We present preliminary work on the benefits of argumentation-based
negotiation, for a simple framework for one-to-one negotiation between
agents in a resource reallocation setting. Agents engage in dialogues with
other agents in order to obtain resources they need but do not have. Di-
alogues are regulated by simple communication policies that allow agents
to provide reasons (arguments) for their refusals to give away resources;
agents use assumption-based argumentation in order to deploy these poli-
cies. We assess the benefits of providing these reasons both informally
and experimentally: by providing reasons, agents are “more effective”
in identifying a reallocation of resources if one exists and failing if none
exists.