IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ndjtrf/207429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Optimization Approach Applied to Fair Division Transportation Funding Allocation Models

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Carlos M.
  • Montes, Edith

Abstract

The problem of multiple necessities and limited funds is common in the transportation field. Funding allocation for a transportation agency often involves prioritizing the allocation of funds across a number of participants who have their own needs and preferences. If a participant believes that the final allocation is unfair, then this perception could result in the generation of envy. In this paper, a genetic optimization technique is applied to a Fair Division Transportation Funding Allocation Model (FDTFAM) to minimize the total envy based on the participant’s own priorities and the budget constraints.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Carlos M. & Montes, Edith, 2014. "An Optimization Approach Applied to Fair Division Transportation Funding Allocation Models," Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Transportation Research Forum, vol. 53(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ndjtrf:207429
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.207429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/207429/files/2014v53n1_07_TransportationFunding.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.207429?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Varian, Hal R., 1974. "Equity, envy, and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 63-91, September.
    2. Dall'Aglio, Marco & Mosca, Raffaele, 2007. "How to allocate hard candies fairly," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 218-237, December.
    3. Flip Klijn, 2000. "An algorithm for envy-free allocations in an economy with indivisible objects and money," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(2), pages 201-215.
    4. Brams, S.J. & Taylor, A.D., 1993. "Fair Division by Point Allocation," Working Papers 93-42, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meertens, Marc & Potters, Jos & Reijnierse, Hans, 2002. "Envy-free and Pareto efficient allocations in economies with indivisible goods and money," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 223-233, December.
    2. Rodrigo A. Velez, 2017. "Equitable rent division," Working Papers 20170818-001, Texas A&M University, Department of Economics.
    3. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    4. Johannes Brustle & Jack Dippel & Vishnu V. Narayan & Mashbat Suzuki & Adrian Vetta, 2019. "One Dollar Each Eliminates Envy," Papers 1912.02797, arXiv.org.
    5. Rajni Goel & Hare Krishna, 2022. "Statistical inference for two Lindley populations under balanced joint progressive type-II censoring scheme," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 263-286, March.
    6. Salvador Barberà & Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2021. "Daunou’s voting rule and the lexicographic assignment of priorities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 259-289, February.
    7. Mariotti, Marco & Wen, Quan, 2021. "A noncooperative foundation of the competitive divisions for bads," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    8. Bengt-Arne Wickström, 2013. "The optimal Babel: an economic framework for the analysis of dynamic language rights," Chapters, in: Francisco Cabrillo & Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro (ed.), Constitutional Economics and Public Institutions, chapter 18, pages 322-344, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Kotaro Suzumura, 2020. "Reflections on Arrow’s research program of social choice theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 219-235, March.
    10. Velez, Rodrigo A., 2011. "Are incentives against economic justice?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 326-345, January.
    11. Ilya Nikolaevskiy & Andrey Lukyanenko & Andrei Gurtov, 2017. "Nash Bargaining Solution Allocation is Not Suitable for Datacenter Jobs," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(01), pages 1-22, March.
    12. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin & Fedor Sandomirskiy & Elena Yanovskaia, 2019. "Dividing bads under additive utilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 395-417, March.
    13. Wolfgang Buchholz & Wolfgang Peters, 2007. "Justifying the Lindahl solution as an outcome of fair cooperation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 157-169, October.
    14. Fleurbaey, Marc & Maniquet, François, 2017. "Fairness and well-being measurement," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 119-126.
    15. Luofeng Liao & Yuan Gao & Christian Kroer, 2022. "Statistical Inference for Fisher Market Equilibrium," Papers 2209.15422, arXiv.org.
    16. Chiara Donnini & Marialaura Pesce, 2020. "Strict fairness of equilibria in asymmetric information economies and mixed markets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(1), pages 107-124, February.
    17. Mooney, Gavin & Jan, Stephen, 1997. "Vertical equity: weighting outcomes? or establishing procedures?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 79-87, January.
    18. Helm, Carsten & Simonis, Udo E., 2000. "Verteilungsgerechtigkeit in der internationalen Umweltpolitik: Theoretische Fundierung und exemplarische Formulierung," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Environmental Policy FS II 00-403, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    19. Simona Cicognani & Anna D’Ambrosio & Werner Güth & Simone Pfuderer & Matteo Ploner, 2015. "Community projects: an experimental analysis of a fair implementation process," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 109-132, January.
    20. José Alcalde & Antonio Romero-Medina, 2017. "Fair student placement," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(2), pages 293-307, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Economics;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ndjtrf:207429. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.trforum.org/journal/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.