Dissertation abstract: Essays on veto bargaining games |
| |
Authors: | Hankyoung Sung |
| |
Institution: | (1) Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, Seoul, Korea |
| |
Abstract: | This dissertation experimentally analyzes the outcomes of multilateral legislative bargaining games in the presence of a veto
player.
The first essay examines veto power—the right of an agent to unilaterally block decisions but without the ability to unilaterally
secure his/her preferred outcome. Using Winter’s (1996) theoretical framework, I consider two cases: urgent committees where
the total amount of money to be distributed shrinks by 50% if proposals do not pass and non-urgent committees where the total
amount of money shrinks by 5% if proposals do not pass. Committees with a veto player take longer to reach decisions (are
less efficient) than without a veto player and veto players proposals generate less consensus then non-veto players proposals,
outcomes on which the theory is silent. In addition, veto power in conjunction with proposer power generates excessive power
for the veto player. This suggests that limiting veto players’ proposer rights (e.g., limiting their ability to chair committees)
would go a long way to curbing their power, a major concern in committees in which one or more players has veto power. Finally,
non-veto players show substantially more willingness to compromise than veto players, with players in the control game somewhere
in between. I relate the results to the theoretical literature on the impact of veto power as well as concerns about the impact
of veto power in real-life committees.
The second essay discusses in detail the voting patterns in the veto and control games reported in the first essay. The empirical
cumulative density functions of shares veto players accepted first degree stochastically dominates that of shares for the
controls and the empirical cdfs of shares the controls accepted first degree stochastically dominate that of shares for non-veto
players. Random effect probits support this conclusion as well. In addition, regressions imply favorable treatment of voting
and proposing between non-veto players which, however, does not result in larger shares in the end. Coalition partners consistently
demand more than the stationary subgame perfect Nash equilibrium share except for veto players in non-urgent committees.
JEL Classification C7, D7, C78, D72
Dissertation Committee:
John H. Kagel, Advisor
Massimo Morelli
Alan Wiseman
Stephen Cosslett |
| |
Keywords: | Veto power Bargaining Committees |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|