庇护提供者:鹰派还是鸽派?

Yuji Tamura
{"title":"庇护提供者:鹰派还是鸽派?","authors":"Yuji Tamura","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3067137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I examine the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium of an asylum provision game in pure strategies, assuming that asylum is an international public good. An equilibrium does not necessarily exist because the players. payo¤s are not quasiconcave. When an equilibrium exists, it is either unique or multiple. When multiple equilibria arise, the game is a variant of hawk-dove game. Multiple equilibria suggest the counter-intuitive possibility that the more popular destination is more open to refugees even though openness is not modeled to boost popularity.","PeriodicalId":290360,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Other International Cooperation (Topic)","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asylum Providers: Hawks or Doves?\",\"authors\":\"Yuji Tamura\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3067137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I examine the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium of an asylum provision game in pure strategies, assuming that asylum is an international public good. An equilibrium does not necessarily exist because the players. payo¤s are not quasiconcave. When an equilibrium exists, it is either unique or multiple. When multiple equilibria arise, the game is a variant of hawk-dove game. Multiple equilibria suggest the counter-intuitive possibility that the more popular destination is more open to refugees even though openness is not modeled to boost popularity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":290360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PSN: Other International Cooperation (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PSN: Other International Cooperation (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3067137\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Other International Cooperation (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3067137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

假设庇护是一种国际公共产品,我在纯策略中考察了庇护提供博弈的子博弈-完美纳什均衡。均衡并不一定存在,因为参与者。Payo·s不是准凹形的。当平衡存在时,它要么是唯一的,要么是多重的。当出现多重均衡时,博弈是鹰鸽博弈的变体。多重平衡表明了一种违反直觉的可能性,即更受欢迎的目的地对难民更开放,尽管开放的模式并不是为了提高受欢迎程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Asylum Providers: Hawks or Doves?
I examine the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium of an asylum provision game in pure strategies, assuming that asylum is an international public good. An equilibrium does not necessarily exist because the players. payo¤s are not quasiconcave. When an equilibrium exists, it is either unique or multiple. When multiple equilibria arise, the game is a variant of hawk-dove game. Multiple equilibria suggest the counter-intuitive possibility that the more popular destination is more open to refugees even though openness is not modeled to boost popularity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信