Skip to main content

Equilibrium Patterns for Bargaining Under Strike: A Differential Game Model

  • Chapter
Directions in Large-Scale Systems

Abstract

A class of N-person, general-sum differential games is considered for which non-cooperative Nash equilibria can characterize situations such as bargaining during a strike. A subclass of strategies is shown to be playable equilibria. The existence and uniqueness of this subclass, as well as the possibility of profitable re-contracting, are analyzed and illustrated with examples. Equilibrium implies that any player will eventually fare as well as if he had accepted the claim of all other players at any earlier time. Possible generalizations are outlined or discussed.

S. Clemhout and H. Wan, Jr. acknowledge beneficial discussions during the Spring of 1970 with P. Varaiya concerning a four-party bargaining model. They are also grateful for helpful suggestions by J. Harsanyi and R. Selten. Special thanks are due to Dean R. B. McKersie for stimulating exchanges of ideas. This research has been supported by the National Science Foundation (GP-24205) and the Office of Naval Research (N00014-69-A-0200-1012).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bishop, R. L., “A Zeuthen-Hicks Theory of Bargaining,” Econometrica 32, 1964, 410–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Case, J., “Applications of the Theory of Differential Games to Economic Problems,” in Kuhn, H.W. and G.P. Szego eds. Differential Games and Related Topics, New York, Elsevier, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Clemhout, S., G. Leitmann and H. Y. Wan, Jr., “A Differential Game Model of Duopoly,” Econometrica, Vol. 39, No. 6, November 1971, 911–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Clemhout, S. and H. Y. Wan, Jr., “A Class of Trilinear Games,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Application, 14, 4, October 1974, 419–24.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Coddington, A., Theories of the Bargaining Process, Chicago, Aldine Publishing Co., 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cross, J.G., “A Theory of the Bargaining Process,” American Economic Review, 55, 1965, 67–94.

    Google Scholar 

  7. de Menil, G., Bargaining: Monopoly Power Versus Union Power, Cambridge, MIT Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dussaix, A. and A. Haurie, “Un Modèle Dynamique de Négociation Sous Forme d’un Jeu Semi-Différentiel,” Rapport de Recherche No. 5, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales, Montreal, September 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fouraker, L. E. and S. Siegel, Bargaining Behavior, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harsanyi, J.C. and R. Selten, “A Generalized Nash Solution for Two-Person Bargaining Games with Incomplete Information,” Working Paper no. 285, Center for Research in Management Science, University of California, Berkeley, October 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harsanyi, J.C., “Approaches to the Bargaining Problem before and after the Theory of Games,” Econometrica, 24, 1956, 144–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Harsanyi, J.C., “Bargaining in Ignorance of the Opponent’s Utility Function,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 6, 1962, 144–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Leitmann, G. and P. T. Liu, “Collective Bargaining: A Differential Game,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 13, 4, April 1974, 427–435 and 14, 4, October 1974, 443–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Luce, R. D. and H. Raiffa, Games and Decisions, New York, Wiley, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nash, J., “Non-Cooperative Games,” Annals of Mathematics, 54, 2, September 1951, 286–95.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nash, J., “The Bargaining Problem,” Econometrica, 18, 1950, 155–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rapoport, A., N-Person Game Theory, Concepts and Applications, Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Siegel, S. and L. E. Fouraker, Bargaining and Group Decision Making, Experiments in Bilateral Monopoly, New York, McGraw- Hill Book Co., 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Walton, R.E. and R. B. McKersie, A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Clemhout, S., G. Leitmann and H. Y. Wan, Jr., “Bargaining under Strike: A Differential Game View,” Journal of Economic Theory, 11, 1, August 1975, 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Basar, T., “A Counterexample in Linear Quadratic Games: Existence of Nonlinear Nash Solutions,” Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 14, 4, October 1974, 425–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1976 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clemhout, S., Leitmann, G., Wan, H.Y. (1976). Equilibrium Patterns for Bargaining Under Strike: A Differential Game Model. In: Ho, Y.C., Mitter, S.K. (eds) Directions in Large-Scale Systems. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2259-7_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2259-7_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-2261-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-2259-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics