Game Theory and Strategic Decision Making in Economics

Abstract

Game theory provides a powerful mathematical framework to analyze strategic interactions among rational agents in economic settings. This paper investigates how core game-theoretic models can be applied to real-world economic decision-making scenarios, focusing specifically on Cournot duopoly and auction mechanisms. The Cournot model illustrates how competing firms determine optimal production quantities under interdependence, reaching a Nash equilibrium that balances competition and market efficiency. In contrast, the first-price sealed-bid auction represents strategic behavior under incomplete information, where bidders shade their bids based on private valuations to maximize expected payoff. Both case studies are explored through formal mathematical analysis and simulation to demonstrate how players\' strategies adapt to market structure and available information. The results highlight that understanding equilibrium outcomes not only improves predictive power in economics but also aids policymakers and firms in designing more efficient and fair market mechanisms. Ultimately, this research underscores the value of game theory as a foundational tool for modeling strategic decision-making across diverse economic applications.

Introduction

In today’s complex and interdependent economy, decisions made by firms, consumers, and governments often involve strategic interactions, where outcomes depend not only on one's own choices but also on the actions of others. Game theory, a branch of applied mathematics, provides a robust framework for analyzing these interactions. Originally developed for military strategy, it is now a central tool in economic theory, particularly in oligopolistic markets, auctions, contract theory, and public policy.

2. Applications of Game Theory in Economics

A. Oligopoly Models

• Cournot Model (quantity competition): Two firms choose output simultaneously; leads to Cournot-Nash Equilibrium where each firm considers the output of its competitor.

• Bertrand Model (price competition): Firms compete on price, often resulting in zero profits if goods are homogeneous.

• Extensions include product differentiation, capacity constraints, and asymmetric information (Tirole).

B. Auction Theory

• Vickrey Auctions: Second-price sealed-bid format; truthful bidding is a dominant strategy (incentive compatible).

• First-Price Auctions: Bidders shade their bids below their private value to maximize expected utility.

• Optimal Auction Design: Myerson showed that maximizing revenue may differ from maximizing efficiency.

• Common-Value Auctions (Milgrom & Wilson): True value is unknown but identical to all bidders, relevant in spectrum and procurement auctions.

C. Empirical Applications

• Cournot-based models are used in telecommunications, energy, and pharmaceutical markets.

• Game theory is integrated with machine learning and mechanism design, e.g., "Doctor AI" in healthcare.

3. Theoretical Foundations

Game Structure

A strategic game is defined by:

• Players (N): Agents involved (e.g., firms or bidders).

• Strategies (S?): Possible actions each player can take.

• Payoffs (u?): Outcome or utility from chosen strategies.

Equilibrium Concepts

• Best Response: Optimal strategy given others' actions.

• Nash Equilibrium: No player can benefit by unilaterally changing their strategy.

4. Key Models Analyzed

A. Cournot Duopoly

• Two firms choose quantities:
  P(Q)=a−bQ,Q=q1+q2P(Q) = a - bQ, \quad Q = q_1 + q_2P(Q)=a−bQ,Q=q1?+q2?

• Profit:
  πi=qi⋅(P(Q)−c)\pi_i = q_i \cdot (P(Q) - c)πi?=qi?⋅(P(Q)−c)

• Solving best-response functions gives:

  • q∗=a−c3bq^* = \frac{a - c}{3b}q∗=3ba−c?

  • Q∗=2(a−c)3bQ^* = \frac{2(a - c)}{3b}Q∗=3b2(a−c)?

  • P∗=a+2c3P^* = \frac{a + 2c}{3}P∗=3a+2c?

B. First-Price Sealed-Bid Auction

• Bidders with private values vi∼U[0,1]v_i \sim U[0,1]vi?∼U[0,1] submit sealed bids.

• Winning bid = highest; payment = submitted bid.

• Optimal symmetric strategy:
  b(v)=n−1nvb(v) = \frac{n - 1}{n}vb(v)=nn−1?v

• Reflects Bayesian Nash Equilibrium, incorporating beliefs about other players’ valuations.

5. Mathematical and Computational Enhancements

• Dimensionality Reduction: PCA, LASSO for simplifying high-dimensional data in auctions or firm behavior modeling.

• Bayesian Inference: To manage uncertainty in incomplete information games.

• Machine Learning Integration: For real-time strategic decisions and predictive modeling (e.g., in healthcare or automated bidding).

6. Game Types in Economics

7. Critiques and Limitations

• Assumptions of Rationality: Real agents may not always behave optimally.

• Common Knowledge Assumption: Often unrealistic in complex settings.

• Bounded Rationality: Gigerenzer and Selten emphasize heuristic-based decision-making in behavioral economics.

• Algorithmic Concerns: Game-theoretic algorithms may suffer from bias or unintended consequences without careful validation.

8. Research Objective and Methodology

This study explores:

• Oligopoly behavior via the Cournot model

• Auction-based resource allocation via first-price sealed-bid auctions
  Both are analyzed using mathematical models and equilibrium concepts, supported by numerical simulations to highlight implications for policy, market design, and business strategy.

Conclusion

This study explored two fundamental applications of game theory in economics-Cournot duopoly and first-price sealed-bid auction-to analyze how strategic decision-making plays out in markets characterized by interdependent agents. The following key insights were derived: In Cournot competition, firms adjust output based on rivals’ actions. This strategic interplay leads to a Nash equilibrium that is less efficient than perfect competition but more favorable for consumers than monopoly. The model reflects real-world dynamics in oligopolistic markets such as cement, telecom, and energy sectors. In the auction framework, bidders with private valuations engage in strategic bid shading to balance the trade-off between winning and profit maximization. This behavior, captured by the Bayesian-Nash equilibrium, is widely applicable to government tenders, spectrum auctions, and resource allocations in procurement. Both models underscore the importance of anticipating others\' strategies when making decisions, a hallmark of game-theoretic reasoning. Moreover, mathematical formulation and simulation revealed that equilibrium behavior is not only predictable but also responsive to market structure, information availability, and competitive intensity. By integrating economic theory, mathematics, and real-world simulations, this research demonstrates that game theory provides a rigorous and practical toolkit for analyzing competitive behavior across a variety of strategic settings. Strategic decision-making lies at the heart of economics. As markets grow more complex and information asymmetries widen, game-theoretic models will remain indispensable for anticipating outcomes, guiding policy, and shaping fair and efficient economic systems.

References

[1] Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press. [2] Cournot, A. A. (1838). Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth (N. T. Bacon, Trans.). Macmillan. (Original work published in French) [3] Bertrand, J. (1883). Théorie mathématique de la richesse sociale. Journal des Savants, 67, 499–508. [4] Tirole, J. (1988). The Theory of Industrial Organization. MIT Press. [5] Bresnahan, T. F., & Reiss, P. C. (1991). Entry and competition in concentrated markets. Journal of Political Economy, 99(5), 977–1009. https://doi.org/10.1086/261786 [6] Vickrey, W. (1961). Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. Journal of Finance, 16(1), 8–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/2977633 [7] Krishna, V. (2009). Auction Theory (2nd ed.). Academic Press. [8] Myerson, R. B. (1981). Optimal auction design. Mathematics of Operations Research, 6(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.6.1.58 [9] Milgrom, P., & Wilson, R. (1982). A theory of auctions and competitive bidding. Econometrica, 50(5), 1089–1122. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911865 [10] Choi, E., Bahadori, M. T., Schuetz, A., Stewart, W. F., & Sun, J. (2016). Doctor AI: Predicting clinical events via recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the Machine Learning for Healthcare Conference (pp. 301–318). PMLR. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v56/Choi16.html [11] Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax2342 [12] Klemperer, P. (2004). Auctions: Theory and Practice. Princeton University Press. [13] Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2001). Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox. MIT Press.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Kalpana Devarajan, Dr. R. Venugopal, S N Sai Priya, Dr. R. Amsaraj. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.