Distributive justice and the Nash bargaining solution

被引:0
作者
Nejat Anbarci
Ching-jen Sun
机构
[1] Deakin University,School of Accounting, Economics and Finance
来源
Social Choice and Welfare | 2011年 / 37卷
关键词
Scale Invariance; Distributive Justice; Bargaining Solution; Bargaining Problem; Nash Bargaining Solution;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Suppes-Sen dominance or SS-proofness (SSP) is a commonly accepted criterion of impartiality in distributive justice. Mariotti (Review of Economic Studies, 66, 733–741, 1999) characterized the Nash bargaining solution using Nash’s (Econometrica, 18, 155–162, 1950) scale invariance (SI) axiom and SSP. In this article, we introduce equity dominance (E-dominance). Using the intersection of SS-dominance and E-dominance requirements, we obtain a weaker version of SSP (WSSP). In addition, we consider α − SSP, where α measures the degree of minimum acceptable inequity aversion; α − SSP is weaker than weak Pareto optimality (WPO) when α = 1. We then show that it is still possible to characterize the Nash solution using WSSP and SI only or using α -SSP, SI, and individual rationality (IR) only for any \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\alpha \in [0,1)}$$\end{document}. Using the union of SS-dominance and E-dominance requirements, we obtain a stronger version of SSP (SSSP). It turns out that there is no bargaining solution that satisfies SSSP and SI, but the Egalitarian solution turns out to be the unique solution satisfying SSSP.
引用
收藏
页码:453 / 470
页数:17
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
Anbarci N(1993)Noncooperative foundations of the area monotonic solution Q J Econ 108 245-258
[2]  
Anbarci N(1995)Reference functions and balanced concessions in bargaining Can J Econ 28 675-682
[3]  
Anbarci N(1994)The area monotonic solution to the cooperative bargaining problem Math Soc Sci 28 133-142
[4]  
Bigelow J(1985)Game-theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud J Econ Theory 36 195-213
[5]  
Aumann RJ(1993)Non-dictatorial, Pareto-monotonic, cooperative bargaining: an impossibility theorem Eur J Political Econ 9 551-558
[6]  
Maschler MB(1988)The equal-loss principle for bargaining problems Econ Lett 26 103-106
[7]  
Bigelow J(1977)Proportional solutions to bargaining situations: interpersonal utility comparisons Econometrica 45 1623-1630
[8]  
Anbarci N(1975)Other solutions to Nash’s bargaining problem Econometrica 43 513-518
[9]  
Chun Y(1999)Fair bargains: distributive justice and Nash bargaining theory Rev Econ Stud 66 733-741
[10]  
Kalai E(1950)The bargaining problem Econometrica 18 155-162