 Simultaneous-offers bargaining with a mediatorGames and Economic Behavior, 2019, vol. 117, issue C, 361-379 Abstract: An arbitrator is often introduced into bargaining to avoid disagreement. The arbitrator's role is to impose some agreement when negotiators cannot reach an agreement. However, in models with an arbitrator, a fair agreement for negotiators is eliminated from equilibrium outcomes if the arbitrator is biased. To avoid disagreement without eliminating the achievability of a fair agreement in equilibrium, we consider introducing a mediator. While an arbitrator imposes an agreement, a mediator can only give advice. We analyze a simultaneous-offers bargaining model with a mediator and obtain the following desirable results. First, disagreement is not supported as an outcome of a stationary subgame perfect equilibrium (SSPE). Second, even if a mediator is biased, the fair agreement in the sense of the Nash bargaining solution (NBS) is always one of the SSPE agreements. Finally, if a mediator is fair, negotiators always reach an agreement with the NBS in SSPE. Keywords: Simultaneous-offers bargaining; Mediator; Bias; Nash bargaining solution; Disagreement (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:117:y:2019:i:c:p:361-379 DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2019.07.008 Access Statistics for this article Games and Economic Behavior is currently edited by E. Kalai More articles in Games and Economic Behavior from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.