Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Divide-and-Permute

Contents:

Author Info

Abstract

We construct "simple" games implementing in Nash equilibria several solutions to the problem of fair division. These solutions are the no-envy solution, which selects the allocations such that no agent would prefer someone else's bundle to his own, and several variants of this solution. Components of strategies can be interpreted as allocations, consumption bundles, permutations, points in simplices of dimensionalities equal to the number of goods or to the number of agents, and integers. We also propose a simple game implementing the Pareto solution and games implementing the intersections of the Pareto solution with each of these solutions.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://rcer.econ.rochester.edu/RCERPAPERS/rcer_510.pdf
File Function: full text
Download Restriction: None

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER) in its series RCER Working Papers with number 510.

as in new window
Length: 20 pages
Date of creation: Nov 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:roc:rocher:510

Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Rochester, Center for Economic Research, Department of Economics, Harkness 231 Rochester, New York 14627 U.S.A.

Related research

Keywords: Nash implementation. No-envy. Divide-and-permute.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Eric Maskin & Tomas Sjostrom, 2001. "Implementation Theory," Economics Working Papers 0006, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
  2. Jackson, Matthew O, 1992. "Implementation in Undominated.Strategies: A Look at Bounded Mechanisms," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 757-75, October.
  3. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-19, March.
  4. Thomson, W., 1996. "Monotonic Extension on Economic Domains," RCER Working Papers 431, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  5. Weller, Dietrich, 1985. "Fair division of a measurable space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 5-17, February.
  6. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O, 1995. "Strategy-Proof Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 51-87, January.
  7. Eric Maskin, 1998. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1829, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  8. Crawford, Vincent P, 1979. "A Procedure for Generating Pareto-Efficient Egalitarian-Equivalent Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 49-60, January.
  9. James Schummer, 1996. "Strategy-proofness versus efficiency on restricted domains of exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 47-56.
  10. Demange, Gabrielle, 1984. "Implementing Efficient Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1167-77, September.
  11. Tian, Guoqiang, 1989. "Implementation of the Lindahl Correspondence by a Single-Valued, Feasible, and Continuous Mechanism," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 613-21, October.
  12. Brams,Steven J. & Taylor,Alan D., 1996. "Fair Division," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521556446, December.
  13. Palfrey, Thomas R & Srivastava, Sanjay, 1987. "On Bayesian Implementable Allocations," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 193-208, April.
  14. Tadenuma Koichi & Thomson William, 1995. "Games of Fair Division," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 191-204, May.
  15. Walker, Mark, 1981. "A Simple Incentive Compatible Scheme for Attaining Lindahl Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 65-71, January.
  16. Bhaskar Dutta & Arunava Sen & Rajiv Vohra, 1994. "Nash implementation through elementary mechanisms in economic environments," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 173-203, December.
  17. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 1988. "Strategy Space Reduction in Maskin's Theorem: Sufficient Conditions for Nash Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 693-700, May.
  18. Pazner, Elisha A & Schmeidler, David, 1978. "Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations: A New Concept of Economic Equity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 92(4), pages 671-87, November.
  19. Hurwicz, L, 1979. "Outcome Functions Yielding Walrasian and Lindahl Allocations at Nash Equilibrium Points," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 217-25, April.
  20. Kolpin, Van, 1991. "Equity and the core," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 137-150, October.
  21. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Tatamitani, Yoshikatsu & Yamato, Takehiko, 1996. "Toward Natural Implementation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 949-80, November.
  22. Berliant, Marcus & Thomson, William & Dunz, Karl, 1992. "On the fair division of a heterogeneous commodity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 201-216.
  23. Postlewaite, Andrew & Wettstein, David, 1989. "Feasible and Continuous Implementation," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 603-11, October.
  24. Thomson, William, 1982. "An informationally efficient equity criterion," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 243-263, July.
  25. Thomson, W., 1992. "Consistent Extensions," RCER Working Papers 329, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  26. Crawford, Vincent P, 1977. "A Game of Fair Division," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 235-47, June.
  27. 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.
  28. Reichelstein, Stefan & Reiter, Stanley, 1988. "Game Forms with Minimal Message Spaces," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 661-92, May.
  29. Yamato, Takehiko, 1992. "On nash implementation of social choice correspondences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 484-492, 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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Takashi Hayashi & Toyotaka Sakai, 2009. "Nash implementation of competitive equilibria in the job-matching market," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 453-467, November.
  2. Marco LiCalzi & Antonio Nicolo, 2007. "Efficient Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations over a Single Good," Working Papers 152, Department of Applied Mathematics, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
  3. Nicolò, Antonio & Yu, Yan, 2008. "Strategic divide and choose," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 268-289, September.
  4. R?bert F. Veszteg, 2004. "Fairness under Uncertainty with Indivisibilities," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 613.04, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  5. Amorós, Pablo, 2009. "Eliciting socially optimal rankings from unfair jurors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1211-1226, May.
  6. Veiga, Helena & Vorsatz, Marc, 2006. "Price Manipulation in an Experimental Asset Market," Research Memorandum 024, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  7. Olivier Bochet, 2007. "Implementation of the Walrasian correspondence: the boundary problem," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 301-316, October.
  8. Luis C. Corchon, 2007. "The theory of implementation : what did we learn?," Economics Working Papers we081207, Universidad Carlos III, Departamento de Economía.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:roc:rocher:510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gabriel Mihalache).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.