Dynamic contests

Considering several main types of dynamic contests (the race, the tug-of-war, elimination contests and iterated incumbency fights) we identify a common pattern: the discouragement effect. This effect explains why the sum of rentseeking efforts often falls considerably short of the prize that is at stake. It may cause violent conflict in early rounds, but may also lead to long periods of peaceful interaction. -- Unter Berücksichtigung verschiedener Haupttypen dynamischer Wettbewerbe (das Wettrennen, das Tauziehen, Ausscheidungskämpfe und wiederholte Kämpfe um Amtszeiten) identifizieren die Autoren ein gemeinsames Muster: den Entmutigungseffekt. Dieser Effekt erklärt, wieso die Rent-seeking-Bemühungen in Summe oft deutlich nicht an den auf dem Spiel stehenden Preis heranreichen. Der Effekt kann heftige Kämpfe in den ersten Runden des Wettbewerbs auslösen, aber auch zu langen Perioden friedlichen Zusammenspiels führen.

Is the 50-State Strategy Optimal?

In 2005, the Democratic National Committee adopted the 50-state strategy in lieu of the strategy of focusing solely on battleground states. The rationale given for this move is that campaign expenditures are durable outlays that impact both current and future campaigns. This paper investigates the optimality of the 50-state strategy in a simple dynamic game of campaign resource allocation in which expenditures act as a form of investment. Neither the 50-state nor the battleground-states strategy is likely to arise in equilibrium. Instead, parties employ a modified battleground-states strategy in which they stochastically target non-battleground states.Political Campaigns, Dynamic Contests, Elections, All-Pay Auction,War of Attrition

Is the 50-state strategy optimal?

In 2005, the Democratic National Committee adopted the 50-state strategy in lieu of the strategy of focusing solely on battleground states. The rationale given for this move is that campaign expenditures are durable outlays that impact both current and future campaigns. This paper investigates the optimality of the 50-state strategy in a simple dynamic game of campaign resource allocation in which expenditures act as a form of investment. Neither the 50-state nor the battleground-states strategy is likely to arise in equilibrium. Instead, parties employ a modified battleground-states strategy in which they stochastically target non-battleground states. -- Im Jahr 2005 führte das Organisationskomitee der Demokratischen Partei die 50-Staaten-Strategie anstelle der alleinigen Fokussierung auf Entscheidungsstaaten ein. Grund hierfür ist, dass Kampagnenausgaben lang wirkende Ausgaben sind, welche sowohl laufende als auch zukünftige Wahlkämpfe beeinflussen. Der vorliegende Aufsatz untersucht die Optimalität der 50- Staaten-Strategie in einem einfachen dynamischen Allokationsspiel von Kampagnemitteln, in welchem Ausgaben eine Form der Investition darstellen. Für ein Gleichgewicht sind jedoch weder die Strategie der 50-Staaten noch die der Entscheidungsstaaten wahrscheinlich. Vielmehr wenden Parteien eine modifizierte Entscheidungsstaaten-Strategie an, im Rahmen derer sie stochastisch auch auf Nicht-Entscheidungsstaaten abzielen.Political campaigns,dynamic contests,elections,all-pay auction,war of attrition

Conflicts with Multiple Battlefields

This paper examines conflicts in which performance is measured by the players' success or failure in multiple component conflicts, commonly termed "battlefields." In multi-battlefield conflicts, behavioral linkages across battlefields depend both on the technologies of conflict within each battlefield and the nature of economies or diseconomies in how battlefield out- comes and costs aggregate in determining payoffs in the overall conflict.Con ict, Contest, Battleeld, Colonel Blotto Game, Auction, Lottery

Conflicts with Multiple Battlefields

This paper examines conflicts in which performance is measured by the players' success or failure in multiple component conflicts, commonly termed “battlefields”. In multi-battlefield conflicts, behavioral linkages across battlefields depend both on the technologies of conflict within each battlefield and the nature of economies or diseconomies in how battlefield out-comes and costs aggregate in determining payoffs in the overall conflict.conflict, contest, battlefield, Colonel Blotto Game, auction, lottery

Bargaining Versus Fighting

I examine the determinants of conflict and settlement by embedding probabilistic contests in a bargaining framework. Different costly enforcement efforts (e.g., arming, litigation expenditures) induce different disagreement points and Pareto frontiers. After examining the incentives for settlement, I demonstrate how different division rules and bargaining norms have real, economic effects. I then analyze some sources of conflict. I emphasize long-term, strategic considerations by examining an illustrative model and discussing particular historical examples.Conflict; Negotiation; War; Settlement; Arming; Litigation

An Experimental Investigation of Colonel Blotto Games

"This article examines behavior in the two-player, constant-sum Colonel Blotto game with asymmetric resources in which players maximize the expected number of battlefields won. The experimental results support all major theoretical predictions. In the auction treatment, where winning a battlefield is deterministic, disadvantaged players use a 'guerilla warfare' strategy which stochastically allocates zero resources to a subset of battlefields. Advantaged players employ a 'stochastic complete coverage' strategy, allocating random, but positive, resource levels across the battlefields. In the lottery treatment, where winning a battlefield is probabilistic, both players divide their resources equally across all battlefields." (author's abstract)"Dieser Artikel untersucht das Verhalten von Individuen in einem 'constant-sum Colonel Blotto'-Spiel zwischen zwei Spielern, bei dem die Spieler mit unterschiedlichen Ressourcen ausgestattet sind und die erwartete Anzahl gewonnener Schlachtfelder maximieren. Die experimentellen Ergebnisse bestätigen alle wichtigen theoretischen Vorhersagen. Im Durchgang, in dem wie in einer Auktion der Sieg in einem Schlachtfeld deterministisch ist, wenden die Spieler, die sich im Nachteil befinden, eine 'Guerillataktik' an, und verteilen ihre Ressourcen stochastisch auf eine Teilmenge der Schlachtfelder. Spieler mit einem Vorteil verwenden eine Strategie der 'stochastischen vollständigen Abdeckung', indem sie zufällig eine positive Ressourcenmenge auf allen Schlachtfeldern positionieren. Im Durchgang, in dem sich der Gewinn eines Schlachtfeldes probabilistisch wie in einer Lotterie bestimmt, teilen beide Spieler ihre Ressourcen gleichmäßig auf alle Schlachtfelder auf." (Autorenreferat

Expenditures and Information Disclosure in Two- Stage Political Contests

This laboratory experiment studies two-stage contests between political parties. In the first stage, parties run their primaries and in the second stage the winners of the primaries compete in the general election. The resource expenditures in the first stage by the winning candidates are partially or fully carried over to the second stage. Experimental results support all major theoretical predictions: the first stage expenditures and the total expenditures increase, while the second stage expenditures decrease in the carryover rate. Consistent with the theory, the total expenditures increase in the number of candidates and the number of parties. Contrary to the theory, however, expenditures in both stages of the competition exceed theoretical predictions. Disclosing information about the opponent’s expenditures in the first stage increases the second stage expenditures and decreases the first stage expenditures.political contest, experiments, information uncertainty, over-expenditures