IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2008.09932.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lindahl Equilibrium as a Collective Choice Rule

Author

Listed:
  • Faruk Gul

    (Princeton University)

  • Wolfgang Pesendorfer

    (Princeton University)

Abstract

A collective choice problem is a finite set of social alternatives and a finite set of economic agents with vNM utility functions. We associate a public goods economy with each collective choice problem and establish the existence and efficiency of (equal income) Lindahl equilibrium allocations. We interpret collective choice problems as cooperative bargaining problems and define a set-valued solution concept, {\it the equitable solution} (ES). We provide axioms that characterize ES and show that ES contains the Nash bargaining solution. Our main result shows that the set of ES payoffs is the same a the set of Lindahl equilibrium payoffs. We consider two applications: in the first, we show that in a large class of matching problems without transfers the set of Lindahl equilibrium payoffs is the same as the set of (equal income) Walrasian equilibrium payoffs. In our second application, we show that in any discrete exchange economy without transfers every Walrasian equilibrium payoff is a Lindahl equilibrium payoff of the corresponding collective choice market. Moreover, for any cooperative bargaining problem, it is possible to define a set of commodities so that the resulting economy's utility possibility set is that bargaining problem {\it and} the resulting economy's set of Walrasian equilibrium payoffs is the same as the set of Lindahl equilibrium payoffs of the corresponding collective choice market.

Suggested Citation

  • Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2020. "Lindahl Equilibrium as a Collective Choice Rule," Papers 2008.09932, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2008.09932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2008.09932
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreu Mas-Colell, 1992. "Equilibrium Theory with Possibly Satiated Preferences," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Mukul Majumdar (ed.), Equilibrium and Dynamics, chapter 9, pages 201-213, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    3. Thomson, William, 1994. "Cooperative models of bargaining," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 35, pages 1237-1284, Elsevier.
    4. Kelso, Alexander S, Jr & Crawford, Vincent P, 1982. "Job Matching, Coalition Formation, and Gross Substitutes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1483-1504, November.
    5. Hylland, Aanund & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1979. "The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 293-314, April.
    6. Satoru Fujishige & Zaifu Yang, 2003. "A Note on Kelso and Crawford's Gross Substitutes Condition," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 463-469, August.
    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. Brandl, Florian & Brandt, Felix & Greger, Matthias & Peters, Dominik & Stricker, Christian & Suksompong, Warut, 2022. "Funding public projects: A case for the Nash product rule," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Florian Brandl & Felix Brandt & Matthias Greger & Dominik Peters & Christian Stricker & Warut Suksompong, 2022. "Funding public projects: A case for the Nash product rule," Post-Print hal-03818329, HAL.

    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. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    2. Izat B. Baybusinov & Enrico Maria Fenoaltea & Yi-Cheng Zhang, 2022. "Negotiation problem," Papers 2201.12619, arXiv.org.
    3. Battal Doğan & M. Bumin Yenmez, 2023. "When does an additional stage improve welfare in centralized assignment?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1145-1173, November.
    4. Yokote, Koji, 2021. "Consistency of the doctor-optimal equilibrium price vector in job-matching markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Alexis Garapin & Michel Hollard & Stéphane Robin & Bernard Ruffieux, 2000. "L'inefficacité d'une chaîne de monopoles : une étude expérimentale en situation de négociation répétée," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 145(4), pages 1-18.
    6. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & António Osório & Josep E. Peris, 2015. "From Bargaining Solutions to Claims Rules: A Proportional Approach," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-7, March.
    7. Miralles, Antonio & Pycia, Marek, 2021. "Foundations of pseudomarkets: Walrasian equilibria for discrete resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    8. Naeve-Steinweg, Elisabeth, 2002. "Mechanisms supporting the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 25-36, September.
    9. Yokote, Koji, 2017. "Application of the discrete separation theorem to auctions," MPRA Paper 82884, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Danilov, V. & Koshevoy, G. & Lang, C., 2013. "Equilibria in Markets with Indivisible Goods," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 10-34.
    11. Kojima, Fuhito, 2013. "Efficient resource allocation under multi-unit demand," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-14.
    12. Geoffroy de Clippel, 2009. "Axiomatic Bargaining on Economic Enviornments with Lott," Working Papers 2009-5, Brown University, Department of Economics.
    13. Jaume García Segarra & Miguel Ginés Vilar, 2011. "Weighted Proportional Losses Solution," ThE Papers 10/21, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    14. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    15. Mariotti, Marco, 1996. "Non-optimal Nash Bargaining Solutions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 15-20, July.
    16. Ozan Candogan & Markos Epitropou & Rakesh V. Vohra, 2021. "Competitive Equilibrium and Trading Networks: A Network Flow Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 114-147, January.
    17. Satoru Fujishige & Akihisa Tamura, 2007. "A Two-Sided Discrete-Concave Market with Possibly Bounded Side Payments: An Approach by Discrete Convex Analysis," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 136-155, February.
    18. Kazuo Murota, 2016. "Discrete convex analysis: A tool for economics and game theory," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 1(1), pages 151-273, December.
    19. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2022. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2987-3007, April.
    20. l'Haridon, Olivier & Malherbet, Franck & Pérez-Duarte, Sébastien, 2013. "Does bargaining matter in the small firms matching model?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 42-58.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2008.09932. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.