Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation
Abstract"Strategy-proofness" is one of the axioms that are most frequently used in the recent literature on social choice theory. It requires that by misrepresenting his preferences, no agent can manipulate the outcome of the social choice rule in his favor. The stronger requirement of "group strategy-proofness" is also often employed to obtain clear characterization results of social choice rules. Group strategy-proofness requires that no group of agents can manipulate the outcome in their favors. In this paper, we advocate "effective pairwise strategy-proofness." It is the requirement that the social choice rule should be immune to unilateral manipulation and "self-enforcing" pairwise manipulation in the sense that no agent of a pair has the incentive to betray his partner. We apply the axiom of effective pairwise strategy-proofness to three types of economies: public good economy, pure exchange economy, and allotment economy. Although effective pairwise strategy-proofness is seemingly a much weaker axiom than group strategy-proofness, effective pairwise strategy-proofness characterizes social choice rules that are analyzed by using different axioms in the literature.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Social Choice and Welfare.
Volume (Year): 26 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/index.htm
Other versions of this item:
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 2005. "Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation," ISER Discussion Paper 0629, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1997.
"Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies,"
Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 379-380.
- Serizawa, Shigehiro, 1996. "Strategy-Proof and Individually Rational Social Choice Functions for Public Good Economies," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 501-12, April.
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1996. "Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies (*)," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 501-512.
- Eric Maskin, 1998.
"Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1829, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Lin Zhou, 1990. "Inefficiency of Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms in Pure Exchange Economies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 954, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Salvador Barbera & Matthew O. Jackson, 1993.
1021, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1999. "Strategy-Proof and Symmetric Social Choice Functions for Public Good Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 121-146, January.
- Shigehiro Serizawa & John A. Weymark, 2002.
"Efficient Strategy-Proof Exchange and Minimum Consumption Guarantees,"
Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers
0216, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics, revised Aug 2002.
- Serizawa, Shigehiro & Weymark, John A., 2003. "Efficient strategy-proof exchange and minimum consumption guarantees," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 246-263, April.
- Peter Sudhölter & Bezalel Peleg, 1999.
"Single-peakedness and coalition-proofness,"
Review of Economic Design,
Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 381-387.
- James Schummer, 1997.
"Manipulation Through Bribes,"
1207, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- James Schummer, 1996. "Strategy-proofness versus efficiency on restricted domains of exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 47-56.
- Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2002. "Inefficiency of Strategy-Proof Rules for Pure Exchange Economies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 219-241, October.
- Musgrave, R.A., 1985. "A brief history of fiscal doctrine," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 1-59 Elsevier.
- Salvador Barberà, 2010.
"Strategy-proof social choice,"
420, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- Mizukami, Hideki & Wakayama, Takuma, 2009. "The relation between non-bossiness and monotonicity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 256-264, September.
- Vito Fragnelli & Maria Erminia Marina, 2009. "Strategic Manipulations and Collusions in Knaster Procedure," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 3(2), pages 143-153, July.
- Barberà, Salvador & Berga, Dolors & Moreno, Bernardo, 2010.
"Individual versus group strategy-proofness: When do they coincide?,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1648-1674, September.
- Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2009. "Individual versus group strategy-proofness: when do they coincide?," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 761.09, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2009. "Individual versus group strategy proofedness: when do they coincide?," Working Papers 372, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2006.
"Group Strategyproofness in Queueing Models,"
Economics Discussion Papers
610, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
- Sato, Shin, 2013. "A sufficient condition for the equivalence of strategy-proofness and nonmanipulability by preferences adjacent to the sincere one," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 259-278.
- Shuhei Morimoto & Shigehiro Serizawa & Stephen Ching, 2013.
"A characterization of the uniform rule with several commodities and agents,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 871-911, March.
- Shuhei Morimoto & Shigehiro Serizawa & Stephen Ching, 2009. "A Characterization of the Uniform Rule with Several Commodities and Agents," ISER Discussion Paper 0769, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
- Bochet, Olivier & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2010. "Secure implementation in allotment economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 35-49, January.
- Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2013.
"Coalitional manipulation on networks,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 627-662.
- Biung-Ghi Ju, 2004. "Coalitional Manipulation on Networks," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 200410, University of Kansas, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2004.
- Adachi, Tsuyoshi, 2010. "The uniform rule with several commodities: A generalization of Sprumont's characterization," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 952-964, November.
- Jin Li & Jingyi Xue, 2013. "Egalitarian division under Leontief Preferences," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 597-622, November.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.