IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ijethy/v19y2023i3p526-558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Refining the Lorenz‐ranking of rules for claims problems on restricted domains

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel Ángel Mirás Calvo
  • Iago Núñez Lugilde
  • Carmen Quinteiro Sandomingo
  • Estela Sánchez Rodríguez

Abstract

The comparison of the central rules for claims problems, according to the Lorenz order, has been studied not only on the entire set of problems but also on some restricted domains. We provide new characterizations of the adjusted proportional rule as being Lorenz‐maximal or Lorenz‐minimal within a class of rules on the half‐domains. Using this result, we rank the adjusted proportional, the minimal overlap, and the average‐of‐awards rules by analyzing whether or not these rules satisfy progressivity and regressivity on the half‐domains. We also find that the adjusted proportional rule violates two well‐known claim monotonicity properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel Ángel Mirás Calvo & Iago Núñez Lugilde & Carmen Quinteiro Sandomingo & Estela Sánchez Rodríguez, 2023. "Refining the Lorenz‐ranking of rules for claims problems on restricted domains," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 19(3), pages 526-558, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:ijethy:v:19:y:2023:i:3:p:526-558
    DOI: 10.1111/ijet.12366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijet.12366
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ijet.12366?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
    2. William Thomson, 2012. "Lorenz rankings of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(3), pages 547-569, August.
    3. Biung-Ghi Ju & Juan Moreno-Ternero, 2008. "On the equivalence between progressive taxation and inequality reduction," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(4), pages 561-569, May.
    4. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Cori Vilella, 2016. "The global carbon budget: a conflicting claims problem," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 693-703, June.
    5. Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 2005. "Convergence under replication of rules to adjudicate conflicting claims," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 129-142, February.
    6. Biung-Ghi Ju & Juan Moreno-Ternero, 2011. "Progressive and merging-proof taxation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(1), pages 43-62, February.
    7. José Alcalde & María Marco & José Silva, 2008. "The minimal overlap rule revisited," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(1), pages 109-128, June.
    8. Miguel Ángel Mirás Calvo & Carmen Quinteiro Sandomingo & Estela Sánchez-Rodríguez, 2022. "The average-of-awards rule for claims problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 863-888, November.
    9. José Alcalde & María Marco & José Silva, 2005. "Bankruptcy games and the Ibn Ezra’s proposal," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(1), pages 103-114, July.
    10. Kristof Bosmans & Luc Lauwers, 2011. "Lorenz comparisons of nine rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 791-807, November.
    11. Sofia Grahn & Mark Voorneveld, 2002. "Population Monotonic Allocation Schemes in Bankruptcy Games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 317-329, January.
    12. Miguel Ángel Mirás Calvo & Carmen Quinteiro Sandomingo & Estela Sánchez Rodríguez, 2016. "Monotonicity implications for the ranking of rules for airport problems," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 12(4), pages 379-400, December.
    13. Juan D. Moreno‐Ternero & Antonio Villar, 2006. "On the Relative Equitability of a Family of Taxation Rules," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 8(2), pages 283-291, May.
    14. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    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. 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.
    2. Kristof Bosmans & Erik Schokkaert, 2009. "Equality preference in the claims problem: a questionnaire study of cuts in earnings and pensions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(4), pages 533-557, November.
    3. Satya R. Chakravarty & Palash Sarkar, 2022. "Inequality minimising subsidy and taxation," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(1), pages 53-67, May.
    4. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & M. Carmen Marco-Gil & Juan-Francisco Sánchez-García, 2022. "New empirical insights into conflicting claims problems," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 709-738, December.
    5. Sanchez-Soriano, Joaquin, 2021. "Families of sequential priority rules and random arrival rules with withdrawal limits," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 136-148.
    6. Kasajima, Yoichi & Velez, Rodrigo A., 2010. "Non-proportional inequality preservation in gains and losses," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1079-1092, November.
    7. Yoichi Kasajima & Rodrigo Velez, 2011. "Reflecting inequality of claims in gains and losses," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(2), pages 283-295, February.
    8. William Thomson, 2012. "Lorenz rankings of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(3), pages 547-569, August.
    9. William Thomson, 2008. "Two families of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 667-692, December.
    10. María José Solíx-Baltodano & Cori Vilella & José Manuel Giménez-Gómez, 2019. "The Catalan Health Budget: A Conflicting Claims Approach," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 228(1), pages 35-54, March.
    11. Duro, Juan Antonio & Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Vilella, Cori, 2020. "The allocation of CO2 emissions as a claims problem," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    12. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Josep Peris, 2014. "Mediation in claims problems," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 357-375, November.
    13. Peris, Josep E. & Jiménez-Gómez, José M., 2012. "A Proportional Approach to Bankruptcy Problems with a guaranteed minimum," QM&ET Working Papers 12-7, University of Alicante, D. Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory.
    14. Patrick Harless, 2017. "Endowment additivity and the weighted proportional rules for adjudicating conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 755-781, March.
    15. Sebastian Cano-Berlanga & María-José Solís-Baltodano & Cori Vilella, 2023. "The Art of Sharing Resources: How to Distribute Water during a Drought Period," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, August.
    16. María-José Solís-Baltodano & José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Josep E. Peris, 2022. "Distributing the European structural and investment funds from a conflicting claims approach [Verteilung der europäischen Struktur- und Investitionsfonds aus einem kollidierenden Forderung Ansatz]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 42(1), pages 23-47, April.
    17. Giménez-Gómez, José Manuel, 2011. "A way to play bankruptcy problems," Working Papers 2072/169781, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    18. Salekpay, Foroogh & Giménez-Gómez, José Manuel, 2022. "How to distribute the ERDF funds through a combination of egalitarian allocations: the CELmin," Working Papers 2072/535073, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    19. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & Foroogh Salekpay & Cori Vilella, 2023. "How to distribute the European regional development funds through a combination of egalitarian allocations: the constrained equal losses min," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, December.
    20. Giménez-Gómez, José-Manuel & Peris, Josep E., 2014. "A proportional approach to claims problems with a guaranteed minimum," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 109-116.

    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:bla:ijethy:v:19:y:2023:i:3:p:526-558. 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: Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1742-7355 .

    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.