IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/hiasdp/hias-e-138.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Shutting-out-proofness in object allocation problems with money

Author

Listed:
  • SHINOZAKI, Hiroki

Abstract

We study the problem of allocating heterogeneous objects to agents with money. Each agent can receive several objects and has a quasi-linear utility function. The owner of the objects is only interested in his revenue from an allocation. An (allocation) rule is shutting-out-proof if no group of agents together with the owner ever benefits from shutting out other groups of agents and arranging payments among themselves. We show that on any domain that includes all the additive valuation functions, a Vickrey rule satisfies shutting-out-proofness if and only if all the valuation functions in the domain satisfy the substitutes condition (Kelso and Crawford, 1982). Our result sheds a new light on the relationship between the desirable properties of a Vickrey rule and the substitutes condition (Ausubel and Milgrom, 2002; Milgrom, 2004).

Suggested Citation

  • SHINOZAKI, Hiroki, 2024. "Shutting-out-proofness in object allocation problems with money," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-138, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:hiasdp:hias-e-138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/82185/070_hiasDP-E-138.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    2. Soo Chew & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2007. "Characterizing the Vickrey combinatorial auction by induction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(2), pages 393-406, November.
    3. Ausubel Lawrence M & Milgrom Paul R, 2002. "Ascending Auctions with Package Bidding," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-44, August.
    4. Robert C. Marshall & Leslie M. Marx, 2009. "The Vulnerability of Auctions to Bidder Collusion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 883-910.
    5. Celentani, Marco & Ganuza, Juan-Jose, 2002. "Corruption and competition in procurement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1273-1303, July.
    6. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    7. 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.
    8. Hiroki Shinozaki, 2022. "Characterizing pairwise strategy-proof rules in object allocation problems with money," ISER Discussion Paper 1187, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    9. Che, Yeon-Koo & Condorelli, Daniele & Kim, Jinwoo, 2018. "Weak cartels and collusion-proof auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 398-435.
    10. Roberto Burguet, 2017. "Procurement Design with Corruption," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 315-341, May.
    11. Holmstrom, Bengt, 1979. "Groves' Scheme on Restricted Domains," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1137-1144, September.
    12. Graham, Daniel A & Marshall, Robert C, 1987. "Collusive Bidder Behavior at Single-Object Second-Price and English Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(6), pages 1217-1239, December.
    13. Lengwiler, Yvan & Wolfstetter, Elmar, 2010. "Auctions and corruption: An analysis of bid rigging by a corrupt auctioneer," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1872-1892, October.
    14. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    15. ,, 2008. "Auction design in the presence of collusion," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(3), September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Paul Milgrom, 2006. "Incentives in Core-Selecting Auctions," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000503, UCLA Department of Economics.
    2. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    3. Paul Milgrom, 2006. "Package Auctions and Package Exchanges: the 2004 Fisher-Schultz Lecture," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000131, UCLA Department of Economics.
    4. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Paul Milgrom, 2004. "Ascending Proxy Auctions," Discussion Papers 03-035, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    5. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    6. Olga Gorelkina, 2014. "Bidder Collusion and the Auction with Target Bids," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_10, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    7. Francisco Robles, 2016. "An implementation of the Vickrey outcome with gross-substitutes," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/353, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Peng Hao & Jun-Peng Guo & Eoghan O’Neill & Yong-Heng Shi, 2023. "When Will First-Price Work Well? The Impact of Anti-Corruption Rules on Photovoltaic Power Generation Procurement Auctions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Lawrence M. Ausubel, 2006. "An Efficient Dynamic Auction for Heterogeneous Commodities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 602-629, June.
    10. Ariane Lambert‐Mogiliansky & Konstantin Sonin, 2006. "Collusive Market Sharing and Corruption in Procurement," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 883-908, December.
    11. Kaplan, Uma & Marmer, Vadim & Shneyerov, Artyom, 2016. "Identifying Collusion in English Auctions," Microeconomics.ca working papers vadim_marmer-2016-3, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 08 Jul 2017.
    12. John William Hatfield & Paul R. Milgrom, 2005. "Matching with Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 913-935, September.
    13. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2021. "Multi-object Auction Design Beyond Quasi-linearity: Leading Examples," ISER Discussion Paper 1116r, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, revised Nov 2022.
    14. Ferrara, Gerardo & Li, Xin, 2017. "Central counterparty auction design," Bank of England working papers 669, Bank of England.
    15. van Damme, E.E.C. & Börgers, T., 2003. "Auction Theory for Auction Design," Other publications TiSEM b04d61c2-a33b-4df4-b39b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    16. Blumrosen, Liad & Solan, Eilon, 2023. "Selling spectrum in the presence of shared networks: The case of the Israeli 5G auction," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2).
    17. Soo Chew & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2007. "Characterizing the Vickrey combinatorial auction by induction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(2), pages 393-406, November.
    18. Akiyoshi Shioura & Zaifu Yang, 2013. "Equilibrium, Auction, Multiple Substitutes and Complements," Discussion Papers 13/17, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. John Asker & Mariagiovanna Baccara & SangMok Lee, 2021. "Patent auctions and bidding coalitions: structuring the sale of club goods," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(3), pages 662-690, September.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Shutting-out-proofness; Collusion; Vickrey rules; Substitutes condition; Combinatorial auctions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:hit:hiasdp:hias-e-138. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ashitjp.html .

    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.