On the investment implications of bankruptcy laws

Axiomatic analysis of bankruptcy problems reveals three major principles: (i) proportionality (PRO), (ii) equal awards (EA), and (iii) equal losses (EL). However, most real life bankruptcy procedures implement only the proportionality principle. We construct a noncooperative investment game to explore whether the explanation lies in the alternative implications of these principles on investment behavior. Our results are as follows (i) EL always induces higher total investment than PRO which in turn induces higher total investment than EA; (ii) PRO always induces higher egalitarian social welfare than both EA and EL in interior equilibria; (iii) PRO induces higher utilitarian social welfare than EL in interior equilibria but its relation to EA depends on the parameter values (however, a numerical analysis shows that on a large part of the parameter space, PRO induces higher utilitarian social welfare than EA)

Uncertainty and ratification failure

I study a game where two agents bargain on an agreement to replace the status quo. For their agreement to come into e¤ect, they need the approval of a third agent. The preferences of this third agent is private information, but there is communication among agents. I study this game in the context of international agreements to provide an explanation for involuntary rati�cation failures. I show that under certain assumptions, the informational de�ciency is incurable due to incentives to misrepresent preferences, and that a parliament whose majority is more hawkish than their executive prefers the executive to be risk averse

Nash Bargaining in Ordinal Environments

We analyze the implications of Nash’s (1950) axioms in ordinal bargaining environments; there, the scale invariance axiom needs to be strenghtened to take into account all order-preserving transformations of the agents’ utilities. This axiom, called ordinal invariance, is a very demanding one. For two-agents, it is violated by every strongly individually rational bargaining rule. In general, no ordinally invariant bargaining rule satisfies the other three axioms of Nash. Parallel to Roth (1977), we introduce a weaker independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom that we argue is better suited for ordinally invariant bargaining rules. We show that the three-agent Shapley-Shubik bargaining rule uniquely satisfies ordinal invariance, Pareto optimality, symmetry, and this weaker independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom. We also analyze the implications of other independence axioms

Nash bargaining in ordinal environments

We analyze the implications of Nash’s (1950) axioms in ordinal bargaining environments; there, the scale invariance axiom needs to be strenghtened to take into account all order-preserving transformations of the agents’ utilities. This axiom, called ordinal invariance, is a very demanding one. For two-agents, it is violated by every strongly individually rational bargaining rule. In general, no ordinally invariant bargaining rule satisfies the other three axioms of Nash. Parallel to Roth (1977), we introduce a weaker independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom that we argue is better suited for ordinally invariant bargaining rules. We show that the three-agent Shapley-Shubik bargaining rule uniquely satisfies ordinal invariance, Pareto optimality, symmetry, and this weaker independence of irrelevant alternatives axiom. We also analyze the implications of other independence axioms

On algorithmic solutions to simple allocation problems

We interpret solution rules to a class of simple allocation problems as data on the choices of a policy-maker. We study the properties of rational rules. We show that every rational rule falls into a class of algorithmic rules that we describe. The Equal Gains rule is a member of this class and it uniquely satisfies rationality, continuity, and equal treatment of equals. Its dual, the Equal Losses rule, uniquely satisfies continuity, equal treatment of equals, and two properties that constitute the dual of rationality: translation down and translation up

The flight of the white collars

By analyzing two novel data sets from Turkey, we provide empirical evidence for yet another negative consequence of civil conflicts. We show that the long running civil cinflict in Turkey has been driving away doctors and other medical personnel from conflict areas, and the availability of medical personal is positively associated with public health. By doing so, we illuminate an important, yet never analyzed before mechanism through which civil conflicts exert their long-term negative influences on the most important "life chances" of societies, namely, the chance to lead a healthy life. We then proceed to provide some evidence that a similar dynamic is in play in education as well

A Revealed preference analysis of solutions to simple allocation problems

We interpret solution rules on a class of simple allocation problems as data on the choices of a policy-maker. We analyze conditions under which the policy maker’s choices are (i) rational (ii) transitive-rational, and (iii)representable; that is, they coincide with maximization of a (i) binary relation, (ii) transitive binary relation, and (iii) numerical function on the allocation space. Our main results are as follows: (i) a well known property, contraction independence (a.k.a. IIA) is equivalent to rationality; (ii) every contraction independent and other-c monotonic rule is transitive-rational;and (iii) every contraction independent and other-c monotonic rule, if additionally continuous, can be represented by a numerical function