IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jetheo/v196y2021ics0022053121001320.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value

Author

Listed:
  • Van Essen, Matt
  • Wooders, John

Abstract

We study the problem of fairly allocating heterogenous items, priorities, positions, or property rights to participants with equal claims from three perspectives: cooperative, decision theoretic, and non-cooperative. We characterize the Shapley value of the cooperative game and then introduce a class of auctions for non-cooperatively allocating positions. We show that for any auction in this class, each bidder obtains his Shapley value when every bidder follows the auction's unique maxmin perfect bidding strategy. When information is incomplete we characterize the Bayesian equilibrium of these auctions, and show that equilibrium play converges to maxmin perfect play as bidders become infinitely risk averse. The equilibrium allocations thus converges to the Shapley value allocation as bidders become risk averse. Together these results provide both decision theoretic and non-cooperative equilibrium foundations for the Shapley value in the position allocation problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2021. "Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:196:y:2021:i:c:s0022053121001320
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jet.2021.105315
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022053121001320
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jet.2021.105315?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    2. Perez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2001. "Bidding for the Surplus : A Non-cooperative Approach to the Shapley Value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 274-294, October.
    3. Graham, Daniel A & Marshall, Robert C & Richard, Jean-Francois, 1990. "Differential Payments within a Bidder Coalition and the Shapley Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 493-510, June.
    4. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2016. "Dissolving a partnership dynamically," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 212-241.
    5. Moulin, Herve & Shenker, Scott, 1992. "Serial Cost Sharing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1009-1037, September.
    6. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2019. "A characterization of the symmetrically balanced VCG rule in the queueing problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 486-490.
    7. Hu, Audrey & Zou, Liang, 2015. "Sequential auctions, price trends, and risk preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 319-335.
    8. Maniquet, Francois, 2003. "A characterization of the Shapley value in queueing problems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 90-103, March.
    9. Herve Moulin, 2004. "Fair Division and Collective Welfare," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262633116, April.
    10. Manipushpak Mitra & Arunava Sen, 2010. "Efficient allocation of heterogenous commodities with balanced transfers," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(1), pages 29-48, June.
    11. Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David & Sotomayor, Marilda, 1986. "Multi-Item Auctions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 863-872, August.
    12. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin & Fedor Sandomirskiy & Elena Yanovskaya, 2017. "Competitive Division of a Mixed Manna," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85(6), pages 1847-1871, November.
    13. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    14. Gabrielle Demange & Ahmet Alkan & David Gale, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Money and Criteria of Justice," Post-Print halshs-00670945, HAL.
    15. Preston McAfee, R., 1992. "Amicable divorce: Dissolving a partnership with simple mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 266-293, April.
    16. Lindsay, Luke, 2018. "Shapley value based pricing for auctions and exchanges," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 170-181.
    17. 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.
    18. Moulin, Herve, 1992. "An Application of the Shapley Value to Fair Division with Money," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1331-1349, November.
    19. Alkan, Ahmet & Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Criteria of Justice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 1023-1039, July.
    20. Matt Van Essen & John Wooders, 2023. "Dual auctions for assigning winners and compensating losers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1069-1114, November.
    21. Jeroen Suijs, 1996. "On incentive compatibility and budget balancedness in public decision making," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 193-209, December.
    22. S. C. Littlechild & G. Owen, 1973. "A Simple Expression for the Shapley Value in a Special Case," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 370-372, November.
    23. Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Graphs and Cooperation in Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 225-229, August.
    24. Hart, Sergiu & Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1996. "Bargaining and Value," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 357-380, March.
    25. Gul, Faruk, 1989. "Bargaining Foundations of Shapley Value," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 81-95, January.
    26. Leonard, Herman B, 1983. "Elicitation of Honest Preferences for the Assignment of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 461-479, June.
    27. Claudio Mezzetti, 2011. "Sequential Auctions with Informational Externalities and Aversion to Price Risk: Decreasing and Increasing Price Sequences," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(555), pages 990-1016, 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. Matt Van Essen & John Wooders, 2023. "Dual auctions for assigning winners and compensating losers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1069-1114, November.

    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. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2019. "Recent developments in the queueing problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, April.
    2. Matt Van Essen & John Wooders, 2018. "Allocating Positions Fairly: An Auction and its Relationship to the Shapley Value," Working Papers 20180019, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Aug 2018.
    3. Matt Van Essen & John Wooders, 2023. "Dual auctions for assigning winners and compensating losers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1069-1114, November.
    4. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2013. "Reconciling marginalism with egalitarianism: consistency, monotonicity, and implementation of egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 693-714, March.
    5. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    6. Hu, Cheng-Cheng & Tsay, Min-Hung & Yeh, Chun-Hsien, 2018. "A study of the nucleolus in the nested cost-sharing problem: Axiomatic and strategic perspectives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 82-98.
    7. Banerjee, Sreoshi, 2023. "Stability and fairness in sequencing games: optimistic approach and pessimistic scenarios," MPRA Paper 118680, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Catherine Refait-Alexandre & Guillaume Sekli, 2022. "Early contributors, cooperation and fair rewards in crowdfunding," Working Papers hal-04222321, HAL.
    9. Chessa, Michela & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Lardon, Aymeric & Yamada, Takashi, 2023. "An experiment on the Nash program: A comparison of two strategic mechanisms implementing the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 88-104.
    10. René Brink & P. Herings & Gerard Laan & A. Talman, 2015. "The Average Tree permission value for games with a permission tree," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(1), pages 99-123, January.
    11. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Tvede, Mich & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2017. "Sharing the proceeds from a hierarchical venture," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 98-110.
    12. Pierre Dehez, 2017. "On Harsanyi Dividends and Asymmetric Values," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(03), pages 1-36, September.
    13. Tierney, Ryan, 2019. "The problem of multiple commons: A market design approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-27.
    14. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Lorenzo, Leticia, 2019. "How to apply penalties to avoid delays in projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 608-620.
    15. René Brink, 2017. "Games with a permission structure - A survey on generalizations and applications," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 1-33, April.
    16. Rebelo, S., 1997. "On the Determinant of Economic Growth," RCER Working Papers 443, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    17. René Brink & Chris Dietz, 2014. "Games with a local permission structure: separation of authority and value generation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 343-361, March.
    18. Dolgopolov, Arthur & Houser, Daniel & Martinelli, Cesar & Stratmann, Thomas, 2024. "Assignment markets: Theory and experiments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    19. Sotomayor, Marilda, 2005. "A Dynamic Market Clearing Price Mechanism with Multiple Demands," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 25(2), November.
    20. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Strategy-proof multi-object mechanism design: Ex-post revenue maximization with non-quasilinear preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auction; Bayes Nash equilibrium; Maxmin; Shapley value; Heterogeneous units;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:eee:jetheo:v:196:y:2021:i:c:s0022053121001320. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622869 .

    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.