Abstract
Bankruptcy problems are commonly associated with economic disasters, but can also emerge due to extraordinary economic performance The choice of a sharing rule has a significant potential effect on the economy’s general equilibrium. The economic literature hitherto neglected the search for an economically optimal bankruptcy solution and concentrated mainly on normative axiomatizations of sharing rules. However, its findings did not attract much attention of legal scholars. The purpose of this article is to create a symposium between the economic and legal literature on bankruptcy based on our interdisciplinary analysis of a fascinating polemic conducted by Jewish Law scholars over the course of fifteenth centuries about the appropriate bankruptcy solution.
Acknowledgements
This article was written while we were visiting scholars at the Berkeley Institute for Jewish Law and Israeli Law, Economy and Society, University of California, Berkeley. We are gratefully indebted to Robert J. Aumann, Ronen Avraham, Shachar Kariv, Hervé J. Moulin and three anonymous referees for very helpful discussions and comments.
References
Aghion, P., O. Hart, and J. Moore (1992). The Economics of Bankruptcy Reform. National Bureau of Economic Research No. w4097.10.3386/w4097Search in Google Scholar
Arin, J. 2007. “Egalitarian Distributions in Coalitional Models,” 9(1) International Game Theory Review 45–57.10.1142/S0219198907001266Search in Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1999. Nichomacean Ethics (350 B.C.E). (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Kitchener, Ontario, Canada: Batoche Books.Search in Google Scholar
Arrow, K. J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values. New Haven: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ashlagi, I., E. Karagözoğlu, and B. Klaus. 2012. “A Non-Cooperative Support for Equal Division in Estate Division Problems,” 63 Mathematical Social Science 228–233.10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2012.01.004Search in Google Scholar
Asker, J. 2000. “Bidding up, Buying Out and Cooling-Off: an Examination of Auctions with Withdrawal Rights,” 16 Economic Theory 585–611.10.1007/978-3-642-56448-2_8Search in Google Scholar
Aumann, R. J. 2010. “Some Non-Superadditive games, and Their Shapley values, in the Talmud,” 39 International Journal of Game Theory 3–10.10.1007/s00182-009-0191-4Search in Google Scholar
Aumann, R. J., and M. Maschler. 1985. “Game Theoretic Analysis of a Bankruptcy Problem from the Talmud,” 36(2) Journal of Economic Theory 195–213.10.1016/0022-0531(85)90102-4Search in Google Scholar
Baird, D. G., and T. H. Jackson. 1985. “Fraudulent Conveyance Law and Its Proper Domain,” 38 Vanderbilt Law Review 829–855.Search in Google Scholar
Baird, D. G., and T. H. Jackson. 1988. “Bargaining after the Fall and Contours of the Absolute Priority Rule,” 55(3) The University of Chicago Law Review 738–789.10.1017/CBO9780511609435.014Search in Google Scholar
Bebchuk, L. A. 2000. “Using Options to Divide Value in Corporate Bankruptcy,” 44 European Economic Review 829–843.10.3386/w7614Search in Google Scholar
Blazy, R., and B. Chopard. 2004. “Ex Post Efficiency of Bankruptcy Procedures: A General Normative Framework,” 24(4) International Review of Law and Economics 447–471.10.1016/j.irle.2005.01.004Search in Google Scholar
Bush, W. C., and L. S. Mayer. 1974. “Some Implications of Anarchy for the Distribution of Property,” 8 Journal of Economic Theory 401–412.10.1016/0022-0531(74)90018-0Search in Google Scholar
Chun, Y., J. Schummer, and W. Thomson. 2001. “Constrained Egalitarianism: A New Solution to Bankruptcy Problems,” 14 Seoul Journal of Economics 269–297.Search in Google Scholar
Chun-Hsien, Y. 2008. “Secured Lower bound, Composition up and Minimal Rights First for Bankruptcy Problems,” 44 Journal of Mathematical Economics 925–932.10.1016/j.jmateco.2007.07.006Search in Google Scholar
Cornelli, F., and L. Felli. 1997. “Ex-Ante Efficiency of Bankruptcy Procedures,” 41(3-5) European Economic Review 475–485.10.1016/S0014-2921(97)00009-3Search in Google Scholar
Curiel, I. M., M. Maschler, and S. H. Tijs. 1987. “Bankruptcy Games,” 31 Zeitschrift für Operations Research A143–A159.10.1007/BF02109593Search in Google Scholar
Dagan, N., and O. Volij. 1993. “The Bankruptcy Problem: A Cooperative Bargaining Approach,” 26 Mathematical Social Sciences 287–297.10.1016/0165-4896(93)90024-DSearch in Google Scholar
Dominguez, D., and W. Thomson. 2006. “A New Solution to the Problem of Adjudicating Conflicting Claims,” 28 Economic Theory 283–307.10.1007/s00199-005-0636-3Search in Google Scholar
Dutta, B., and D. Ray. 1989. “A Concept of Egalitarianism under Participation Constraints,” 57 Econometrica 615–635.10.2307/1911055Search in Google Scholar
Fisher, T. C., and J. Martel. 1995. “The Creditors’ Financial Reorganization Decision: New Evidence From Canadian Data,” 11(1) Journal of law, economics, & Organization 112–126.Search in Google Scholar
Hart, O. (2000). Different Approaches to Bankruptcy. National Bureau of Economic Research No. w7921.10.3386/w7921Search in Google Scholar
Hart, O. 2006. “Different Approaches to Bankruptcy, CESifo DICE Report,” 4(1) IFO Institute for Economic Research 3–8.Search in Google Scholar
Herrero, C., and A. Villar. 2001. “The Three Musketeers: Four Classical Solutions to Bankruptcy Problems,” 42 Mathematical Social Science 307–328.10.1016/S0165-4896(01)00075-0Search in Google Scholar
Ibn-Ezra, Abraham. 1895. Sefer Ha-Mispar (Book of the Number). Frankfurt a. M.: Kaufmann Verlag. (with German translation by M. Silberberg).Search in Google Scholar
Jackson, Thomas H. 1986. The Logic and Limits of Bankruptcy Law. Cambridge Mass: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jackson, T., and R. Scott. 1989. “On The Nature Of Bankruptcy: An Essay On Bankruptcy Sharing And The Creditors’ Bargain,” 75(2) Virginia Law Review 155–204.10.1017/CBO9780511609435.015Search in Google Scholar
Jackson, T. H. 2001. The Logic and Limits of Bankruptcy Law. Washington, D. C.: Beard Books.Search in Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., J. L. Knetsch, and R. H. Thaler. 1990. “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem,” 98 Journal of Political Economy 1325–1348.10.1086/261737Search in Google Scholar
Karagözoğlu, E. (2008). A Noncooperative Approach to Bankruptcy Problems with an Endogenous Estate. METEOR, Maastricht research school of Economics of TEchnology and ORganizations.10.1007/s10479-014-1588-4Search in Google Scholar
Keane, M. A. (1969). Some Topics in N-person Game Theory. Ph.D. Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Kıbrıs, Ö., and A. Kıbrıs. 2013. “On the Investment Implications of Bankruptcy Laws,” 80 Games and Economic Behavior 85–99.10.1016/j.geb.2013.02.007Search in Google Scholar
Landes, W. M. 1971. “An Economic Analysis of the Courts,” 14 Journal of Law and Economics 61–107.10.1086/466704Search in Google Scholar
Legros, P. 1987. “Disadvantageous Syndicates and Stable Cartels: the Case of the Nucleolus,” 42 Journal of Economic Theory 30–49.10.1016/0022-0531(87)90101-3Search in Google Scholar
Lipschits, I., and M. E. Schwarz. 2015. “Aggregation of Estimates When Decision by Majority Is Not Possible,” XXI Jewish Law Annuals 111–166.10.2139/ssrn.1924848Search in Google Scholar
Lipschits, I.E. (2004). ‘P’shara’ in Jewish Law. Ph.D. Dissertation. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University.Search in Google Scholar
Littlechild, S. C., and G. Owen. 1973. “A Simple Expression For The Shapley Value In A Special Case,” 20(3) Management Science 370–372.10.1287/mnsc.20.3.370Search in Google Scholar
McGuire, M. C., and M. J. Olson. 1996. “The Economics of Autocracy and Majority Rule: the Invisible Hand and the Use of Force,” XXXIV Journal of Economic Literature 72–96.10.1007/978-1-349-26284-7_3Search in Google Scholar
McKenzie, C. R., and J. D. Nelson. 2003. “What A Speaker’s Choice of Frame Reveals: Reference points, Frame selection, and Framing Effects,” 10 Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 596–602.10.1037/e537102012-428Search in Google Scholar
Moreno-Ternero, J. D., and A. Villar. 2004. “The Talmud Rule and the Securement of Creditors’ Awards,” 47 Mathematical Social Sciences 245–257.10.1016/S0165-4896(03)00087-8Search in Google Scholar
Moulin, H. 2002. “Axiomatic Cost and Surplus Sharing,” in K. J. Arrow, A. K. Sen, and K. Suzumura, eds. Handbook of Social Science and Welfare, vol. 1. Elsevier Science, 289–357.Search in Google Scholar
Moulin, H. J. 1984. “Implementing the Kalai-Smorodinsky Bargaining Solution,” 33 Journal of Economic Theory 32–45.10.1016/0022-0531(84)90038-3Search in Google Scholar
Moulin, H. J. 2000. “Priority Rules and Other Asymmetric Rationing Methods,” 68 Econometrica 643–684.10.1111/1468-0262.00126Search in Google Scholar
Moulin, H. J. 2004. Fair Division and Collective Welfare, vol. 1. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/2954.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Nash, J. F. 1950. “The Bargaining Problem,” 18(2) Econometrica 155–162.10.2307/1907266Search in Google Scholar
O’Neill, B. 1982. “A Problem of Rights Arbitration from the Talmud,” 2(4) Mathematical Social Science 345–371.10.1016/0165-4896(82)90029-4Search in Google Scholar
Olson, M. 2000. Power and Prosperity: Outgrowing Communist and Capitalist Dictatorships. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Olson, M., and M. Olson. 2009. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge Massachusetts, London: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctvjsf3tsSearch in Google Scholar
Piccione, M., and A. Rubinstein. 2007. “Equilibrium in the Jungle,” 117(522) The Economic Journal 883–896.10.1111/j.1468-0297.2007.02072.xSearch in Google Scholar
Piniles, Z. M. 1863. Darka shel Tora (The Way of Torah), Buchdrukerei von Bendiner, Viena.Search in Google Scholar
Plott, C. R. 1973. “Path independence, Rationality and Social Choice,” 41(6) Econometrica 1075–1091.10.2307/1914037Search in Google Scholar
Plott, C. R. 1976. “Axiomatic Social Choice Theory: an Overview and Interpretation,” 20(3) American Journal of Political Science 511–596.10.2307/2110686Search in Google Scholar
Rabinovitch, N. L. 1973. Probability and Statistical Inference in Ancient and Medieval Jewish Literature. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781487574581Search in Google Scholar
Rasmussen, R. K. 1994. “An Essay on Optimal Bankruptcy Rules and Social Justice,” 1 University of Illinois Law Review 1–43.Search in Google Scholar
Sahota, G. S. 1978. “Theories of Personal Income Distribution: A Survey,” XVI Journal of Economic Literature 1–55.Search in Google Scholar
Schmeidler, D. 1969. “The Nucleolus of a Characteristic Function Game,” 17 SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics 1163–1170.10.1137/0117107Search in Google Scholar
Schummer, J., and W. Thomson. 1997. “Two Derivations of the Uniform Rule,” 55 Economics Letters 333–337.10.1016/S0165-1765(97)00079-7Search in Google Scholar
Schwarz, M. E. 2012. “Subgame Perfect Plea Bargaining in Biform Judicial Contests,” 8(1) Review of Law and Economics 297–330.10.1515/1555-5879.1623Search in Google Scholar
Schwarz, M. E. 2019. “From Jungle to Civilized Economy: The Power Foundation of Exchange Economy Equilibrium,” 19(2) The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics. https://doi.org/10.1515/bejte-2017-0085.10.1515/bejte-2017-0085Search in Google Scholar
Schwarz, M. E. (2018, forthcomming). Auctions with Endogenous Opting-Out Fees and Recursive Winning Procedures from the Talmud. Proceedings of the 24th conference of the Eurasia Business and Economics Society Conference.10.1111/ijet.12244Search in Google Scholar
Serrano, R. 1995. “Strategic bargaining, Surplus Sharing Problems and the Nucleolus,” 24 Journal of Mathematical Economics 319–329.10.1016/0304-4068(94)00696-8Search in Google Scholar
Shapley, L. S. 1953. “A Value for N Person Games, ” H. W. Kuhn, and A. W. Tucker, eds. Contributions to the Theory of Games (Annals of Mathematical Studies), vol. 5(28). Princeton New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 307–319.Search in Google Scholar
Steinhaus, H. 1948. “The Problem of Fair Division,” 16(1) Econometrica 33–111.Search in Google Scholar
Thomson, W. 2003. “Axiomatic and Game-Theoretic Analysis of Bankruptcy and Taxation Problems: A Survey,” 45 Mathematical Social Science 249–297.10.1016/S0165-4896(02)00070-7Search in Google Scholar
Weijs, R. J. 2012. “Harmonisation of European Insolvency Law and the Need to Tackle Two Common Problems: Common Pool and Anticommons,” 21(2) International Insolvency Review 67–83.10.1002/iir.1197Search in Google Scholar
White, M. 1989. “The Corporate Bankruptcy Decision,” 3(2) Journal of Economic Perspectives 129–151.10.1017/CBO9780511609435.019Search in Google Scholar
Yaari, M. E. 1981. “rawls, edgeworth, shapley, Nash: Theories of Distributive Justice Re-examined,” 24 Journal of Economic Theory 1–39.10.1016/0022-0531(81)90062-4Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Articles
- Two Advantages of the Negligence Rule Over Strict Liability when the Parties are Risk Averse
- Is a ‘Bad Individual’ more Condemnable than Several ‘Bad Individuals’? Examining the Scope-severity Paradox
- Leniency Programs and Cartel Organization of Multiproduct Firms
- Fairness Vs. Economic Efficiency: Lessons from an Interdisciplinary Analysis of Talmudic Bankruptcy Law
- Individual or Enterprise Liability? The Roles of Sanctions and Liability Under Contractible and Non-contractible Safety Efforts
- US State Tort Liability Reform and Entrepreneurship
Articles in the same Issue
- Articles
- Two Advantages of the Negligence Rule Over Strict Liability when the Parties are Risk Averse
- Is a ‘Bad Individual’ more Condemnable than Several ‘Bad Individuals’? Examining the Scope-severity Paradox
- Leniency Programs and Cartel Organization of Multiproduct Firms
- Fairness Vs. Economic Efficiency: Lessons from an Interdisciplinary Analysis of Talmudic Bankruptcy Law
- Individual or Enterprise Liability? The Roles of Sanctions and Liability Under Contractible and Non-contractible Safety Efforts
- US State Tort Liability Reform and Entrepreneurship