Reciprocity in the shadow of threat

International Review of Economics - Tập 55 - Trang 91-111 - 2007
Raul Caruso1
1Institute of Economic Policy, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy

Tóm tắt

This paper considers a partial equilibrium model of conflict where two agents differently evaluate a contested stake. Differently from common contest models, agents have the option of choosing a second instrument to affect the outcome of the conflict. The second instrument is assumed to capture positive investments in ‘conflict management’—labeled as ‘talks’. The focus is on the asymmetry in the evaluation of the stake: whenever the asymmetry in the evaluation of the stake is large there is no room for cooperation and a conflict trap emerges; whenever the degree of asymmetry falls within a critical interval, cooperation seems to emerge only in the presence of a unilateral concession; as the evaluations of the stake converge, only reciprocal concessions can sustain cooperation. Finally the concept of entropy is applied to measure conflict and conflict management.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Amegashie AJ (2006) A contest success function with a tractable noise parameter. Public Choice 126:135–144 Anderton CH (2000) An insecure economy under ratio and logistic conflict technologies. J Conflict Resolut 44(6):823–838 Anderton CH, Anderton RA, Carter J (1999) Economic activity in the shadow of conflict. Econ Inq 17(1):166–179 Attaran M, Zwick M (1989) An information theory approach to measuring industrial diversification. J Econ Stud 16(1):19–30 Baik KH (1998) Difference-form contest success functions and efforts levels in contests. Eur J Polit Econ 14:685–701 Baik KH, Shogran JF (1995) Contests with spying. Eur J Polit Econ 11:441–451 Basu K (2007) Coercion, contract and the limits of the market. Soc Choice Welfare 29:559–579 Bhagwati JN (1982) Directly unproductive, profit-seeking (DUP) activities. J Polit Econ 9(5):988–1002 Boulding KE (1963) Towards a pure theory of threat systems. Am Econ Rev Pap Proc 53(2):424–434 Boulding KE (1973) The economy of love and fear. Wadsworth, Belmont Campiglio L (1999) Mercato, prezzi e politica economica. Il Mulino, Bologna Caruso R (2005) Asimmetrie negli incentivi, equilibrio competitivo e impegno agonistico: distorsioni in presenza di doping e combine. Riv Dir Econ Sport 1(3):13–38 Caruso R (2006) Conflict and conflict management with interdependent instruments and asymmetric stakes (The Good Cop and the Bad Cop Game). Peace Econ Peace Sci Public Pol 12(1), art 1 Caruso R (2007) Continuing conflict and stalemate: a note. Econ Bull 4(17):1–8. http://economicsbulletin.vanderbilt.edu/2007/volume4/EB-07D70005A.pdf Clark DJ, Riis C (1998) Contest success functions: an extension. Econ Theory 11:201–204 Dixit A (1987) Strategic behavior in contests. Am Econ Rev 77(5): 891–898 Dixit A (2004) Lawlessness and economics, alternative modes of governance. Princeton University Press, Princeton Epstein GS, Hefeker C (2003) Lobbying contests with alternative instruments. Econ Gov 4:81–89 Gabor A, Gabor D (1958) L’entropie comme mesure de la liberté sociale et économique. Cahiers de l’Institut de Science Économique Appliquée, vol 72, pp 13–25 Garfinkel MR, Skaperdas S (2007) Economics of conflict: an overiew. In: Sandler T, Hartley K (eds) Handbook of defense economics, vol 22, chap 22 Gintis H (2000) Game theory evolving. Princeton University Press, Princeton Grossman HI (1991) A general equilibrium model of insurrections. Am Econ Rev 81(4):912–921 Grossman HI (1998) Producers and predators. Pac Econ Rev 3(3):169–187 Harsanyi JC (1965) Bargaining and conflict situations in the light of a new approach to game theory. Am Econ Rev 55(1/2):447–457 Hausken K (2005) Production and conflict models versus rent-seeking models. Public Choice 123:59–93 Hillman AL, Riley JG (1989) Politically contestable rents and transfers. Econ Polit 1(1):17–39 Hirshleifer J (1988) The analytics of continuing conflict. Synthese 76(2): 201–233. Reprinted by Center for International and Strategic Affairs, CISA, University of California Hirshleifer J (1989) Conflict and rent-seeking success functions, ratio vs. difference models of relative success. Public Choice 63:101–112 Horowitz A, Horowitz I (1968) Entropy, Markov processes and competition in the brewing industry. J Ind Econ 16:196–211 Isard W, Smith C (1982) Conflict analysis and practical management procedures. An introduction to peace science. Ballinger, Cambridge Konrad K (2000) Sabotage in rent-seeking. J Law Econ Organ 16(1): 155–165 Nash J (1953) Two-person cooperative games. Econometrica 21(1):128–140 Neary HM (1997a) Equilibrium structure in an economic model of conflict. Econ Inq 35(3):480–494 Neary HM (1997b) A comparison of rent-seeking models and economics models of conflict. Public Choice 93:373–388 Nti KO (1999) Rent-seeking with asymmetric valuations. Public Choice 98:415–430 Nti KO (2004) Maximum efforts in contests with asymmetric valuations. Eur J Polit Econ 20:1059–1066 O’Keeffe M, Viscusi KW, Zeckhauser RJ (1984) Economic contests: comparative reward schemes. J Lab Econ 2(1):27–56 Pigou AC ([1921]1929) The economics of welfare, 3rd edn. MacMillan, London Rosen S (1986) Prizes and incentives in elimination tournaments. Am Econ Rev 76(4):701–715 Schelling TC (1960) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Schelling TC (1966) Arms and influence. Yale University Press, New Haven Shannon CE, Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana Skaperdas S (1992) Cooperation, conflict, and power in the absence of property rights. Am Econ Rev 82(4):720–739 Skaperdas S (1996) Contest success functions. Econ Theory 7:283–290 Spolaore E (2004) Economic integration, international conflict and political unions. Riv Pol Econ IX–X:3–50 Tullock G (1980) Efficient rent seeking. In: Buchanan JM, Tollison RD, Tullock G (eds) Toward a theory of the rent-seeking society. Texas A&M University, College Station, pp 97–112