Talk:Two-level game theory
Add topic | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]In my opinion, and as it is stated by Robert Putman in his article "Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level-games" in his book "International Organization" (1988) win-sets are: "the set of all level I agreements that would "win" - that is gain the necessary majority among the [Level II] constituents" whereas Level I is the international level and Level II is the domestic level. Therefore, that is, the win-set actually is larger than those agreements both levels actually agree on. It is everything which on the international level is supposed to be approven by on the national level. But when the win-set is formed, it is yet not known whether the national level will actually agree on the ideas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.202.75 (talk • contribs) 22 June 2005 (UTC)
Double game?
[edit]we have one link to double game. Is it same as two-level game (theory)?--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)