IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v11y2009i4p565-598.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Announcement or Contribution? The Relative Efficiency of Manipulated Lindahl Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • NIGAR HASHIMZADE
  • GARETH D. MYLES

Abstract

The private provision mechanism is individually incentive compatible but inefficient. The Lindahl mechanism is efficient but not incentive compatible. We analyze the outcome of the manipulated Lindahl mechanism. When the demand announcements of participants are unrestricted the Lindahl mechanism suffers from multiple equilibria. If the government removes the multiplicity by restricting the functional form of announcements the resulting Lindahl equilibrium can be made approximately efficient. Approximate efficiency is achieved by announcements that are one‐dimensional regardless of the number of participants in the mechanism. This is in contrast to mechanisms that achieve exact efficiency but require announcements whose dimensionality increases at the same rate as the number of participants. The mechanism we describe benefits from simplicity at the cost of approximate efficiency. We demonstrate that mechanisms in which a linear demand function is announced are supermodular so play will converge to the Nash equilibrium for a range of learning dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigar Hashimzade & Gareth D. Myles, 2009. "Announcement or Contribution? The Relative Efficiency of Manipulated Lindahl Mechanisms," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 11(4), pages 565-598, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:11:y:2009:i:4:p:565-598
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9779.2009.01421.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9779.2009.01421.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9779.2009.01421.x?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Groves, Theodore & Ledyard, John O, 1977. "Optimal Allocation of Public Goods: A Solution to the "Free Rider" Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 783-809, May.
    2. Bergstrom, Theodore C., 1970. "A "Scandinavian consensus" solution for efficient income distribution among nonmalevolent consumers," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 383-398, December.
    3. Luca Anderlini & Paolo Siconolfi, 2004. "Efficient provision of public goods with endogenous redistribution," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 8(4), pages 413-447, April.
    4. Walker, Mark, 1981. "A Simple Incentive Compatible Scheme for Attaining Lindahl Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 65-71, January.
    5. Tian, Guoqiang, 2003. "A solution to the problem of consumption externalities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 831-847, November.
    6. Bergstrom, Ted C. & Blume, Larry & Varian, Hal, 1992. "Uniqueness of Nash equilibrium in private provision of public goods : An improved proof," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 391-392, December.
    7. Sertel, Murat R. & Sanver, M. Remzi, 1999. "Equilibrium outcomes of Lindahl-endowment pretension games1," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 149-162, June.
    8. Cornes,Richard & Sandler,Todd, 1996. "The Theory of Externalities, Public Goods, and Club Goods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521477185.
    9. 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.
    10. Tian, Guoqiang, 1991. "Implementation of Lindahl allocations with nontotal--nontransitive preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 247-259, November.
    11. Groves, Theodore & Ledyard, John O, 1980. "The Existence of Efficient and Incentive Compatible Equilibria with Public Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(6), pages 1487-1506, September.
    12. Tian, Guoqiang, 1993. "Implementing Lindahl allocations by a withholding mechanism," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 169-179.
    13. Varian, Hal R, 1994. "A Solution to the Problem of Externalities When Agents Are Well-Informed," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1278-1293, December.
    14. Richard Cornes & Roger Hartley, 2007. "Aggregative Public Good Games," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(2), pages 201-219, April.
    15. Bergstrom, Theodore & Blume, Lawrence & Varian, Hal, 1986. "On the private provision of public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 25-49, February.
    16. Richard Cornes & Todd Sandler, 2000. "Pareto‐Improving Redistribution and Pure Public Goods," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(2), pages 169-186, May.
    17. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    18. Tian, Guoqiang, 1990. "Completely feasible and continuous implementation of the Lindahl correspondence with a message space of minimal dimension," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 443-452, August.
    19. Bernheim, B. Douglas & Peleg, Bezalel & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-12, June.
    20. Otani, Yoshihiko & Sicilian, Joseph, 1982. "Equilibrium allocations of Walrasian preference games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 47-68, June.
    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. Sertel, Murat R. & Sanver, M. Remzi, 1999. "Equilibrium outcomes of Lindahl-endowment pretension games1," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 149-162, June.
    2. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    3. 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.
    4. Bezalel Peleg, 1996. "Double implementation of the Lindahl equilibrium by a continuous mechanism," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 311-324, December.
    5. Weifeng Liu, 2014. "Participation constraints of matching mechanisms," CAMA Working Papers 2014-63, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    6. Healy, Paul J. & Jain, Ritesh, 2017. "Generalized Groves–Ledyard mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 204-217.
    7. 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.
    8. Furusawa, Taiji & ,, 2011. "Contributing or free-riding? Voluntary participation in a public good economy," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(2), May.
    9. Tian, Guoqiang, 1991. "Implementation of the Walrasian Correspondence without Continuous, Convex, and Ordered Preferences," MPRA Paper 41298, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Monique Florenzano, 2010. "Government and the provision of public goods:from equilibrium models to mechanismdesign," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 1047-1077.
    11. Wolfgang Buchholz & Richard Cornes & Dirk Rübbelke, 2011. "Matching as a Cure for Underprovision of Voluntary Public Good Supply: Analysis and an Example," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2011-541, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    12. Yipeng Liu & Hong Guo & Barrie R. Nault, 2017. "Organization of Public Safety Networks: Spillovers, Interoperability, and Participation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 704-723, April.
    13. Nicola Acocella & Giovanni Di Bartolomeo, 2010. "Conflict of interest and coordination in public good provision," Politica economica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 3, pages 389-408.
    14. Tian, Guoqiang & Li, Qi, 1995. "Ratio-Lindahl equilibria and an informationally efficient and implementable mixed-ownership system," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 391-411, May.
    15. 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.
    16. Sébastien ROUILLON, 2009. "A new mechanism to implement the Lindahl equilibriums (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-09, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    17. Charles Figuières & Marc Willinger, 2012. "Regulating ambient pollution when social costs are unknown," Working Papers 12-17, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jun 2012.
    18. Van Essen, Matthew J., 2008. "A Simple Supermodular Mechanism that Implements Lindahl Allocations," MPRA Paper 12781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Buchholz, Wolfgang & Cornes, Richard & Rübbelke, Dirk, 2011. "Interior matching equilibria in a public good economy: An aggregative game approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 639-645.
    20. Van Essen, Matthew & Walker, Mark, 2017. "A simple market-like allocation mechanism for public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 6-19.

    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:jpbect:v:11:y:2009:i:4:p:565-598. 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 Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.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.