×

Coalition formation in the presence of continuing conflict. (English) Zbl 1211.91049

Summary: This paper studies endogenous coalition formation in a rivalry environment where continuing conflict exists. A group of heterogeneous players compete for a prize with the probability of winning for a player depending on his strength as well as the distribution of strengths among his rivals. Players can pool their strengths together to increase their probabilities of winning as a group through coalition formation. The players in the winning coalition will compete further until one individual winner is left. We show that in any equilibrium there are only two coalitions in the initial stage of the contest. In the case of three players, the equilibrium often has a coalition of the two weaker players against the strongest. The equilibrium coalition structure with four players mainly takes one of the two forms: a coalition of the three weaker players against the strongest or a coalition of the weakest and strongest players against a coalition of the remaining two. Our findings imply that the rivalry with the possibility of coalition formation in our model exhibits a pattern of two-sidedness and a balance of power. We further study the impact of binding agreements by coalition members on equilibrium coalition structures. Our analysis sheds some light on problems of temporary cooperation among individuals who are rivals by nature.

MSC:

91A12 Cooperative games
91A40 Other game-theoretic models
91A60 Probabilistic games; gambling
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Alesina A, Spolaore E (2006) Conflict, defense spending and the number of nations. Eur Econ Rev 50: 91–120 · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2004.06.003
[2] Bloch F (1995) Endogenous structures of association in oligopolies. RAND J Econ 26: 537–556 · doi:10.2307/2556002
[3] Bloch F (1996) Sequential formation of coalitions in games with externalities and fixed payoff division. Games Econ Behav 14: 90–123 · Zbl 0862.90143 · doi:10.1006/game.1996.0043
[4] Bloch F, Sanchez-Pages S, Soubeyran R (2006) When does universal peace prevail? Secession and group formation in conflict. Econ Gov 7: 3–29 · doi:10.1007/s10101-005-0099-9
[5] Esteban J, Ray D (1999) Conflict and distribution. J Econ Theory 87: 379–415 · Zbl 0960.91023 · doi:10.1006/jeth.1999.2549
[6] Esteban J, Ray D (2001) Collective action and the group size paradox. Am Political Sci Rev 95: 663–672 · doi:10.1017/S0003055401003124
[7] Esteban J, Sakovics J (2003) Olson vs. coase: coalitional worth in conflict. Theory Decis 55: 339–357 · Zbl 1111.91303 · doi:10.1023/B:THEO.0000047490.12475.03
[8] Garfinkel M, Skaperdas S (2007) Economics of conflict: an overview. In: Sandler T, Hartley K (eds) Handbook of defense economics, vol II. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 649–709
[9] Grossman H, Kim M (1995) Swords or plowshares? A theory of the security of claims to property. J Political Econ 103: 1275–1288 · doi:10.1086/601453
[10] Hirshleifer J (1988) The analytics of continuing conflict. Synthese 76: 201–233 · doi:10.1007/BF00869589
[11] Hirshleifer J (1991) The technology of conflict as an economic activity. Am Econ Rev 81: 130–134
[12] Hirshleifer J (1995) Anarchy and its breakdown. J Political Econ 103: 26–52 · doi:10.1086/261974
[13] Moulin H (1987) Equal or proportional division of a surplus, and other methods. Int J Game Theory 16: 161–186 · Zbl 0631.90093 · doi:10.1007/BF01756289
[14] Neary H (1997a) A comparison of rent-seeking models and economic models of conflict. Public Choice 93: 373–388 · doi:10.1023/A:1017901524758
[15] Neary H (1997b) Equilibrium structure in an economic model of conflict. Econ Inquiry 35: 480–494 · doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1997.tb02026.x
[16] Niou E, Tan G (1997) A theory of alliance formation. Duke University and University of British Columbia, Mimeo
[17] Niou E, Tan G (2005) External threat and collective action. Econ Inquiry 43: 519–530 · doi:10.1093/ei/cbi035
[18] Noh SJ (2002) Resource distribution and stable alliances with endogenous sharing rules. Eur J Political Econ 18: 129–151 · doi:10.1016/S0176-2680(01)00072-6
[19] Olson M, Zeckhauser R (1966) An economic theory of alliances. Rev Econ Stat 48: 266–279 · doi:10.2307/1927082
[20] Perez-Castrillo JD, Verdier T (1992) A general analysis of rent-seeking games. Public Choice 73: 335–350 · doi:10.1007/BF00140926
[21] Ray D, Vohra R (1999) A theory of endogenous coalition structure. Games Econ Behav 26: 286–336 · Zbl 0918.90146 · doi:10.1006/game.1998.0648
[22] Rubinstein A (1982) Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica 50: 97–109 · Zbl 0474.90092 · doi:10.2307/1912531
[23] Sanchez-Pages S (2007a) Rivalry, exclusion and coalitions. J Public Econ Theory 9: 809–830 · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9779.2007.00333.x
[24] Sanchez-Pages S (2007b) Endogenous coalition formation in contests. Rev Econ Des 11: 139–163 · Zbl 1274.91054
[25] Sandler T (1993) The economic theory of alliances: a survey. J Confl Res 37: 446–483 · doi:10.1177/0022002793037003003
[26] Skaperdas S (1992) Cooperation, conflict, and power in the absence of property rights. Am Econ Rev 82: 720–739
[27] Skaperdas S (1996) Contest success functions. Econ Theory 7: 283–290 · Zbl 0852.90137
[28] Skaperdas S (1998) On the formation of alliances in conflict and contest. Public Choice 96: 25–42 · doi:10.1023/A:1004912124496
[29] Wagner RH (2004) Bargaining, war, and alliances. Confl Manag Peace Sci 21: 215–231 · doi:10.1080/07388940490487270
[30] Yi SS (1996) Endogenous formation of customs unions under imperfect competition: open regionalism is good. J Int Econ 41: 153–177 · doi:10.1016/S0022-1996(96)01429-8
[31] Yi SS (1997) Stable coalition structures with externalities. Games Econ Behav 20: 201–237 · Zbl 0894.90186 · doi:10.1006/game.1997.0567
[32] Yi SS (1998) Endogenous formation of joint ventures with efficiency gains. RAND J Econ 29: 610–631 · doi:10.2307/2556107
[33] Yi SS (1999) Entry, licensing and research joint ventures. Int J Indust Organ 17: 1–24 · doi:10.1016/S0167-7187(97)00021-0
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.