk, Return, and Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 23-30, January.
    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. Haider Ali Khan, 2002. "How Effective Is Japanese Foreign Aid? Econometric Results from a Bounded Rationality Model for Indonesia," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-164, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    2. Haider A. Khan, 2004. "General Conclusions: From Crisis to a Global Political Economy of Freedom," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Global Markets and Financial Crises in Asia, chapter 9, pages 193-211, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Haider A. Khan, 2003. "The Future of Japanese Aid to South and Southeast Asia: A Comparative Analysis," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-233, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    4. Haider A. Khan, 2005. "Governance and Effectiveness of Japanese Aid: Towards Optimality," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-331, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    5. Haider Khan, 2002. "Japanese Foreign Aid, Development Expenditures and Taxation in Thailand: Econometric Results from a Bounded Rationality Model of Fiscal Behavior," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-188, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    6. G Mavrotas & B Ouattara, 2003. "The Composition of Aid and the Fiscal Sector in an Aid-Recipient Economy: A model," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0307, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    7. Ira N. Gang & Haider Ali Khan, 1999. "Foreign aid and fiscal behavior in a bounded rationality model: Different policy regimes," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 121-134.
    8. repec:bla:rdevec:v:13:y:2009:i:s1:p:526-542 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. repec:dgr:rugsom:95d21 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    11. Zafar Iqbal, 1997. "Foreign Aid and the Public Sector: A Model of Fiscal Behaviour in Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 36(2), pages 115-129.
    12. Susana Franco‐Rodriguez, 2000. "Recent developments in fiscal response with an application to Costa Rica," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 429-441, April.
    13. Feeny, Simon & McGillivray, Mark, 2010. "Aid and public sector fiscal behaviour in failing states," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1006-1016, September.
    14. Mark McGillivray & Akhter Ahmed, 1999. "Aid, adjustment and public sector fiscal behaviour in the Philippines," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 381-391.
    15. Leanora Alecia Brown & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2015. "International Debt Forgiveness: Who Gets Picked and Its Effect On The Tax Effort Of Developing Countries," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1504, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    16. Ouattara, B., 2006. "Foreign aid and government fiscal behaviour in developing countries: Panel data evidence," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 506-514, May.
    17. Feeny, Simon, 2007. "Foreign Aid and Fiscal Governance in Melanesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 439-453, March.
    18. Franco-Rodriguez, Susana & Morrissey, Oliver & McGillivray, Mark, 1998. "Aid and the Public Sector in Pakistan: Evidence with Endogenous Aid," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1241-1250, July.
    19. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    20. Khan, Haider, 2024. "Japanese Aid and Economic Development of Bangladesh," MPRA Paper 119877, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Han Bleichrodt & John Miyamoto, 2003. "A Characterization of Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Under Cumulative Prospect Theory," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 181-193, February.
    22. George Mavrotas, 2003. "Which Types of Aid Have the Most Impact?," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-85, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    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:tky:fseres:2002cf161. 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: CIRJE administrative office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ritokjp.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.