A Coalitional Game-Theoretic Model of Stable Government Forms with Umpires

In this paper a government form is modeled as an effectivity function scheme (EFS) i.e. a parameterized family of effectivity functions having admissible (strong) weight-profiles as the relevant parameters. Working in a 2-jurisdiction outcome space we show that the existence of umpires is consistent with strong core-stability of a neo-parliamentary or mixed semi-presidential government form provided that the majority formation rule is collegial.

Supply chain collaboration

In the past, research in operations management focused on single-firm analysis. Its goal was to provide managers in practice with suitable tools to improve the performance of their firm by calculating optimal inventory quantities, among others. Nowadays, business decisions are dominated by the globalization of markets and increased competition among firms. Further, more and more products reach the customer through supply chains that are composed of independent firms. Following these trends, research in operations management has shifted its focus from single-firm analysis to multi-firm analysis, in particular to improving the efficiency and performance of supply chains under decentralized control. The main characteristics of such chains are that the firms in the chain are independent actors who try to optimize their individual objectives, and that the decisions taken by a firm do also affect the performance of the other parties in the supply chain. These interactions among firms’ decisions ask for alignment and coordination of actions. Therefore, game theory, the study of situations of cooperation or conflict among heterogenous actors, is very well suited to deal with these interactions. This has been recognized by researchers in the field, since there are an ever increasing number of papers that applies tools, methods and models from game theory to supply chain problems

The role of electoral and party systems in the development of fiscal institutions in the Central and Eastern European countries

The literature on fiscal institutions has established a connection between the design of fiscal institutions and a country’s political fundamentals. The paper includes a review of the party and electoral systems in the Central and Eastern European countries (the CEECs) and then reaches conclusions on what modes of fiscal governance (“commitment”, “delegation”, “fiefdom”) these countries should have developed based on their political fundamentals. Two major conclusions stand out. First, all of the countries have multi-dimensional social cleavage space which, together with the dominance of proportional electoral systems, suggests diverse party systems. This is a recipe for multi-party governments. Indeed, coalition governments have been dominant in the CEECs suggesting in turn that the majority of these countries should be leaning towards commitment approach. Second, the collapse of communism and consequent social changes led rather unsurprisingly to a certain political turmoil. This was evident especially during the first half of the 1990s. Some countries were affected more than others. Party structures have been in a constant change and reforms in the electoral laws have not been uncommon resulting in some countries to frequent shifts between different government types. This suggests that these countries have not been able to develop a coherent way to tackle the common pool resource problem. The reality largely confirms these expectations. The results therefore indicate that no “onesize- fits-all” solutions exist in fiscal management. Consequently, the design of such institutions should pay due attention to the political factors, alongside with the economic ones. The results indicate further that a certain degree of political stability is a prerequisite for stable fiscal conditions. --

Does Devolution make a difference? A comparison of party-group interaction in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.

Significant research has been dedicated to the question what roles members of parliament play within an assembly and how they shape them individually. (e.g. Searing 1994, Patzelt 1995, 1997, Müller et al 2001). Findings show that some differences in parliamentarians’ roles and behaviour are tied to the party’s status in parliament. However, most of the analyses in this field (exception: Müller et al 2001) do not consider how these characteristics are linked with the overall appearance of particular parliamentary party groups (PPGs) and their political strategies. Research conducted on the Bavarian Parliament (Steinack 2007 a, b) shows significant differences in PPGs’ strategies that relate to the MPs’ socio-demographic background and the party groups’ history and discussion culture. Based on preliminary results of an ongoing research project, the paper outlines how structural differences between parliamentary party groups in the devolved assemblies in Scotland and Wales shape strategies and political styles of their representatives. Interviews with members and clerks of the assemblies illustrate the findings

Can Social Externalities Solve the Small Coalitions Puzzle in International Environmental Agreements?

A puzzle in the literature on the formation of coalitions supporting International Environmental Agreements (IEAs) is that if an IEA leads to substantial gains, then it will not be supported by many countries. The non-cooperative game theoretic literature highlights the “small coalitions†puzzle by which only a small number of countries are willing to sign an environmental convention. In these models, a global coalition comprising all countries and generating significant benefits is not sustainable. Moreover they indicate that greater the number of countries in the coalition, higher the incentive of signatories to not respect their engagement. The present paper resolves this puzzle by introducing social externalities, in order to explain why some treaties can be sustained by nearly all countries, while others can be supported only by a handful.