IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v93y2016ipap596-617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Private parking slot sharing

Author

Listed:
  • Xu, Su Xiu
  • Cheng, Meng
  • Kong, Xiang T.R.
  • Yang, Hai
  • Huang, George Q.

Abstract

This paper addresses the private parking slot sharing problem during regular working hours in a big city. Our results extend the existing market design theory so that money flow is allowed in the matching mechanisms. We consider two cases of money flow: (i) one agent who fails to exchange his parking slot can join the leasing mechanism as a lessor; and (ii) one agent who fails in parking slot exchange can always “transfer” (rent) his parking slots to the platform. Each agent is self-interested. We propose the (price-compatible) top trading cycles and deals (TTCD) mechanism for case (i) and the price-compatible top trading cycles and chains (PC-TTCC) mechanism for case (ii). Both mechanisms are effective in terms of the compatibility with money flow, agents’ welfare, and strategy-proofness. Our experimental results further show that the proposed mechanisms would result in remarkable social welfare, and (ex post) budget balance for the platform in a big city with large population. In some realistic settings, our proposed mechanisms can almost realize cost saving of 60% and make more than 50% of agents strictly better off. There is no private parking slot sharing in the benchmark case. Overall, this paper opens the door to the solutions of a host of price-compatible matching problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Xu, Su Xiu & Cheng, Meng & Kong, Xiang T.R. & Yang, Hai & Huang, George Q., 2016. "Private parking slot sharing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 596-617.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:93:y:2016:i:pa:p:596-617
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2016.08.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261516302119
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2016.08.017?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shoup, Donald, 2011. "Free Parking or Free Markets," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt00w047hr, University of California Transportation Center.
    2. Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez, 2005. "A Kidney Exchange Clearinghouse in New England," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 376-380, May.
    3. Abdulkadiroglu, Atila & Sonmez, Tayfun, 1999. "House Allocation with Existing Tenants," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 233-260, October.
    4. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for Parking," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt55s7079f, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    6. Qian, Zhen (Sean) & Rajagopal, Ram, 2014. "Optimal occupancy-driven parking pricing under demand uncertainties and traveler heterogeneity: A stochastic control approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 144-165.
    7. Sönmez, Tayfun & Ünver, M. Utku, 2014. "Altruistically unbalanced kidney exchange," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 105-129.
    8. Zou, Bo & Kafle, Nabin & Wolfson, Ouri & Lin, Jie (Jane), 2015. "A mechanism design based approach to solving parking slot assignment in the information era," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 631-653.
    9. Krishna, Aradhna & Wang, Yu, 2007. "The relationship between top trading cycles mechanism and top trading cycles and chains mechanism," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 539-547, January.
    10. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    11. Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2009. "Matching, Allocation, and Exchange of Discrete Resources," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 717, Boston College Department of Economics.
    12. Du, Lili & Gong, Siyuan, 2016. "Stochastic Poisson game for an online decentralized and coordinated parking mechanism," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 44-63.
    13. Tayfun Sönmez & Alvin E. Roth & M. Utku Ünver, 2007. "Efficient Kidney Exchange: Coincidence of Wants in Markets with Compatibility-Based Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 828-851, June.
    14. Roth, Alvin E. & Sonmez, Tayfun & Utku Unver, M., 2005. "Pairwise kidney exchange," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 151-188, December.
    15. Shoup, Donald C., 2006. "Cruising for parking," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 479-486, November.
    16. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tayfun Sonmez, 1998. "Random Serial Dictatorship and the Core from Random Endowments in House Allocation Problems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 689-702, May.
    17. Shapley, Lloyd & Scarf, Herbert, 1974. "On cores and indivisibility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 23-37, March.
    18. Roth, Alvin E., 1982. "Incentive compatibility in a market with indivisible goods," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 127-132.
    19. Xu, Su Xiu & Cheng, Meng & Huang, George Q., 2015. "Efficient intermodal transportation auctions for B2B e-commerce logistics with transaction costs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 322-337.
    20. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Xiaotian & Wang, Xin, 2019. "Flexible parking reservation system and pricing: A continuum approximation approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 408-434.
    2. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng & Gao, Ziyou, 2018. "Shared parking problem: A novel truthful double auction mechanism approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 40-69.
    3. Shao, Saijun & Xu, Su Xiu & Yang, Hai & Huang, George Q., 2020. "Parking reservation disturbances," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 83-97.
    4. Nourinejad, Mehdi & Roorda, Matthew J., 2017. "Impact of hourly parking pricing on travel demand," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 28-45.
    5. Yan, Qianqian & Feng, Tao & Timmermans, Harry, 2023. "A model of household shared parking decisions incorporating equity-seeking household dynamics and leadership personality traits," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Sun, Xiaotong & Yin, Yafeng, 2021. "Decentralized game-theoretical approaches for behaviorally-stable and efficient vehicle platooning," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 45-69.
    7. Zhang, Miao & Kang, Jiaxi & Tang, Ruixin & Xu, Fangyuan & Fan, Yiliang & Tang, Xiongming & Zhang, Haotian, 2020. "Sharing car park system for parking units of multiple EVs in a power market," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Yangbeibei Ji & Xueqing Lu & Hanwan Jiang & Xinyang Zhu & Jiao Wang, 2022. "Layout Optimization for Shared Parking Spaces Considering Shared Parking Walking Time and Parking Fee," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Marianne Guillet & Maximilian Schiffer, 2022. "Coordinating charging request allocation between self-interested navigation service platforms," Papers 2208.09530, arXiv.org.
    10. Jian, Sisi & Liu, Wei & Wang, Xiaolei & Yang, Hai & Waller, S. Travis, 2020. "On integrating carsharing and parking sharing services," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 19-44.
    11. Zhang, Fangni & Lindsey, Robin & Yang, Hai & Shao, Chaoyi & Liu, Wei, 2022. "Two-sided pricing strategies for a parking sharing platform: Reselling or commissioning?," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 40-63.
    12. Yifei Cai & Jun Chen & Chu Zhang & Bin Wang, 2018. "A Parking Space Allocation Method to Make a Shared Parking Strategy for Appertaining Parking Lots of Public Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Ning, Yu & Yan, Mian & Xu, Su Xiu & Li, Yina & Li, Lixu, 2021. "Shared parking acceptance under perceived network externality and risks: Theory and evidence," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 1-15.
    14. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng & Yang, Hai, 2020. "Pricing strategies for shared parking management with double auction approach: Differential price vs. uniform price," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    15. Jiang, Bowen & Fan, Zhi-Ping, 2020. "Optimal allocation of shared parking slots considering parking unpunctuality under a platform-based management approach," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    16. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng, 2022. "Modelling bidding behaviors in shared parking auctions considering anticipated regrets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 88-106.
    17. Tan, Bing Qing & Xu, Su Xiu & Kang, Kai & Xu, Gangyan & Qin, Wei, 2021. "A reverse Vickrey auction for physical internet (PI) enabled parking management systems," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    18. Wang, Yineng & Li, Meng & Lin, Xi & He, Fang, 2021. "Online operations strategies for automated multistory parking facilities," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    19. Olus Inan, Murat & Inci, Eren & Robin Lindsey, C., 2019. "Spillover parking," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 197-228.
    20. Yunqiang Xue & Qifang Kong & Feng Sun & Meng Zhong & Haokai Tu & Caifeng Tan & Hongzhi Guan, 2022. "Shared Parking Decision Behavior of Parking Space Owners and Car Travelers Based on Prospect Theory—A Case Study of Nanchang City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-17, December.

    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. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez, 2006. "Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000001022, UCLA Department of Economics.
    2. Yuji Fujinaka & Takuma Wakayama, 2011. "Secure implementation in Shapley–Scarf housing markets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(1), pages 147-169, September.
    3. Alvin Roth, 2008. "Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(3), pages 537-569, March.
    4. , & , E., 2014. "Free riding and participation in large scale, multi-hospital kidney exchange," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    5. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2012. "Alvin E. Roth and Lloyd S. Shapley: Stable allocations and the practice of market design," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2012-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    6. Tayfun Sönmez & M Utku Ünver, 2017. "Market design for living-donor organ exchanges: an economic policy perspective," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 676-704.
    7. Ivan Balbuzanov & Maciej H. Kotowski, 2019. "Endowments, Exclusion, and Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(5), pages 1663-1692, September.
    8. Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "What Have We Learned from Market Design?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 79-112.
    9. Wang, Pengfei & Guan, Hongzhi & Liu, Peng, 2020. "Modeling and solving the optimal allocation-pricing of public parking resources problem in urban-scale network," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 74-98.
    10. Nicolò, Antonio & Rodríguez-Álvarez, Carmelo, 2017. "Age-based preferences in paired kidney exchange," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 508-524.
    11. Ekici, Özgün, 2020. "Random mechanisms for house allocation with existing tenants," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 53-65.
    12. Ehlers, Lars, 2014. "Top trading with fixed tie-breaking in markets with indivisible goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 64-87.
    13. Min Zhu, 2013. "College Admissions in China : A Mechanism Design Perspective," Working Papers halshs-00860931, HAL.
    14. Ross Anderson & Itai Ashlagi & David Gamarnik & Michael Rees & Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2015. "Kidney Exchange and the Alliance for Paired Donation: Operations Research Changes the Way Kidneys Are Transplanted," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 26-42, February.
    15. Min Zhu, 2013. "College Admissions in China : A Mechanism Design Perspective," Working Papers 1327, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    16. Miyagawa, Eiichi, 2001. "House Allocation with Transfers," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 329-355, October.
    17. Nicoló, Antonio & Rodríguez-Álvarez, Carmelo, 2012. "Transplant quality and patientsʼ preferences in paired kidney exchange," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 299-310.
    18. Ekici, Özgün, 2013. "Reclaim-proof allocation of indivisible objects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1-10.
    19. Pycia, Marek & Unver, Utku, 2017. "Incentive compatible allocation and exchange of discrete resources," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    20. Anno, Hidekazu & Kurino, Morimitsu, 2016. "On the operation of multiple matching markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 166-185.

    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:eee:transb:v:93:y:2016:i:pa:p:596-617. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    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.