Misrepresentation of utilities in bargaining:: Pure exchange and public good economies

被引:6
作者
Kibris, Ö [1 ]
机构
[1] Sabanci Univ, Fac Arts & Social Sci, TR-81474 Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Univ Catholique Louvain, CORE, B-1348 Louvain, Belgium
关键词
bargaining; Walrasian rule; Lindahl rule; distortion game; interiority;
D O I
10.1006/game.2001.0884
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
In order to analyze bargaining in pure exchange and public good economics when the agents are not informed about their opponents' payoffs. we embed each bargaining problem into a noncooperative game of misrepresentation. In pure exchange (public good) economies with an arbitrary number of agents whose true utilities satisfy a mild assumption, the set of allocations obtained at the linear-strategies Nash equilibria of this game is equal to the set of constrained Walrasian (Lindahl) allocations with respect to the agents' true utilities. Without this assumption, the result holds for two-agent pure-exchange economies and, under alternative assumptions, for public good economies. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).
引用
收藏
页码:91 / 110
页数:20
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1959, CONTRIBUTIONS THEORY
[2]   COALITION-PROOF NASH EQUILIBRIA .1. CONCEPTS [J].
BERNHEIM, BD ;
PELEG, B ;
WHINSTON, MD .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY, 1987, 42 (01) :1-12
[3]   THE NASH BARGAINING SOLUTION IN ECONOMIC MODELING [J].
BINMORE, K ;
RUBINSTEIN, A ;
WOLINSKY, A .
RAND JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1986, 17 (02) :176-188
[4]   DISTORTION OF PREFERENCES AND THE NASH THEORY OF BARGAINING [J].
CRAWFORD, VP ;
VARIAN, HR .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 1979, 3 (03) :203-206
[5]   A NONCOOPERATIVE BARGAINING GAME WITH RISK AVERSE PLAYERS AND AN UNCERTAIN FINITE-HORIZON [J].
HARRINGTON, JE .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 1986, 20 (01) :9-13
[6]   OTHER SOLUTIONS TO NASHS BARGAINING PROBLEM [J].
KALAI, E ;
SMORODINSKY, M .
ECONOMETRICA, 1975, 43 (03) :513-518
[7]  
Kannai Y., 1977, J. Math. Economics, V4, P1
[8]  
KIHLSTROM RE, 1981, GAME THEORY MATH EC
[9]   THE BARGAINING PROBLEM [J].
Nash, John F., Jr. .
ECONOMETRICA, 1950, 18 (02) :155-162
[10]  
NEILSEN LT, 1984, J ECON THEORY, V32, P371