A bargaining procedure leading to the serial rule in games with veto players

This paper studies an allocation procedure for coalitional games with veto players. The procedure is similar to the one presented by Arin and Feltkamp (J Math Econ 43:855-870, 2007), which is based on Dagan et al. (Games Econ Behav 18:55-72, 1997). A distinguished player makes a proposal that the remaining players must accept or reject, and conflict is solved bilaterally between the rejector and the proposer. We allow the proposer to make sequential proposals over several periods. If responders are myopic maximizers (i.e. consider each period in isolation), the only equilibrium outcome is the serial rule of Arin and Feltkamp (Eur J Oper Res 216:208-213, 2012) regardless of the order of moves. If all players are fully rational, the serial rule still arises as the unique subgame perfect equilibrium outcome if the order of moves is such that stronger players respond to the proposal after weaker ones

Cooperation, allocation and strategy in interactive decision-making

Game theory is the mathematical theory to analyze the behavior of rational decisionmakers in both cooperative and strategic interactive situations. It aims to resolve these situations by developing mathematical models and applying mathematical tools to provide insights in the interactive decision-making process. This dissertation studies the theoretical model of a transferable utility game with limited cooperation possibilities as well as altruistic equilibrium concepts for the model of a strategic game. Furthermore, this dissertation deals with several interactive allocation and operations research problems related to claims, sequencing and purchasing situations in which both cooperative and strategic approaches play a role

Metadata Schema x-econ Repository

Since May 2017, the x-hub project partners OVGU Magdeburg, University of Vienna, and GESIS dispose of a new repository, called x-econ (https://x-econ.org). The service is dedicated to all experimental economics research projects to disseminate user-friendly archiving and provision of experimental economics research data. The repository x-econ contains all necessary core functionalities of a modern repository and is in a continuous optimization process aiming at functionality enhancement and improvement. x-econ is also one pillar of the multidisciplinary repository x-science (https://x-science.org). The present documentation, which is primarily based on the GESIS Technical Reports on datorium 2014|03 and da|ra 4.0, lists and explains the metadata elements, used to describe research information

Sovereign risk: constitutions rule

This paper models the executive's choice of whether to reschedule external debt as the outcome of an intra-governmental negotiation process. The executive's necessity of a confidence vote from the legislature is found to provide the rationale for why some democracies may not renegotiate their foreign obligations. Empirically, parliamentary democracies are indeed less prone to reschedule their foreign liabilities or accumulate arrears on them. Most of the democracies that have been able to significantly reduce their debt/GNP ratio without a 'credit incident' were parliamentary. Moreover, countries with stronger political checks on the executive and lower executive turnover have a lower rescheduling propensity. These results suggest that North and Weingast's account of the evolution of institutions in 17th century England gives substantial mileage in understanding the international debt markets in the contemporary developing world

Herders in the budgetary commons : the fiscal policy consequences of multiparty government in the European Union

In contemporary political economy, it is often argued that multiparty government contributes to sustainability problems in the public economy. This is because parties have incentives to offer targeted policies to narrow-based voter groups while neglecting a large share of the costs associated with such policies. The structure of the situation is arguably similar to overconsumption and under-saving problems often encountered in the management of natural resources, which has given rise to the notion of the budgetary or fiscal common-pool problem. In this view, multiparty government is associated with increases in public spending, taxes and debt as well as persistent budget deficits; such phenomena becoming clearer as the number of parties in government grows. This work challenges the view by arguing that such problems are not inherent features of multiparty politics, but rather follow from the combination of multiparty decision making and the breakdown of programmatic linkages between voters and political parties. In particular, when corruption and other forms of favouritism and partiality are prevalent in the public sector, the credibility of programmatic goals and statements that parties make decreases. This creates room for non-programmatic, distributive objectives and hence encourages the exploitation of the tax base, which becomes visible in empirical associations between the number of government parties and fiscal policy aggregates. In contrast, impartial and efficient state institutions make it possible to present and implement programmes with far-reaching and universalistic implications, whereby the programmatic stances rather than the number of government parties explain policy outcomes. This makes it possible to manage the ‘budgetary commons’ in a sustainable way. These arguments are tested on data that covers the current 28 member states (as of 2017) of the European Union from the early 1970s or mid-1990s to 2012. The results are largely in line with the expectations, although the effects of political variables differ somewhat between the post-communist member states and the rest. The number of parties in government explains fiscal policy outcomes mainly in those post-communist countries where favouritism and partiality in the use of state authority are most prevalent. However, in the post-communist area these effects disappear when state institutions are more impartial, whereby the effects of variables capturing programmatic aspects of politics have explanatory power. Outside the post-communist area, political variables generally have little effect on fiscal policy aggregates, especially since the early 1990s. However, in that group of countries, those countries with most impartial state institutions have been most likely to adopt stringent and encompassing fiscal rules.  Nykyisessä poliittisen talouden tutkimuksessa on tavallista väittää, että monipuoluehallinto on omiaan johtamaan julkistalouden kestävyysongelmiin. Tämä johtuu siitä, että puolueilla on kannustimia tarjota kohdennettuja etuja kapeapohjaisille äänestäjäryhmille ja jättää suuri osa toimenpiteiden kustannuksista huomiotta. Rakenteeltaan tilanteen väitetään usein muistuttavan luonnonvarojen hallinnassa usein ilmeneviä ylikulutus- ja alisäästämisongelmia. Siksi budjettiyhteisvaranto-ongelman käsite on tullut suosituksi. Tämän näkemyksen mukaan monipuoluehallinto on yhteydessä julkisten menojen, verotuksen ja velan kasvuun sekä sitkeisiin alijäämiin siten, että nämä ilmiöt käyvät sitä voimakkaammiksi, mitä suurempi määrä puolueita on jakamassa hallitusvaltaa. Tämän tutkimuksen mukaan edellä mainitut ilmiöt eivät ole monipuoluehallinnon välttämättömiä seurauksia. Pikemminkin ne seuraavat siitä, että monipuoluepolitiikkaa tehdään äänestäjien ja puolueiden välisten ohjelmallisten yhteyksien ollessa heikkoja tai puuttuessa kokonaan. Erityisesti korruption ja muiden puolueellisuuden muotojen ollessa julkisella sektorilla yleisiä puolueiden esittämien ohjelmallisten tavoitteiden ja väittämien uskottavuus heikkenee. Tämä luo tilaa ei-ohjelmallisille jakopoliittisille motiiveille ja kannustaa käyttämään veropohjaa jakopoliittisten resurssien lähteenä, mikä ilmenee hallituspuolueiden lukumäärän ja julkistaloudellisten muuttujien välisinä empiirisinä yhteyksinä. Puolueettomat ja tehokkaat valtioinstituutiot sen sijaan mahdollistavat laajojen ja pitkävaikutteisten ohjelmien esittämisen ja toimeenpanemisen, jolloin puolueiden esittämät ohjelmalliset linjat, hallituspuolueiden lukumäärän sijaan, selittävät politiikan lopputuloksia. Näitä väittämiä testataan aineistolla, joka kattaa Euroopan unionin nykyiset 28 jäsenmaata (vuoden 2017 tilanteen mukaan) 1970-luvun alusta tai 1990-luvun puolivälistä vuoteen 2012. Tulokset ovat pitkälti odotusten mukaisia, joskin poliittisten muuttujien vaikutukset poikkeavat toisistaan jälkikommunistisissa ja muissa jäsenmaissa. Hallituspuolueiden lukumäärä selittää julkistaloudellisia lopputuloksia lähinnä niissä jälkikommunistisissa maissa, joissa puolueellisuus julkisen vallan käytössä on kaikkein yleisintä. Jälkikommunistisella alueella nämä ilmiöt kuitenkin häviävät valtioinstituutioiden käydessä puolueettomammiksi, jolloin politiikan ohjelmallisia puolia kuvaavat muuttujat saavat selitysvoimaa. Jälkikommunistisen alueen ulkopuolella poliittisilla muuttujilla on vain vähän vaikutusta julkistaloudellisiin mittareihin erityisesti tarkasteltaessa 1990-luvun alun jälkeistä ajanjaksoa. Kuitenkin jälkikommunistisen alueen ulkopuolisista maista ne, joiden valtioinstituutiot ovat kaikkein puolueettomimmat, ovat todennäköisimmin ottaneet käyttöön vahvoja ja kattavia budjetointisääntöjä

Interactive operational decision making:Purchasing situations & mutual liability problems

Three chapters of this dissertation deal with three different types of interactive purchasing situations, in which multiple buying organizations interact with similar (or possibly the same) suppliers for the procurement of the same commodity. Decisions to be made in interactive purchasing concern if and how to cooperate with other buying organizations. If so, one has to tackle the important question of how to allocate possible cost savings. And if not, how to interact with the supplier(s) on an individual strategic level, while taking into account the strategic behavior of the other purchasers

Trading Interests: Domestic Institutions, International Negotiations, and the Politics of Trade.

This dissertation addresses the relationship between domestic and international institutions in the context of the politics of trade. The dissertation identifies specific instances of how international institutions modify the effects of domestic institutions, and it shows how domestic institutions affect government behavior in international institutions. The first chapter focuses on the domestic politics of trade. A prominent literature argues that electoral institutions favoring narrow interest groups result in higher average tariff rates. The chapter argues that this literature has largely ignored the role of exporter interests and shows that, in the presence of trade agreements, this omission results in a biased understanding of trade politics. The second chapter expands on these issues, turning to electoral campaigns. Narrow interest institutions are not only associated with more support for protectionist trade policies in campaign statements, as would be expected from standard accounts, but also with more support for free trade. The finding further underscores the contemporaneous influence of protectionist and free trade interest groups in trade politics. The third chapter turns to government behavior in international institutions. It shows that domestic institutions can provide an explanation for differences in government engagement with dispute settlement procedures. Governments under institutions that are more prone to support narrow interest groups are more active in filing trade disputes against other governments. The final chapter addresses the question of why many international agreements lack strong enforcement and commitment mechanisms, even where agreements are used as hands-tying mechanisms by governments. The chapter emphasizes an incompatibility between institutions that tie the hands of governments, and thereby lock in policies, and international cooperation that is driven by domestic pro-cooperation groups. Agreements which lock in policies take an issue off the table, such that a government can no longer leverage it in political campaigns. Anticipating this, governments may be reluctant to lock in policies through international agreements.PhDPolitical ScienceUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/111475/1/timmbetz_1.pd