Learn Before
  • Hypothetical Example: Information Asymmetry in Doctor-Confectioner Bargaining

Designing a Solution for Negotiation Deadlock

A doctor, whose practice is disrupted by noise from an adjacent confectioner's shop, claims to be losing $1,000 per month in business. The confectioner can install soundproofing for a monthly equivalent cost of $400. A mutually beneficial agreement seems possible, but the confectioner is hesitant, suspecting the doctor is overstating the damages. Propose a specific, practical mechanism or contractual arrangement that could help the two parties overcome this information problem and reach an efficient agreement. Justify why your proposed solution would be effective.

0

1

2 months ago

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

Social Science

Empirical Science

Science

CORE Econ

Economics

Economy

Introduction to Microeconomics Course

The Economy 2.0 Microeconomics @ CORE Econ

Related
  • A resident in an apartment building claims that the noise from a neighboring musician's practice sessions is causing them significant distress, which they value at $200 per month. The musician would be willing to stop practicing at home for any payment over $100 per month. Despite the potential for a mutually beneficial agreement (e.g., a payment of $150), the negotiation fails. What is the most likely reason for this failure, considering the challenges that can arise when one party has more information than the other?

  • Pollution Negotiation Breakdown

  • Strategic Behavior in Negotiations

  • In a negotiation between a doctor harmed by a confectioner's noise, the primary reason a bargain might fail is not the lack of a potential mutually beneficial outcome, but the difficulty the confectioner faces in confirming the true extent of the doctor's harm.

  • Negotiation Breakdown Analysis

  • A doctor claims that the noise from a neighboring confectioner's machinery is causing them $500 in damages per month. The confectioner could soundproof their shop for a one-time cost equivalent to $300 per month. However, the confectioner suspects the doctor is exaggerating and that the true damage is much lower, but they have no way to prove it. As a result, no agreement is reached. Match each element of this scenario to the economic concept it best represents.

  • Cost-Benefit Analysis of Information Verification

  • A doctor claims a neighboring confectioner's noise causes $1,000 per month in damages (e.g., lost patients, stress). The confectioner can eliminate the noise for a cost of $600 per month but suspects the doctor is exaggerating the extent of the harm. This suspicion prevents them from reaching a mutually beneficial agreement. Which of the following proposed actions is LEAST likely to resolve the core issue that is preventing a bargain?

  • Designing a Solution for Negotiation Deadlock

  • Decision-Making Under Uncertainty