IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v48y2017i4d10.1007_s00355-017-1041-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On societies choosing social outcomes, and their memberships: strategy-proofness

Author

Listed:
  • Gustavo Bergantiños

    (Universidade de Vigo)

  • Jordi Massó

    (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)

  • Alejandro Neme

    (Universidad Nacional de San Luis, CONICET)

Abstract

We consider a society whose members have to choose not only an outcome from a given set of outcomes but also the subset of agents that will remain members of the society. We assume that each agent is indifferent between any two alternatives (pairs of final societies and outcomes) provided that the agent does not belong to any of the two final societies, regardless of the chosen outcome. Under this preference domain restriction we characterize the class of all strategy-proof, unanimous and outsider independent rules as the family of all serial dictator rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2017. "On societies choosing social outcomes, and their memberships: strategy-proofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 857-875, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:48:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1041-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-017-1041-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-017-1041-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-017-1041-0?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. Papai, Szilvia, 2001. "Strategyproof and Nonbossy Multiple Assignments," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 3(3), pages 257-271.
    2. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    3. Roberts, Kevin, 2015. "Dynamic voting in clubs," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 320-335.
    4. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    5. Demange,Gabrielle & Wooders,Myrna (ed.), 2005. "Group Formation in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521842716.
    6. Barbera, S. & Maschler, M. & Shalev, J., 2001. "Voting for Voters: A Model of Electoral Evolution," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 40-78, October.
    7. ,, 2015. "Serial dictatorship: the unique optimal allocation rule when information is endogenous," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), May.
    8. Lars-Gunnar Svensson, 1999. "Strategy-proof allocation of indivisible goods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(4), pages 557-567.
    9. Mark A. Satterthwaite & Hugo Sonnenschein, 1981. "Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms at Differentiable Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(4), pages 587-597.
    10. Gabrielle Demange & Wooders Myrna, 2005. "Group Formation in Economics: Networks, Clubs and Coalitions," Post-Print halshs-00576778, HAL.
    11. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen, 1975. "Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-217, April.
    12. Deb, Rajat & Razzolini, Laura, 1999. "Auction-Like Mechanisms for Pricing Excludable Public Goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 340-368, October.
    13. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, 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. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2018. "On societies choosing social outcomes, and their memberships: internal stability and consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 83-97, January.

    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. Barberà, Salvador & Berga, Dolors & Moreno, Bernardo, 2022. "Restricted environments and incentive compatibility in interdependent values models," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-28.
    2. Mackenzie, Andrew & Zhou, Yu, 2022. "Menu mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    3. Tayfun Sönmez, 1994. "Strategy-proofness in many-to-one matching problems," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 1(1), pages 365-380, December.
    4. Carmelo Rodríguez-Álvarez, 2009. "Strategy-proof coalition formation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 38(3), pages 431-452, November.
    5. Ricardo Martínez & Bernardo Moreno, 2011. "Manipulability in Restricted Separable Domains," Working Papers 2011-01, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    6. Ricardo Martínez & Bernardo Moreno, 2013. "Strategy-proofness on restricted separable domains," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 17(4), pages 323-333, December.
    7. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    8. Bock, Hans-Hermann & Day, William H. E. & McMorris, F. R., 1998. "Consensus rules for committee elections," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 219-232, May.
    9. Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    10. Takamiya, Koji, 2001. "Coalition strategy-proofness and monotonicity in Shapley-Scarf housing markets," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 201-213, March.
    11. Picot, Jérémy & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "An extreme point characterization of random strategy-proof social choice functions: The two alternative case," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 49-52.
    12. Kentaro Hatsumi & Dolors Berga & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2014. "A maximal domain for strategy-proof and no-vetoer rules in the multi-object choice model," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(1), pages 153-168, February.
    13. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Bonifacio, Agustín G., 2024. "Obvious manipulations of tops-only voting rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 12-24.
    14. M. Sanver, 2009. "Strategy-proofness of the plurality rule over restricted domains," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 39(3), pages 461-471, June.
    15. Monte, Daniel & Tumennasan, Norovsambuu, 2015. "Centralized allocation in multiple markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 74-85.
    16. Corchón, Luis C., 2008. "The theory of implementation : what did we learn?," UC3M Working papers. Economics we081207, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    17. 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.
    18. Debasis Mishra & Abdul Quadir, 2012. "Deterministic single object auctions with private values," Discussion Papers 12-06, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    19. Alexander Reffgen, 2011. "Generalizing the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem: partial preferences, the degree of manipulation, and multi-valuedness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(1), pages 39-59, June.
    20. Salvador Barbera & Matthew Jackson, 1991. "A Characterization of Strategy-Proof Social Choice Functions for Economies with Pure Public Goods," Discussion Papers 964, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.

    More about this item

    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:spr:sochwe:v:48:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1041-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.