Suppose two large countries are deciding whether to impose a tariff on each other. (a) Use a payoff matrix and graphs to show the payoffs associated with each of the scenarios; (b) Identify the Nash Equilibrium in a non-cooperative game. (c) How can a cooperative trade agreement change the equilibrium?

Suppose two large countries are deciding whether to impose a tariff on each other. (a) Use a payoff matrix and graphs to show the payoffs associated with each of the scenarios; (b) Identify the Nash Equilibrium in a non-cooperative game. (c) How can a cooperative trade agreement change the equilibrium?

Microeconomics: Principles & Policy

14th Edition

ISBN:9781337794992

Author:William J. Baumol, Alan S. Blinder, John L. Solow

Publisher:William J. Baumol, Alan S. Blinder, John L. Solow

Chapter13: Between Competition And Monopoly

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 3TY

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider trade relations between Canada and Mexico. Assume that the leaders of the two countries believe the payoffs to alternative trade policies are as follows: Canada High Tariffs Low Tariffs Mexico High Tariffs Canada trade value = $65 Mexico trade value = $75 Canada trade value = $35 Mexico trade value = $285 Refer to Table 17-4. When this game reaches a Nash equilibrium, what will the value of trade flow benefits be? Canada $35 and Mexico $285 Canada $65and Mexico $75 Canada $130 and Mexico $5 Low Tariffs Canada trade value = $140 Mexico trade value = $5 Canada trade value = $130 Mexico trade value = $275 Canada $140 and Mexico $275
Suppose China and the US are deciding whether to join an international agreement to mitigate climate change. The matrix below contains payoffs that represent each country’s net benefit from their decisions. Use this information to answer Question 24. CHINA USA Join Agreement Do Not Join Agreement Join Agreement (100,100) (0,125) Do Not Join Agreement (125,0) (25,25) [24] What does each country decide to do in a Nash equilibrium? AND What is the efficient outcome? Nash: Efficient:
Assume two countries (US and Germany) are facing the decision of whether to participate in the Paris Agreement or not. The following payoff matrix contains the estimated payoffs for both countries for all possible strategies. Germany US Join Not join Join A: (500, 360) B: (100, 200) Not join C: (450, 300) D: (450, 350) What is the Nash equilibrium of this game if it has to be played sequentially and US moves first? US joins, Germany joins US joins, Germany does not join US does not join, Germany joins US does not join, Germany does not join
3. The following is an interpretation of the rivalry between the United States (USA) and the Soviet Ünion (USSR) during the cold war. Each side has the choice of two strategies: Aggressive and Restrained. The payoff table is given as follows: USSR Restrained Aggressiveness Restrained 4,3 1,4 USA Aggressiveness 3,1 2,2 a) Consider this game when the two countries move simultaneously. Find all pure strategy Nash equilibria. b) Next consider three alternative ways in which the game could be played with sequential moves: (i) The USA moves first and the USSR moves second. (i) the USSR moves first and the USA moves second. (i) The USSR moves first, and the USA moves second, but the USSR has a further move after the USA moves. For each case, draw the game tree and find the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium. c) What are the key strategic issues (commitment, credibility and so on) for the two countries. (Note: Be concise. Your answer should not exceed 300 words].
In 2003, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela produced an average of 8 million and 3 million barrels of oil a day, respectively. Production costs were about $10 a barrel and the price of oil averaged $28 per barrel. Each country had the capacity to produce an additional 1 million barrels per day. At that time, it was estimated that each country 1-million-barrel increase in supply would depress the average price of oil by $3. A. Draw a normal form representation of a game where Saudi Arabia has 2 possible actions to produce 8 million or 9 million barrels of oil and Venezuela has 2 possible actions: to produce 3 or 4 million barrels of oil. Fill in the payoffs for each player and action. Draw a table. B. What action should each country take and why? C. Does the asymmetry in the countries' sizes cause them to take different attitudes towards expanding out? Explain why or why not.
9. Little Kona is a small coffee company that is consider- ing entering a market dominated by Big Brew. Each company's profit depends on whether Little Kona enters and whether Big Brew sets a high price or a low price: Little Kona Enter Don't Enter High Price Kona makes $2 million Kona makes zero Big Brew Brew makes $3 million Brew makes $7 million Kona loses $1 million Low Price Kona makes zero Brew makes $1 million Brew makes $2 million
Suppose OPEC has only two producers, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, Saudi Arabia has far more oil reserves and is the lower-cost producer compared to Nigeria. The payoff matrix in the table to the right shows the profits earned per day by each country. "Low output" corresponds to producing the OPEC assigned quota and "high output" corresponds to producing the maximum capacity beyond the assigned quota Which of the following statements is true? OA. The Nash equilibrium is a cooperative equilibrium. OB. The Nash equilibrium is a noncooperative, dominant strategy equilibrium OC. The Nash equilibrium is a collusive equilibrium. D. There is no Nash equilibrium in this game because each party. pursues its dominant strategy. Low output Nigeria High output Low output Nigeria earns $20 million Saudi Arabia Nigeria earns $30 million Saudi Arabia earns $100 million Saudi Arabia earns $80 million High output Nigeria earns $12 million Saudi Arabia earns $75 million Nigeria earns $20 million Saudi Arabia…
Use the following normal-form game to answer the following questions. a. For what values of x is strategy D (strictly) dominant for player 2? b. For what values of x is strategy B (strictly) dominant for player 1? c. For what values of x is (B, D) the only Nash equilibrium of the game?
Game Theory. Consider the following scenario: Two cloth manufacturing companies, A and B. Firm A designs a few costumes, and they are confident enough that they will be sold quickly in the market, but after launching their designs, they make very little profit due to a lack of capital to promote their designs. Now firm B uses these designs and makes a significant profit due to its brand value. 1. Demonstrate that the situation IS a game (explain strategic interaction/conflict).
a. Draw a game tree that represents this game. How many proper sub- games does it have? b. Are there other game trees that would work? Explain briefly. c. Construct the matrix representation of the normal form of this dynamic game.
Hello, please help me to solve this Game Theory question. Thanks in advance! Hobby hunter Jack decides what to do the next weekend. He can either stay at home and watch movies (Movies), or call his friend Katherine to go hunting (Hunt). If he stays in, both Jack and Katherine get a payoff of 2. If he decides to hunt, he knows the situation with his friend will resemble a classic stag hunt game with simultaneous moves: Hunting a stag is better than hunting a rabbit, but it only works if they cooperate. The hunting subgame is captured as: Katherine Stag Rabbit Jack Stag 3 , 3 0 , 1 Rabbit 1 , 0 1 , 1 Are the Nash Equilibria of the full game credible?Comment on any Nash equilibria of the full game which are not credible.Find all subgame perfect equilibria in pure strategies.
Hello, please help me to solve this Game Theory question. Thanks in advance! Hobby hunter Jack decides what to do the next weekend. He can either stay at home and watch movies (Movies), or call his friend Katherine to go hunting (Hunt). If he stays in, both Jack and Katherine get a payoff of 2. If he decides to hunt, he knows the situation with his friend will resemble a classic stag hunt game with simultaneous moves: Hunting a stag is better than hunting a rabbit, but it only works if they cooperate. The hunting subgame is captured as: Katherine Stag Rabbit Jack Stag 3 , 3 0 , 1 Rabbit 1 , 0 1 , 1 1. Write the normal form representation of the full game, including Jack’s initial decision.2. Identify any pure-strategy Nash equilibria. How does this compare to the pure strategy Nash equilibria of the hunting game alone?