Social Choice and Welfare

, Volume 47, Issue 4, pp 959–971 | Cite as

Best-shot versus weakest-link in political lobbying: an application of group all-pay auction

Original Paper
  • 149 Downloads

Abstract

We analyze a group political lobbying all-pay auction with a group specific public good prize, in which one group follows a weakest-link and the other group follows a best-shot impact function. We completely characterize all semi-symmetric equilibria. There are two types of equilibria: (1) each player in the best-shot group puts mass at the upper bound of the support, whereas each player in the other group puts mass at the lower bound of the support; (2) players in the best-shot group put masses at both the lower and the upper bounds, while the other group randomizes without a mass point.

References

  1. Baik KH (1993) Effort levels in contests: the public-good prize case. Econ Lett 41(4):363–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baik KH (2008) Contests with group-specific public-good prizes. Soc Choice Welf 30(1):103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baik KH, Kim IG, Na S (2001) Bidding for a group-specific public-good prize. J Public Econ 82(3):415–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbieri S, Malueg DA (2014) Group efforts when performance is determined by the “best shot”. Econ Theory 56(2):333–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barbieri S, Malueg DA, Topolyan I (2014) The best-shot all-pay (group) auction with complete information. Econ Theory 57(3):603–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baye MR, Kovenock D, De Vries CG (1996) The all-pay auction with complete information. Econ Theory 8(2):291–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergstrom T, Blume L, Varian H (1986) On the private provision of public goods. J Public Econ 29(1):25–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bliss C, Nalebuff B (1984) Dragon-slaying and ballroom dancing: the private supply of a public good. J Public Econ 25(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Che Y-K, Gale I (1998) Caps on political lobbying. Am Econ Rev 88(3):643–651Google Scholar
  10. Choi JP, Chowdhury SM, Kim J (2016) Group contests with internal conflict and power asymmetry. Scand J Econ (Forthcoming)Google Scholar
  11. Chowdhury SM, Lee D, Sheremeta RM (2013) Top guns may not fire: best-shot group contests with group-specific public good prizes. J Econ Behav Organ 92:94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chowdhury SM, Lee D, Topolyan I (2016) The max-min group contest: weakest-Link (Group) all-pay auction. South Econ J (Forthcoming)Google Scholar
  13. Chowdhury SM, Topolyan I (2015) The group all-pay auction with heterogeneous impact functions. University of East Anglia Economics Working paper No. 069Google Scholar
  14. Chowdhury SM, Topolyan I (2016) The attack-and-defense group contests: best shot versus weakest link. Econ Inq 54(1):548–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Conybeare JA, Murdoch JC, Sandler T (1994) Alternative collective-goods models of military alliances: theory and empirics. Econ Inq 32(4):525–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cornes R (1993) Dyke maintenance and other stories: some neglected types of public goods. Q J Econ 108:259–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hirshleifer J (1983) From weakest-link to best-shot: the voluntary provision of public goods. Public Choice 41:371–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Katz E, Nitzan S, Rosenberg J (1990) Rent-seeking for pure public goods. Public Choice 65(1):49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kolmar M, Rommeswinkel H (2013) Contests with group-specific public goods and complementarities in efforts. J Econ Behav Organ 89:9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee D (2012) Weakest-link contests with group-specific public good prizes. Eur J Political Econ 28(2):238–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Olson M (1965) The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Pecorino P (2015) Olson’s logic of collective action at fifty. Public Choice 162:243–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Topolyan I (2014) Rent-seeking for a public good with additive contributions. Soc Choice Welf 42(2):465–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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 Press, College Station, pp 97–112Google Scholar
  25. Varian HA (2004) System reliability and free riding, economics of information security. Adv Inf Secur 12:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science, and Centre for Competition PolicyUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations