INTIMIDATION: LINKING NEGOTIATION AND CONFLICT

B-Tier
Journal: International Economic Review
Year: 2019
Volume: 60
Issue: 4
Pages: 1589-1618

Authors (3)

Sambuddha Ghosh (not in RePEc) Gabriele Gratton (UNSW Sydney) Caixia Shen (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

0.670 = (α=2.01 / 3 authors) × 1.0x B-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

A challenger wants a resource initially held by a defender, who can negotiate a settlement by offering to share the resource. If Challenger rejects, conflict ensues. During conflict, each player could be a tough type for whom fighting is costless. Therefore, nonconcession intimidates the opponent into conceding. Unlike in models where negotiations happen in the shadow of exogenously specified conflicts, offers made during negotiations determine how conflict unfolds if negotiations fail. In turn, how conflict is expected to unfold determines the players' negotiating positions. In equilibrium, negotiations always fail with positive probability, even if players face a high cost of conflict. Allowing multiple offers leads to brinkmanship—the only acceptable offer is the one made when conflict is imminent. If negotiations fail, conflict is prolonged and not duration dependent.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:wly:iecrev:v:60:y:2019:i:4:p:1589-1618
Journal Field
General
Author Count
3
Added to Database
2026-01-25