Exploring how the costs of a pandemic can lead to a self-enforcing lockdown in a networked economy, analyzing the resulting changes in network structure and the existence of stable equilibria.Exploring how the costs of a pandemic can lead to a self-enforcing lockdown in a networked economy, analyzing the resulting changes in network structure and the existence of stable equilibria.

The Economics of Self-Isolation: A Game-Theoretic Analysis of Contagion in a Free Economy

Abstract and 1. Introduction

  1. A free and fair economy: definition, existence and uniqueness

    2.1 A free economy

    2.2 A free and fair economy

  2. Equilibrium existence in a free and fair economy

    3.1 A free and fair economy as a strategic form game

    3.2 Existence of an equilibrium

  3. Equilibrium efficiency in a free and fair economy

  4. A free economy with social justice and inclusion

    5.1 Equilibrium existence and efficiency in a free economy with social justice

    5.2 Choosing a reference point to achieve equilibrium efficiency

  5. Some applications

    6.1 Teamwork: surplus distribution in a firm

    6.2 Contagion and self-enforcing lockdown in a networked economy

    6.3 Bias in academic publishing

    6.4 Exchange economies

  6. Contributions to the closely related literature

  7. Conclusion and References

Appendix

6.2 Contagion and self-enforcing lockdown in a networked economy

In this section, we provide an application of a free and fair economy to contagion and selfenforcing lockdown in a networked economy. We show how the costs of a pandemic from a virus outbreak can affect agents’ decisions to form and sever bilateral relationships in the economy. Specifically, we illustrate this application by using the contagion potential of a network [Pongou, 2010, Pongou and Serrano, 2013, 2016, Pongou and Tondji, 2018].

\ Consider an economy M involving agents who freely form and sever bilateral links according to their preferences. Agents’ choices lead to a network, defined as a set of bilateral links. Assume that rational behavior is captured by a certain equilibrium notion (for example, Nash equilibrium, pairwise-Nash equilibrium, etc.). Such an economy may have multiple equilibria. Denote by E(M) the set of its equilibria. Our main goal is to assess agent’s decisions in response to the spread of a random infection (for example, COVID-19) that might hit the economy. As the pandemic evolves in the economy, will some agents decide to sever existing links and self-isolate themselves? How does network structure depend on the infection cost?

\

\

\

\

\

\ Figure 2: Possible network formation in M

\

\ Interestingly, the value of λ depends on the nature of the virus. Viruses induce different severity levels. For example, COVID-19 and the flu virus have different values, inducing different network configurations in equilibrium. The different network configurations in Figure 2 can therefore be interpreted as the networks that will arise in different scenarios regarding the nature of the virus.

\

:::info Authors:

(1) Ghislain H. Demeze-Jouatsa, Center for Mathematical Economics, University of Bielefeld (demeze jouatsa@uni-bielefeld.de);

(2) Roland Pongou, Department of Economics, University of Ottawa (rpongou@uottawa.ca);

(3) Jean-Baptiste Tondji, Department of Economics and Finance, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (jeanbaptiste.tondji@utrgv.edu).

:::


:::info This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.

:::

\

Market Opportunity
SQUID MEME Logo
SQUID MEME Price(GAME)
$33.4986
$33.4986$33.4986
+0.17%
USD
SQUID MEME (GAME) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
Forward Industries Bets Big on Solana With $4B Capital Plan

Forward Industries Bets Big on Solana With $4B Capital Plan

The firm has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to launch a $4 billion at-the-market (ATM) equity program, […] The post Forward Industries Bets Big on Solana With $4B Capital Plan appeared first on Coindoo.
Share
Coindoo2025/09/18 04:15
Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework

Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework

Coinbase Payments has joined the Open Intents Framework as a core contributor, working alongside Ethereum Foundation and other major players. The initiative aims to simplify complex multi-chain interactions through automated solver technology. The post Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework appeared first on Coinspeaker.
Share
Coinspeaker2025/09/18 02:43