The Good of the Few: Reciprocal Acts and the Provision of a Public Bad

People trade favors when doing so increases efficiency. Will they when it reduces efficiency, such as in political logrolling? We introduce the “Stakeholder Public Bad ” game, in which common fund contributions increase one person’s earnings (the “Stakeholder”) while reducing others ’ earnings and overall efficiency. The Stakeholder position rotates through all group members or just alternates among two people (making it easier to form a coalition). High Stakeholder rewards provide a lever for reciprocity: if someone contributes when another is Stakeholder, he may be rewarded with a gift when he becomes Stakeholder. Reciprocity is only possible when agents know others ’ roles and actions, so information provision may be pro- or anti-social. In a laboratory experiment, we combine a rotating or alternating asymmetry in payoffs with varying levels of information provision to examine pro- and anti-social reciprocity. We find that subjects in the Stakeholder role willingly sacrifice social welfare. We also see both anti-social and pro-social favor trading, particularly when coalition-forming is easier. Favor trading does not change the mean level of public bad provision. People who trade favors tend to be less risk averse