Resource Allocation in Multi-Objective Epidemic Management: An Axiomatic Analysis

This study presents a novel game-theoretical framework designed to support epidemic management, with a specific focus on the allocation of limited resources across competing public health objectives and intervention strategies. Recognizing the varied roles and capacities of participatory agents, we model their involvement as occurring at multiple levels, reflecting the complex decision-making processes encountered in real-world situations. To account for the unequal influence or priority of different agents and strategies, we further propose a suite of weighted allocation measures grounded in well-established theoretical principles. In response to ongoing concerns over the arbitrariness of externally assigned weights, we also construct a refined metric based on endogenous marginal intervention effects, offering a more organically derived representation of participator impact. A series of illustrative examples demonstrates the practical relevance of these models, revealing how they can capture key dynamics such as behavioral diversity, the coexistence of overlapping policies, and logical independence under distinct weighting perspectives. Collectively, these contributions aim to provide epidemic response teams with a set of interpretable and adaptable tools tailored to the complexity of real-world public health crises.