Feasible sets, comparative risk aversion, and comparative uncertainty aversion in bargaining. (English) Zbl 1368.91107

Driesen, Bram; Lombardi, Michele; Peters, Hans

J. Math. Econ. 67, 162-170 (2016).

Summary: We study feasible sets of the bargaining problem under two different assumptions: the players are subjective expected utility maximizers or the players are Choquet expected utility maximizers. For the latter case, we consider the effects on bargaining solutions when players become more risk averse and when they become more uncertainty averse.

MSC:

91B26	Auctions, bargaining, bidding and selling, and other market models
91B16	Utility theory

Keywords:

subjective expected utility; Choquet expected utility; comparative risk aversion; comparative uncertainty aversion; bargaining

References:

[1]	Ellsberg, D., Risk, ambiguity, and savage axioms, Quart. J. Econ., 75, 643-669, (1961) · Zbl 1280.91045
[2]	Ghirardato, P.; Marinacci, M., Ambiguity made precise: a comparative foundation, J. Econom. Theory, 102, 251-289, (2002) · Zbl 1019.91015
[3]	Kalai, E., Proportional solutions to bargaining situations: interpersonal utility comparisons, Econometrica, 45, 1623-1630, (1977) · Zbl 0371.90135
[4]	Kalai, E.; Smorodinsky, M., Other solutions to nash’s bargaining problem, Econometrica, 43, 513-518, (1975) · Zbl 0308.90053
[5]	Kannai, Y., Concavifiability and constructions of concave utility functions, J. Math. Econom., 4, 1-56, (1977) · Zbl 0361.90008
[6]	Kihlstrom, R. E.; Roth, A. E.; Schmeidler, D., Risk aversion and solutions to nash’s bargaining problem, (Moeschlin, O.; Pallaschke, D., Game Theory and Mathematical Economics, (1981), North Holland Amsterdam) · Zbl 0481.90098
[7]	Köbberling, V.; Peters, H., The effect of decision weights in bargaining problems, J. Econom. Theory, 110, 154-175, (2003) · Zbl 1045.91016
[8]	Nash, J. F., The bargaining problem, Econometrica, 18, 155-162, (1950) · Zbl 1202.91122
[9]	Peters, H., A criterion for comparing strength of preference, with an application to bargaining, Oper. Res., 40, 1018-1022, (1992) · Zbl 0758.90004
[10]	Quiggin, J., A theory of anticipated utility, J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 3, 324-344, (1982)
[11]	Raiffa, H., Arbitration schemes for generalized two-person games, Ann. Math. Stud., 28, 361-387, (1953) · Zbl 0050.14501
[12]	Roth, A. E.; Rothblum, U. G., Risk aversion and nash’s solution for bargaining games with risky outcomes, Econometrica, 50, 639-647, (1982) · Zbl 0478.90090
[13]	Rubinstein, A.; Safra, Z.; Thomson, W., On the interpretation of the Nash bargaining solution and its extension to non-expected utility preferences, Econometrica, 60, 1171-1186, (1992) · Zbl 0767.90094
[14]	Safra, S.; Zilcha, I., Bargaining solutions without the expected utility hypothesis, Games Econom. Behav., 5, 288-306, (1993) · Zbl 0776.90094
[15]	Safra, Z.; Zhou, L.; Zilcha, I., Risk aversion in the Nash bargaining problem with risky outcomes and risky disagreement points, Econometrica, 58, 961-965, (1990) · Zbl 0747.90116
[16]	Savage, L. J., Foundations of statistics, (1954), Wiley New York · Zbl 0121.13603
[17]	Schmeidler, D., Integral representation without additivity, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 97, 255-261, (1986) · Zbl 0687.28008
[18]	Schmeidler, D., Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity, Econometrica, 57, 571-587, (1989) · Zbl 0672.90011
[19]	Siniscalchi, M., Ambiguity and ambiguity aversion, (Durlauf, Steven N.; Blume, Lawrence E., The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, (2008), Palgrave Macmillan)
[20]	Volij, O.; Winter, E., On risk aversion and bargaining outcomes, Games Econom. Behav., 41, 120-140, (2002) · Zbl 1046.91075
[21]	Wakker, P.; Peters, H.; van Riel, T., Comparisons of risk aversion, with an application to bargaining, Methods Oper. Res., 54, 307-320, (1986) · Zbl 0601.90004
[22]	Yaari, M. E., Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses, J. Econom. Theory, 1, 315-329, (1969)
[23]	Yaari, M. E., The dual theory of choice under risk, Econometrica, 55, 95-115, (1987) · Zbl 0616.90005