IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v49y2017i2d10.1007_s00355-017-1068-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bribe-proofness for single-peaked preferences: characterizations and maximality-of-domains results

Author

Listed:
  • Takuma Wakayama

    (Ryukoku University)

Abstract

This paper considers the problem of allocating an amount of a perfectly divisible resource among agents. We are interested in rules eliminating the possibility that an agent can compensate another to misrepresent her preferences, making both agents strictly better off. Such rules are said to be bribe-proof (Schummer in J Econ Theory 91:180–198, 2000). We first provide necessary and sufficient conditions for any rule defined on the single-peaked domain to be bribe-proof. By invoking this and Ching’s (Soc Choice Welf 11:131–136, 1994) result, we obtain the uniform rule as the unique bribe-proof and symmetric rule on the single-peaked domain. Furthermore, we examine how large a domain can be to allow for the existence of bribe-proof and symmetric rules and show that the convex domain is such a unique maximal domain.

Suggested Citation

  • Takuma Wakayama, 2017. "Bribe-proofness for single-peaked preferences: characterizations and maximality-of-domains results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(2), pages 357-385, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:49:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1068-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-017-1068-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-017-1068-2
    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/s00355-017-1068-2?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. Thomson, William, 1997. "The Replacement Principle in Economies with Single-Peaked Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 145-168, September.
    2. Schummer, James & Thomson, William, 1997. "Two derivations of the uniform rule and an application to bankruptcy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 333-337, September.
    3. Schmeidler, David & Vind, Karl, 1972. "Fair Net Trades," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 40(4), pages 637-642, July.
      • SCHMEIDLER, David & VIND, Karl, 1972. "Fair net trades," LIDAM Reprints CORE 131, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    4. Thomson, William, 1995. "Population-Monotonic Solutions to the Problem of Fair Division When Preferences Are Single-Peaked," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 5(2), pages 229-246, March.
    5. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O. & Neme, Alejandro, 1997. "Strategy-Proof Allotment Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Bettina Klaus & Hans Peters & Ton Storcken, 1997. "Reallocation of an infinitely divisible good," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(2), pages 305-333.
    7. Schummer, James, 2000. "Manipulation through Bribes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 180-198, April.
    8. Hideki Mizukami, 2003. "On the constancy of bribe-proof solutions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 22(1), pages 211-217, August.
    9. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-519, March.
    10. Hideyuki Mizobuchi & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2006. "Maximal Domain for Strategy-proof Rules in Allotment Economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(1), pages 195-210, August.
    11. Thomson William, 1994. "Consistent Solutions to the Problem of Fair Division When Preferences Are Single-Peaked," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 219-245, August.
    12. Toyotaka Sakai & Takuma Wakayama, 2012. "Strategy-proofness, tops-only, and the uniform rule," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 287-301, March.
    13. Ching, Stephen & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 1998. "A Maximal Domain for the Existence of Strategy-Proof Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 157-166, January.
    14. Shigehiro Serizawa, 2006. "Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(2), pages 305-331, April.
    15. Agustín Bonifacio, 2015. "Bribe-proof reallocation with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 617-638, March.
    16. 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.
    17. K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), 2011. "Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    18. William Thomson, 1997. "The replacement principle in economies with indivisible goods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(1), pages 57-66.
    19. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    20. Chun, Youngsub, 2000. "Distributional properties of the uniform rule in economies with single-peaked preferences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 23-27, April.
    21. Chun, Youngsub, 2003. "One-sided population monotonicity, separability, and the uniform rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 343-349, March.
    22. Kesten, Onur, 2006. "More on the uniform rule: Characterizations without Pareto optimality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 192-200, March.
    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. William Thomson, 2016. "Non-bossiness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 665-696, October.
    2. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Takuma Wakayama, 2021. "Fair reallocation in economies with single-peaked preferences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(3), pages 773-785, September.
    3. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2023. "All sequential allotment rules are obviously strategy-proof," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    4. Rodríguez-Álvarez, Carmelo, 2023. "Maximal domains for strategy-proof pairwise exchange," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 107-118.

    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. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Takuma Wakayama, 2021. "Fair reallocation in economies with single-peaked preferences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(3), pages 773-785, September.
    2. Erlanson, Albin & Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol, 2015. "Strategy-proof assignment of multiple resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 137-162.
    3. Shuhei Morimoto & Shigehiro Serizawa & Stephen Ching, 2013. "A characterization of the uniform rule with several commodities and agents," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 871-911, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2012. "The division problem with voluntary participation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 371-406, March.
    6. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Inés Moreno de Barreda & Alejandro Neme, 2015. "Stable partitions in many division problems: the proportional and the sequential dictator solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 227-250, September.
    7. Rebelo, S., 1997. "On the Determinant of Economic Growth," RCER Working Papers 443, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    8. Toyotaka Sakai & Takuma Wakayama, 2012. "Strategy-proofness, tops-only, and the uniform rule," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 287-301, March.
    9. Ruben Juarez & Jung S. You, 2019. "Optimality of the uniform rule under single-peaked preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(1), pages 27-36, May.
    10. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    11. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak, 2016. "The replacement principle in networked economies with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 763-789, December.
    12. Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2001. "Maximal Domain of Preferences in the Division Problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 367-387, November.
    13. Pablo Amorós, 2002. "Single-peaked preferences with several commodities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(1), pages 57-67.
    14. Moulin, Herve, 2002. "Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing," 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 1, chapter 6, pages 289-357, Elsevier.
    15. Zhen Zhao & Shinji Ohseto, 2022. "Strategy-proof and fair reallocation with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(4), pages 791-800, May.
    16. Moreno, Bernardo, 2002. "Single-peaked preferences, endowments and population-monotonicity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 87-95, March.
    17. Agustín Bonifacio, 2015. "Bribe-proof reallocation with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 617-638, March.
    18. Salvador Barberà, 2010. "Strategy-proof social choice," Working Papers 420, Barcelona School of Economics.
    19. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2021. "Individually rational rules for the division problem when the number of units to be allotted is endogenous," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(2), pages 376-401, April.
    20. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2015. "The division problem under constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 56-77.

    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:49:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1068-2. 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.