Final answer:
It is a.true that in distributive bargaining, one party's gain is at the expense of the other. This zero-sum negotiation contrasts with integrative bargaining, where both parties may gain.
Step-by-step explanation:
The student's question asks whether it is true or false that gains made by a party using the distributive bargaining approach come at the expense of the other party. The answer to this question is true. Distributive bargaining is a negotiation strategy where one party's gain is indeed the other party's loss. This zero-sum approach means that the negotiation is like a pie to be divided, where if one party gets a larger piece, the other gets a smaller one. This contrasts with integrative bargaining where the parties seek a win-win solution where both may gain.
In the context of political bargaining, when one party is seeking to change the status quo, they may encounter resistance from those who benefit from the current situation. This dynamic reinforces the distributive nature of bargaining in politics, as gains for the change advocates typically imply losses for the status quo defenders. However, economists commonly believe that the benefits from trade and negotiations should be embraced and the costs and tradeoffs addressed separately through other policy tools, rather than avoiding negotiations altogether to prevent potential losses.