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.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.