×

Legislative bargaining with heterogeneous disagreement values: theory and experiments. (English) Zbl 1393.91092

Summary: We study a legislative bargaining game in which failure to agree in a given round may result in a breakdown of negotiations. In that case, each player receives an exogenous ‘disagreement value’. We characterize the set of stationary subgame perfect equilibria under all q-majority rules. Under unanimity rule, equilibrium payoffs are strictly increasing in disagreement values. Under all less-than-unanimity rules, expected payoffs are either decreasing or first increasing and then decreasing in disagreement values. We conduct experiments involving three players using majority and unanimity rule, finding qualitative support for several, but not all, of our main predictions. Having a high disagreement value is indeed an advantage under unanimity rule. Under majority rule, the player with the highest disagreement value is more likely to be excluded, but this does not consistently result in a lower average payoff.

MSC:

91B26 Auctions, bargaining, bidding and selling, and other market models
91A12 Cooperative games
91A90 Experimental studies

Software:

signrankex; Z-Tree; Stata

References:

[1] Agranov, M.; Tergiman, C., Communication in multilateral bargaining, J. Public Econ., 118, 75-85 (2014)
[2] Agranov, M., Tergiman, C., 2016. Communication and voting rules in bargaining games. Unpublished manuscript.; Agranov, M., Tergiman, C., 2016. Communication and voting rules in bargaining games. Unpublished manuscript.
[3] Anbarci, N.; Feltovich, N., How sensitive are bargaining outcomes to changes in disagreement payoffs?, Exper. Econ., 16, 560-596 (2013)
[4] Banks, J. S.; Duggan, J., A general bargaining model of legislative policy-making, Q. J. Polit. Sci., 1, 49-85 (2006)
[5] Baranski, A., 2016. Pre-distribution: Bargaining over incentives with endogenous production. Unpublished Manuscript.; Baranski, A., 2016. Pre-distribution: Bargaining over incentives with endogenous production. Unpublished Manuscript.
[6] Baron, D. P.; Ferejohn, J. A., Bargaining in legislatures, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 83, 1181-1206 (1989)
[7] Battaglini, M.; Palfrey, T., The dynamics of redistributive politics, Econ. Theory, 49, 739-777 (2012) · Zbl 1277.91045
[8] Battaglini, M.; Nunnari, S.; Palfrey, T. R., Legislative bargaining and the dynamics of public investment, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 106, 407-429 (2012)
[9] Binmore, K., Perfect equilibria in bargaining models, (Binmore, K.; Dasgupta, P., The Economics of Bargaining (1987), Blackwell: Blackwell Oxford)
[10] Binmore, K.; Rubinstein, A.; Wolinsky, A., The Nash bargaining solution in economic modelling, RAND J. Econ., 17, 176-188 (1986)
[11] Bradfield, A. J.; Kagel, J. H., Legislative bargaining with teams, Games Econ. Behav., 93, 117-127 (2015) · Zbl 1347.91152
[12] Buchanan, J.; Tullock, G., The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy (1962), University of Michigan Press: University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor, MI
[13] Christiansen, N., Greasing the wheels: pork and public goods contributions in a legislative bargaining experiment, J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 120, 64-79 (2015)
[14] Christiansen, N.; Georganas, S.; Kagel, J. H., Coalition formation in a legislative voting game, Am. Econ. J. Microecon., 6, 182-204 (2013)
[15] Diermeier, D.; Gailmard, S., Self-interest, inequality and entitlement in majoritarian decision-making, Q. J. Polit. Sci., 1, 327-350 (2006)
[16] Diermeier, D.; Morton, R., Proportionality versus perfectness: experiments in majoritarian bargaining, (Austen-Smith, David; Duggan, John, Social Choice and Strategic Behavior: Essays in the Honor of Jeffrey S. Banks (2005), Springer: Springer Berlin) · Zbl 1255.91146
[17] Drouvelis, M.; Montero, M.; Sefton, M., Gaining power through enlargement: strategic foundations and experimental evidence, Games Econ. Behav., 69, 274-292 (2010) · Zbl 1230.91024
[18] Eraslan, H., Uniqueness of stationary equilibrium payoffs in the Baron-Ferejohn model, J. Econ. Theory, 103, 11-30 (2002) · Zbl 1051.91009
[19] Eraslan, H.; McLennan, A., Uniqueness of stationary equilibrium payoffs in coalitional bargaining, J. Econ. Theory, 148, 2195-2222 (2013) · Zbl 1284.91031
[20] Fischbacher, U., z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments, Exper. Econ., 10, 171-178 (2007)
[21] Fréchette, G. R.; Kagel, J. H.; Lehrer, S. F., Bargaining in legislatures: an experimental investigation of open versus closed amendment rules, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 97, 221-232 (2003)
[22] Fréchette, G. R.; Kagel, J. H.; Morelli, M., Nominal bargaining power, selection protocol and discounting in legislative bargaining, J. Public Econ., 89, 1497-1517 (2005)
[23] Fréchette, G. R.; Kagel, J. H.; Morelli, M., Gamson’s law versus non-cooperative bargaining theory, Games Econ. Behav., 51, 365-390 (2005) · Zbl 1090.91506
[24] Fréchette, G. R.; Kagel, J. H.; Morelli, M., Behavioral identification in coalitional bargaining: an experimental analysis of demand bargaining and alternating offers, Econometrica, 73, 1893-1937 (2005) · Zbl 1152.91459
[25] Fréchette, G. R.; Kagel, J. H.; Morelli, M., Pork versus public goods: an experimental study of public good provision within a legislative bargaining framework, Econ. Theory, 49, 779-800 (2012) · Zbl 1277.91033
[26] Harris, T.; Hardin, J. W., Exact Wilcoxon signed-rank and Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney ranksum tests, Stata J., 13, 2, 337-343 (2013)
[27] Harstad, B., Strategic delegation and voting rules, J. Public Econ., 94, 102-113 (2010)
[28] Herings, P. J.J.; Meshalkin, A.; Predtetchinski, A., A one-period memory folk theorem for multilateral bargaining games, Games Econ. Behav., 103, 185-198 (2017) · Zbl 1393.91083
[29] Jackson, M.; Moselle, B., Coalition and party formation in a legislative voting game, J. Econ. Theory, 103, 49-87 (2002) · Zbl 1012.91004
[30] Kagel, J. H.; Sung, H.; Winter, E., Veto power in committees: an experimental study, Exper. Econ., 13, 167-188 (2010) · Zbl 1231.91056
[31] Kalandrakis, T., A three-player dynamic majoritarian bargaining game, J. Econ. Theory, 116, 294-322 (2004) · Zbl 1106.91018
[32] Kalandrakis, T., Computation of equilibrium values in the Baron and Ferejohn bargaining model, Games Econ. Behav., 94, 29-38 (2015) · Zbl 1347.91157
[33] Kawamori, T., Players’ patience and equilibrium payoffs in the Baron-Ferejohn model, Econ. Bull., 3, 1-7 (2005)
[34] McKelvey, R. D., An experimental test of a stochastic game model of committee bargaining, (Palfrey, Thomas R., Contemporary Laboratory Research in Political Economy (1991), University of Michigan Press: University of Michigan Press Ann Arbor)
[35] Miller, L.; Vanberg, C., Decision costs in legislative bargaining: an experimental analysis, Public Choice, 154, 373-394 (2013)
[36] Miller, L.; Vanberg, C., Group size and decision rules in legislative bargaining, Europ. J. Polit. Economy, 37, 288-302 (2015)
[37] Miller, L.; Montero, M.; Vanberg, C., Legislative bargaining with heterogeneous disagreement values (2015), Available at SSRN:
[38] Montero, M., Inequity aversion may increase inequity, Econ. J., 117, C192-C204 (2007)
[39] Norman, P., Legislative bargaining and coalition formation, J. Econ. Theory, 102, 322-353 (2002) · Zbl 1039.91005
[40] Nunnari, S.; Zapal, J., Gambler’s fallacy and imperfect best response in legislative bargaining, Games Econ. Behav., 99, 275-294 (2016) · Zbl 1394.91084
[41] Ochs, J.; Roth, A., An experimental study of sequential bargaining, Amer. Econ. Rev., 79, 355-384 (1989)
[42] Okada, A., A noncooperative coalitional bargaining game with random proposers, Games Econ. Behav., 16, 97-108 (1996) · Zbl 0873.90125
[43] Rubinstein, A., Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model, Econometrica, 50, 97-108 (1982) · Zbl 0474.90092
[44] Volden, C.; Wiseman, A. E., Bargaining in legislatures over particularistic and collective goods, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 101, 79-92 (2007)
[45] Volden, C.; Wiseman, A. E., Erratum to “Bargaining in legislatures over particularistic and collective goods”, Amer. Polit. Sci. Rev., 102, 385-386 (2008)
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.