IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tkk/dpaper/dp108.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Procedurally Fair Implementation: The Cost of Insisting on Symmetry

Author

Listed:
  • Korpela Ville

    (Department of Economics, University of Turku)

Abstract

We derive a necessary and a sufficient condition for Nash implementation with a procedurally fair mechanism. Our result has a nice analogue with the path-braking result of Maskin [Nash equilibrium and welfare optimality, Rev. Econ. Stud. 66 (1999) 23-38.], and therefore, it allows us to give a simple characterization of those choice rules that are implementable, but not in a procedurally fair way. This reveals the constraints that insisting on procedural fairness impose on the collective.

Suggested Citation

  • Korpela Ville, 2016. "Procedurally Fair Implementation: The Cost of Insisting on Symmetry," Discussion Papers 108, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:tkk:dpaper:dp108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ace-economics.fi/kuvat/dp108.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Fairness and implementability in allocation of indivisible objects with monetary compensations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 549-563, June.
    2. Sébastien Rouillon, 2013. "Anonymous implementation of the Lindahl correspondence: possibility and impossibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1179-1203, April.
    3. Moulin, HervÈ, 1997. "Procedural cum Endstate Justice: An Implementation Viewpoint," Working Papers 97-17, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    4. Galbiati, Marco, 2008. "Fair divisions as attracting Nash equilibria of simple games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 72-75, July.
    5. Azrieli, Yaron & Jain, Ritesh, 2018. "Symmetric mechanism design," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 108-118.
    6. , A., 2010. "Supermodular mechanism design," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 5(3), September.
    7. Yan Chen, 2002. "A family of supermodular Nash mechanisms implementing Lindahl allocations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 773-790.
    8. Moore, John & Repullo, Rafael, 1990. "Nash Implementation: A Full Characterization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(5), pages 1083-1099, September.
    9. 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 949-980, November.
    10. Guoqiang Tian, 1989. "Implementation of the Lindahl Correspondence by a Single-Valued, Feasible, and Continuous Mechanism," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(4), pages 613-621.
    11. Epstein, Larry G. & Peters, Michael, 1999. "A Revelation Principle for Competing Mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 119-160, September.
    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. Azrieli, Yaron & Jain, Ritesh, 2018. "Symmetric mechanism design," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 108-118.

    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. Korpela, Ville, 2018. "Procedurally fair implementation under complete information," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 25-31.
    2. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," 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 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    3. Matthew O. Jackson, 2001. "A crash course in implementation theory," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(4), pages 655-708.
    4. Hassan Benchekroun & Charles Figuières & Mabel Tidball, 2016. "Implementation of the Lindahl Correspondance via Simple Indirect Mechanisms," AMSE Working Papers 1637, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    5. Takuma Wakayama & Takehiko Yamato, 2023. "Comparison of the voluntary contribution and Pareto-efficient mechanisms under voluntary participation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 517-553, June.
    6. Korpela, Ville & Lombardi, Michele & Vartiainen, Hannu, 2020. "Do coalitions matter in designing institutions?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    7. Tian, Guoqiang, 2009. "Implementation of Pareto efficient allocations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-2), pages 113-123, January.
    8. Sébastien Rouillon, 2013. "Anonymous implementation of the Lindahl correspondence: possibility and impossibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1179-1203, April.
    9. Lombardi, Michele & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2013. "Natural implementation with partially honest agents in economic environments," MPRA Paper 48294, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Bhaskar Dutta & Arunava Sen & Rajiv Vohra, 1994. "Nash implementation through elementary mechanisms in economic environments," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 1(1), pages 173-203, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Mathevet, Laurent & Taneva, Ina, 2013. "Finite supermodular design with interdependent valuations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 327-349.
    13. Tian, Guoqiang, 1997. "Virtual implementation in incomplete information environments with infinite alternatives and types," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 313-339, October.
    14. Galbiati, Marco, 2008. "Fair divisions as attracting Nash equilibria of simple games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 72-75, July.
    15. Thomson, William, 2005. "Divide-and-permute," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 186-200, July.
    16. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    17. Matt Van Essen, 2015. "Bartering Games in the Kolm Triangle," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(3), pages 297-310, June.
    18. Michele Lombardi & Naoki Yoshihara, 2013. "A full characterization of nash implementation with strategy space reduction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(1), pages 131-151, September.
    19. Michele Lombardi & Naoki Yoshihara, 2020. "Partially-honest Nash implementation: a full characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 871-904, October.
    20. Naoki Yoshihara & Akira Yamada, 2019. "Nash implementation in production economies with unequal skills: a characterization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(1), pages 113-134, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Characterization; Implementation; Nash equilibrium; Other regarding preferences; Procedural fairness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy; Intergenerational Transfers
    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    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:tkk:dpaper:dp108. 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: Susmita Baulia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tukkkfi.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.