THE THREE MUSKETEERS: FOUR CLASSICAL SOLUTIONS TO BANKRUPTCY PROBLEMS

This paper provides a comparative analysis of some classical solutions to bankruptcy problems from an axiomatic viewpoint. These rules are the constrained equal-awards rule, the constrained equal-losses rule, the proportional rule and the Talmud rule. The purpose of this study is to facilitate the understanding of their differences and to clarify the type of situations in which each of these rules is better.Bankruptcy problems, proportional solution, equal-awards solution

Generalized rationing problems and solutions

An extension of the standard rationing model is introduced. Agents are not only identified by their respective claims on some amount of a scarce resource, but also by some exogenous ex-ante conditions (initial stock of resource or net worth of agents, for instance), different from claims. Within this framework, we define a generalization of the constrained equal awards rule. We provide two different characterizations of this generalized rule. Finally, we use the corresponding dual properties to characterize a generalization of the constrained equal losses rule

EGALITARIAN RULES IN CLAIMS PROBLEMS WITH INDIVISIBLE GOODS

In this work we deal with rationing problems. In particular with claims problems with indivisible goods, that is, problems in which a certain amount of indivisible units (of an homogeneous good), has to be distributed among a group of agents, when this amount is not enough to satisfy agents' demands. We define discrete rules to solve those problems that involve notions of fairness similar to those supporting the constrained-equal awards and the constrained-equal losses rules in the continuous case. Axiomatic characterizations of those solutions are provided.indivisible goods, claims problems, equal awards solution, equal losses solution.

Rationing problems with ex-ante conditions

An extension of the standard rationing model is introduced. Agents are not only identified by their respective claims to some amount of a scarce resource, but also by some exogenous ex-ante conditions (initial stock of resource or net worth of agents, for instance), other than claims. Within this framework,we define a generalization of the constrained equal awards rule and provide two different characterizations of this generalized rule. Finally, we use the corresponding dual properties to characterize a generalization of the constrained equal losses rule

How to Cope with Division Problems under Interval Uncertainty of Claims?

The paper deals with division situations where individual claims can vary within closed intervals.Uncertainty of claims is removed by compromising in a consistent way the upper and lower bounds of the claim intervals.Deterministic division problems with compromise claims are then considered and classical division rules from the bankruptcy literature are used to generate several procedures leading to e .cient and reasonable rules for division problems under interval uncertainty of claims.uncertainty;claims;division problems

Strong composition down. Characterizations of new and classical bankruptcy rules.

This paper is devoted to the study of claims problems. We identify the family of rules that satisfy strong composition down (robustness with respect to reevaluations of the estate) and consistency (robustness with respect to changes in the set of agents) together. Such a family is the Þxed path rules, which is a generalization of the weighted constrained equal awards rules. In addition, once strong composition down and consistency are combined with homogeneity only the weighted constrained equal awards rules survive. We also prove that the constrained equal awards rule is the only rule that satisÞes strong composition down, consistency and equal treatment of equals together.strong composition down, Þxed path rules, constrained equal awards rule, weighted constrained equal awards rules

The Reverse Talmud Rule for Bankruptcy Problems

Most TI discussion papers can be downloaded a

Distributive Concerns in the Bankruptcy Problem with an Endogenous Estate

We compare certain bankruptcy rules in a bankruptcy model with an endogenous estate on the basis of normative criteria. In particular, five properties related to distributive concerns are analyzed: minimal rights first, securement of initial investments, initial investments first, reasonable lower bounds on awards, and reasonable lower bounds on losses. The proportional rule receives the strongest support from this normative analysis among the rules considered. We also observe that the performance of the proportional rule improves in the family of bankruptcy problems with endogenous estates compared to the general set of bankruptcy problems. Our results complement those in Karagozoglu (2008) and provide a broader perspective to bankruptcy problems with endogenous estates.public economics ;

Bargaining with Independence of Higher or Irrelevant Claims

This paper studies independence of higher claims and independence of irrelevant claims on the domain of bargaining problems with claims. Independence of higher claims requires that the payoff of an agent does not depend on the higher claim of another agent. Independence of irrelevant claims states that the payoffs should not change when the claims decrease but remain higher than the payoffs. Interestingly, in conjunction with standard axioms from bargaining theory, these properties characterize a new constrained Nash solution, a constrained Kalai-Smorodinsky solution, and a constrained Kalai solution