Advertisement

Investigating the Use of the Core as a Solution Concept in Spatial Price Equilibrium Games

  • Patrick T. Harker
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 249)

Abstract

This paper presents a critical appraisal of the use of the core as a solution concept for games involving spatially separated producers. Starting from the classicl Samuelson/Takayama-Judge spatial price equilibrium model, the core of a game between the producers of commodities in this economy is defined, the conditions ensuring the nonemptiness of the core are stated, and the problems surrounding the definition and computation of the characteristic function are addressed.

Keywords

Nash Equilibrium Characteristic Function Cooperative Game Solution Concept Variational Inequality Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahn, B-H. and William W. Hogan (1982). On the convergence of the PIES algorithm for computing equilibria, Operations Research 30, 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bard, Jonathan F. and James E. Falk (1978). Computing Equilibria Via Nonconvex Programming, Serial T-386, Institute for Management Science and Engineering, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  3. Bard, Jonathan F. and James E. Falk (1982). An explicit solution to the multi-level programming problem, Computers and Operations Research 9(1), 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Falk, James E. and Garth P. McCormick (1982). Mathematical Structure of the International Coal Trade Model, Energy Information Adiminstration, U.S. DEpartment of Energy, September 1983.Google Scholar
  5. Fiacco, Anthony V. (1983). Introduction to Sensitivity and Stability Analysis in Nonlinear Programming, New York, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Friedman, James W. (1979). Oligopoly and the Theory of Games, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  7. Friesz, Terry L., Roger L. Tobin, Tony E. Smith and Patrick T. Harker (1983). A nonlinear complementarity formulation and solution procedure for the general derived demand network equilibrium problem, Journal of Regional Science 23, 337–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harker, Patrick T. (1985). Alternative models of spatial competition, in progress, Operations Research.Google Scholar
  9. Harker, P.T. (1984a). A generalized spatial price equilibrium model, Papers of the Regional Science Association, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  10. Harker, Patrick T. (1984b). A variational inequality approach for the determination of oligopolistic market equilibrium, Mathematical Programming 30, 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haurie, A. and Patrice Marcotte (1984). On the relationship between Nash-Cournot and Wardrop equilibria, Networks, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  12. Hildenbrand, W. and A.P. Kirman (1976). Introduction to Equilibrium Analysis, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  13. Hobbs, Benjamin F. (1984a). A spatial linear programming analysis of the deregulation of electricity generation, Operations Research, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  14. Hobbs, Benjamin F. (1984b). Modeling imperfect spatial energy markets, in B.D Solomon (ed.), Geographical Dimensions of Energy, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  15. Hogan, William W. (1975). Energy policy models for project independence, Computers and Operations Research 2, 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hogan, William W., J.L. Sweeney and M.D. Wagner (1978). Energy policy models for the National Energy Outlook, TIMS Studies in Management Science 10, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy, M. (1974). An economic model of the world oil markets, Bell Journal of Economics 5, 540–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McCormick, Garth P. (1983). Nonlinear Programming: Theory, Algorithms and Applications, New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  19. Moulin, Herve (1982). Game Theory for the Social Sciences, New York, New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Ponsard, Claude (1982). Partial spatial equilibria with fuzzy constraints, Journal of Regional Science 22, 159–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rosenthal, Robert W. (1971). External economies and cores, Journal of Economic Theory 3, 182–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Samuelson, Paul A. (1952). Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming, American Economic Review 42, 283–303.Google Scholar
  23. Scarf, Herbert (1971). On the existence of a cooperative solution for a general class of n-person games, Journal of Economic Theory 3, 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Scarf, Herbert (1973). The Computation of Economic Equilibrium, Cowles Foundation Monograph 24, New Haven, Conn.: Yale university Press.Google Scholar
  25. Sheppard, E. and L. Curry (1982). Spatial price equilibria, Geographical Analysis 14, 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shubik, Martin (1982). Game Theory in the Social Sciences, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Takayama, T. and George G. Judge (1964). Equilibrium among spatially separated markets: a reformulation, Econometrica 32 510–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Takayama, T. and George G. Judge (1971), Spatial and Temporal Price and Allocation Models, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  29. Zimmerman, Martin B. (1981). The U.S. Coal Industry: The Economics of Policy Choice, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick T. Harker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Decision SciencesThe Wharton School University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations