Queue allocation of indivisible goods

A model with a finite number of indivisible goods (houses) and the same number of individuals is considered. The allocation of houses among the individuals according to a queue order is analysed. First an allocation mechanism is constructed where it is a dominant strategy for the individuals to truthfully report their preferences. Second it is demonstrated that in order to obtain the desired allocation, the individuals must not in general report their complete ranking of the houses, but only their maximal elements in recursively defined choice sets.Financial support from Jan Wallander's Foundation for Research in the Social Sciences is gratefully acknowledged.A first version of this paper was presented at ESEM in Cambridge 1991.     

Strategy-proof Cardinal Decision Schemes

This paper analyses strategy-proof mechanisms or decision schemes which map profiles of cardinal utility functions to lotteries over a finite set of outcomes. We provide a new proof of Hylland’s theorem which shows that the only strategy-proof cardinal decision scheme satisfying a weak unanimity property is the random dictatorship. Our proof technique assumes a framework where individuals can discern utility differences only if the difference is at least some fixed number which we call the grid size. We also prove a limit random dictatorship result which shows that any sequence of strategy-proof and unanimous decision schemes defined on a sequence of decreasing grid sizes approaching zero must converge to a random dictatorship. We are most grateful to an Associate Editor and two referees for very helpful comments on an earlier version of the paper. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Fair allocation of indivisible goods: the two-agent case

One must allocate a finite set of indivisible goods among two agents without monetary compensation. We impose Pareto-efficiency, anonymity, a weak notion of no-envy, a welfare lower bound based on each agent’s ranking of the subsets of goods, and a monotonicity property w.r.t. changes in preferences. We prove that there is a rule satisfying these axioms. If there are three goods, it is the only rule, together with one of its subcorrespondences, satisfying each fairness axiom and not discriminating between goods.     

Note on social choice allocation in exchange economies with Cobb–Douglas preferences

We show that in a pure exchange economy with two agents and a finite number of goods, there exists no strategy-proof, Pareto-efficient, and non-dictatorial social choice allocation function on any local Cobb–Douglas preference domain. This is a slight extension of a result proved by Hashimoto (2008).     

On strategy-proofness and essentially single-valued cores: A converse result

In a general model of indivisible good allocation, S?nmez (1999) established that, whenever the core is nonempty for each preference profile, if an allocation rule is strategy-proof, individually rational and Pareto optimal, then the rule is a selection from the core correspondence, and the core correspondence must be essentially single-valued. This paper studies the converse claim of this result. I demonstrate that whenever the preference domain satisfies a certain condition of `richness', if the core correspondence is essentially single-valued, then any selection from the core correspondence is strategy-proof (even weakly coalition strategy-proof, in fact). In particular, on the domain of preferences in which each individual has strict preferences over his own assignments and there is no consumption externality, such an allocation rule is coalition strategy-proof. And on this domain, coalition strategy-proofness is equivalent to Maskin monotonicity, an important property in implementation theory. Received: 22 February 2000/Accepted: 22 January 2002 I am grateful to Ryo-ichi Nagahisa, Shinji Ohseto, Hiroshi Ono, Tomoichi Shinotsuka and Shigehiro Serizawa for valuable comments. And I am indebted to two anonymous referees for useful suggestions. Especially, I owe the present proof of Lemma 2 to one referee. I also thank Yukihiko Funaki, Atsushi Kajii, Mamoru Kaneko, Eiichi Miyagawa, Tatsuyoshi Saijo, Manimay Sengupta, Yves Sprumont, Yoshikatsu Tatamitani, Manabu Toda, Takashi Ui, Takehiko Yamato, Naoki Yoshihara and the participants of the seminars in Hokkaido University, Kansai University, ISER (Osaka University), Otaru University of Commerce and Tsukuba University. All errors are my own responsiblity.     

Approval Voting on Dichotomous Preferences

The aim of this paper is to find normative foundations of Approval Voting when individuals have dichotomous preferences. We show that a social choice function is anonymous, neutral, strategy-proof and strictly monotone if and only if it is Approval Voting and interpret this result as an extension of May’s theorem (Econometrica 20:680–684, 1952). Then, we show that Approval Voting is the only strictly symmetric, neutral and efficient social choice function. This result is related to a characterization of Baigent and Xu (Math Soc Sci 21:21–29, 1991).     

Strategy-proofness on Euclidean spaces

 In this paper we characterize strategy-proof voting schemes on Euclidean spaces. A voting scheme is strategy-proof whenever it is optimal for every agent to report his best alternative. Here the individual preferences underlying these best choices are separable and quadratic. It turns out that a voting scheme is strategy-proof if and only if (α) its range is a closed Cartesian subset of Euclidean space, (β) the outcomes are at a minimal distance to the outcome under a specific coordinatewise veto voting scheme, and (γ) it satisfies some monotonicity properties. Neither continuity nor decomposability is implied by strategy-proofness, but these are satisfied if we additionally impose Pareto-optimality or unanimity. Received: 18 October 1993/Accepted: 2 February 1996     

Trade-off between equity and efficiency in a general economy with indivisible goods

In most of the recent literature on fair allocation in economies with indivisible goods and a single infinitely divisible good, it is assumed that each agent can consume at most one indivisible good. In this paper, we show that if this assumption is dropped, there do not necessarily exist envy-free and Pareto efficient allocations. However, envy-free allocations still exist and so do Pareto efficient allocations. Hence, a trade-off between equity and efficiency arises.     

Strategy-proofness of continuous aggregation maps

 We consider continuous aggregation maps (e.g., social welfare functions). By assuming that the voters have preferences over social outcomes, we regard the social decision procedure as a noncooperative game, with the aggregation map as a game form. The map is called strategy-proof if it is a Nash equilibrium that the voters report their most preferred outcomes. We give sufficient topological conditions on the space of outcomes so that only dictatorial maps are strategy-proof. Received: 28 February 1994/Accepted: April 22, 1996     

On strategy-proof social choice under categorization

I consider social choice problems such that (i) the set of alternatives can be partitioned into categories based on a prominent and objective feature and (ii) agents have strict preferences over the alternatives. Main results are characterizations of the structure of the strategy-proof social choice functions. I prove that each social choice function is strategy-proof if and only if it is decomposable into “small” strategy-proof social choice functions; one of them chooses one category and each of the others chooses one alternative from a category.     

No externalities: a characterization of efficiency and incentive compatibility with public goods

We show that efficient anonymous incentive compatible (dominant strategy) mechanisms for public goods eliminate externalities, i.e., each individual is unable to change the welfare of anyone else. The characterization is used to derive existence and non-existence results for models with a finite number of individuals and to explain existence results in the continuum. A similar characterization and conclusions are demonstrated for private goods in (J Econ Theory 85:169–225, 1999). However, unlike private goods, elimination of externalities with public goods implies that individuals cannot change the outcome. Hence, such mechanisms provide only weak incentives for truth-telling.     

The dynamic transformation of political systems through social contract: a game theoretic approach

 We consider how the political system of the state evolves in the process of economic development. We present a dynamic public goods economy with non-overlapping generations, which confronts the free-rider problem without the state. In each generation, individuals enter under the unanimous rule a social contract of the political system, either monarchy or democracy, and then attempt to establish the state under the contracted political system. If the state is established, it provides public goods by enforcing tax on its members. Our game theoretic analysis shows: (i) the state can be established if and only if social productivity in terms of the capital stock of public goods is lower than a critical level; (ii) individuals choose democracy if social productivity is sufficiently high, while monarchy may be chosen if it is not; (iii) social productivity stochastically converges to the critical level over generations; and (iv) a simulation result shows several transformation patterns of political systems. Received: 21 June 1994/Accepted: 7 November 1995     

Arrovian theorems for economic domains: Assignments,matchings and pairings

In this paper, we show that Arrow's and Wilson's theorems hold for permutation, symmetric permutation and symmetric domains. Permutation domains concern assignments: n indivisible private goods are distributed betweenn selfish individuals. Symmetric permutation domains concern matchings: two sets ofn selfish individuals being given, pairs with an individual from each set are to be made. Symmetric domains concern pairings: a set of 2n selfish individuals being given,n pairs of individuals are to be made.We thank two anonymous referees for helpful suggestions.     

Toward general impossibility theorems in pure exchange economies

We study the possibility of strategy-proof and efficient mechanisms in pure exchange economies. In his remarkable paper, Zhou (1991) establishes an elegant impossibility result: there is no strategy-proof, efficient, and non-dictatorial mechanism in the two-agent case. He conjectures that there is no strategy-proof, efficient, and “non-inversely-dictatorial” mechanism in the case of three or more agents. However, we discover some counterexamples to his conjecture in the case of four or more agents. We present a new interesting open question: Is there any strategy-proof, efficient, and “non-alternately-dictatorial” mechanism? Received: 17 October 2000/Accepted: 20 April 2001     

Convergence theorems of willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept for nonmarket goods

This paper shows that the disparity between an agent’s willingness-to-pay and willingness-to-accept for a nonmarket good becomes small and the two values converge to the same limit only if the agent’s initial consumption level of the numéraire is large enough. A necessary and sufficient condition for convergences is provided, and a formula is provided to compute the limit value directly from a utility function. These convergence results are derived when the nonmarket goods are indivisible and qualitatively differentiated, and then extended for the divisible case.     

Incremental cost sharing: Characterization by coalition strategy-proofness

Each one of n users consumes an idiosyncratic commodity produced in indivisible units. The n commodities are jointly produced by a central facility and total cost must be shared by the users.  A “sequential stand alone mechanism” shares costs incrementally according to a fixed ordering of the users: the first user always pays stand alone cost, the second pays the stand alone cost of the first two users minus that of the first and so on. If the second derivatives of costs are of a constant sign, such a method yields a unique strong equilibrium at every profile of convex preferences in the game where each user chooses his own demand. This equilibrium, in turn, defines a coalition strategy-proof social choice function.  Under decreasing marginal costs and submodular costs, the sequential stand alone mechanisms are almost characterized by these properties; the only exception is the binary demand case (each agent consumes zero or one unit) where a rich family of cost sharing methods (the Shapley value among them) yields a coalition strategy-proof equilibrium selection. Under increasing marginal costs and supermodular costs, coalition strategy-proofness characterizes a richer family of cost sharing methods: they give out one unit at a time while charging marginal costs, with the users taking turns according to a sequence fixed in advance. These methods contain serial cost sharing as a limit case. Received: 8 July 1997/Accepted: 22 January 1998     

Strategy-proofness and markets

If a market is considered to be a social choice function, then the domain of admissible preferences is restricted and standard social choice theorems do not apply. A substantial body of analysis, however, strongly supports the notion that attractive strategy-proof social choice functions do not exist in market settings. Yet price theory, which implicitly assumes the strategy-proofness of markets, performs quite well in describing many real markets. This paper resolves this paradox in two steps. First, given that a market is not strategy-proof, it should be modeled as a Bayesian game of incomplete information. Second, a double auction market, which is perhaps the simplest operationalization of supply and demand as a Bayesian game, is approximately strategy-proof even when the number of traders on each side of the market is quite moderate. Received: 24 March 1999/Accepted: 25 October 1999     

Identical preferences lower bound solution and consistency in economies with indivisible goods

We consider the problem of allocating a finite set of indivisible goods and a single infinitely divisible good among a group of agents, and we study a solution, called the Identical Preferences Lower Bound solution, in the presence of consistency properties. This solution is not consistent. We prove that its maximal consistent subsolution is the No-envy solution. Our main result is that the minimal consistent extension of the intersection of the Identical Preferences Lower Bound solution with the Pareto solution is the Pareto solution. This result remains true in the restricted domain when all the indivisible goods are identical, but not when there is a unique indivisible good.This paper was developed during my stay at Rochester University in the summer of 1992. I would like to express my special thanks to Professor William Thomson for all his help and advice. Iam also grateful to my supervisor Luis Corchón, to Koichi Tadenuma and to the anonymous referees for their helpful comments. The remaining errors are my exclusive responsibility. Financial support from the DGCYT under project PB 91-0756 and the Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas are gratefully acknowledged.     

A characterization of strategy-proof social choice functions for economies with pure public goods

We characterize strategy-proof social choice functions when individuals have strictly quasi-concave, continuous and satiated utility functions on convex subsets of IR ^m , representing preferences for the provision of m pure public goods. When specialized to the case m=1, these assumptions amount to requiring that preferences are single peaked, and for such a domain there exists a wide class of strategy-proof social choice functions. These were studied by Moulin (1980) under strong additional assumptions. Our first results characterize the complete class, after an appropriate extension of the single-peakedness condition. The new characterization retains the flavour of Moulin's elegant representation theorem. For the general m-dimensional case, previous results have shown that there is no efficient, strategy-proof, nondictatorial social choice function, even within the domain restrictions under consideration (Border and Jordan 1983; Zhou 1991). In fact, Zhou's powerful result indicates that nondictatorial strategy-proof s.c.f.'s will have a range of dimension one. This allows us to conclude with a complete characterization of all strategy-proof s.c.f.'s on IR ^m , because restrictions of preferences from our admissible class to one dimensional subsets satisfy the slightly generalized notion of single-peakedness that is used in our characterization for the case m=1. We feel that a complete knowledge of the class of strategy-proof mechanisms, in this as well as in other contexts, is an important step in the analysis of the trade-offs between strategy-proofness and other performance criteria, like efficiency.This paper was written while both authors were visiting GREMAQ, Université des Sciences Sociales de Toulouse. We are thankful for its hospitality and good research atmosphere. Barberà's work is supported by the Instituto de Estudios Fiscales and by research grant PB89-0294 from the Secretaría de Estado de Universidades e Investigación, Spain. Jackson acknowledges the support of NSF grant SES8921409. We thank Jacques Crémer, Beth Allen, John Weymark and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on earlier drafts.     

Single-Crossing, Strategic Voting and the Median Choice Rule

This paper studies the strategic foundation of the Representative Voter Theorem (Rothstein in: Pub Choice 72:193–212, 1991), also called the “second version” of the Median Voter Theorem. As a by-product, it also considers the existence of strategy-proof social choice functions over the domain of single-crossing preferences. The main result shows that single-crossing constitutes a domain restriction over the real line that allows not only majority voting equilibria, but also non-manipulable choice rules. In particular, this is true for the median rule, which is found to be group strategic-proof over the full set of alternatives and over every nonempty subset. In addition, the paper also examines the relation between single-crossing and order-restriction. And it uses this relation together with the strategy-proofness of the median rule to prove that the outcome predicted by the Representative Voter Theorem can be implemented in dominant strategies through a simple mechanism. This mechanism is a two-stage voting procedure in which, first, individuals select a representative among themselves, and then the winner chooses a policy to be implemented by the planner.