IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v55y1988i2p301-322..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experimental Analysis of Unanimity in Public Goods Provision Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey S. Banks
  • Charles R. Plott
  • David P. Porter

Abstract

The paper reports on an experimental investigation of four methods of allocating public goods. The two basic processes studied are direct contribution and a public goods auction process. Both of these processes are studied with and without an additional unanimity feature. The results suggest that the auction process outperforms direct contribution. The effect of unanimity is to decrease the efficiency of both processes. Much of the paper is focused on an analysis of these results.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey S. Banks & Charles R. Plott & David P. Porter, 1988. "An Experimental Analysis of Unanimity in Public Goods Provision Mechanisms," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 301-322.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:55:y:1988:i:2:p:301-322.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/2297583
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sven Fischer & Andreas Nicklisch, 2006. "Ex Interim Voting in Public Good Provision," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-13, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    2. Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Yoshitaka Okano & Takafumi Yamakawa, 2015. "The approval mechanism solves the prisoner's dilemma theoretically and experimentally," Working Papers SDES-2015-12, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Feb 2015.
    3. Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Takehito Masuda & Takafumi Yamakawa, 2018. "Approval mechanism to solve prisoner’s dilemma: comparison with Varian’s compensation mechanism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 65-77, June.
    4. Shogren, Jason F., 2006. "Experimental Methods and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 969-1027, Elsevier.
    5. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    6. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    7. Crawford, Vincent P, 1995. "Adaptive Dynamics in Coordination Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 103-143, January.
    8. Ortmann, Andreas, 2003. "Charles R. Plott's collected papers on the experimental foundations of economic and political science," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 555-575, August.
    9. Cadigan, John & Wayland, Patrick T. & Schmitt, Pamela & Swope, Kurtis, 2011. "An experimental dynamic public goods game with carryover," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 523-531.
    10. Reischmann, Andreas, 2015. "Conditional vs. Voluntary Contribution Mechanism – An Experimental Study," Working Papers 0587, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    11. Sánchez, Isabel, 1991. "La provision voluntaria de bienes publicos: Resultados Experimentales," DE - Documentos de Trabajo. Economía. DE 3000, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    12. Kube, Sebastian & Schaube, Sebastian & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Khachatryan, Elina, 2015. "Institution formation and cooperation with heterogeneous agents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 248-268.
    13. Theodore C. Bergstrom, 2003. "Vernon Smith's Insomnia and the Dawn of Economics as Experimental Science," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 105(2), pages 181-205, June.
    14. Tatsuyoshi Saijo & Takehito Masuda & Takafumi Yamakawa, "undated". "Approval Mechanism to Solve Prisoner’s Dilemma: Comparison with Varian’s Compensation Mechanism," Working Papers SDES-2016-15, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Chen, Yan & Plott, Charles R., 1996. "The Groves-Ledyard mechanism: An experimental study of institutional design," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 335-364, March.
    16. Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Shen, Junyi, 2018. "Mate choice mechanism for solving a quasi-dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1-8.
    17. Sven Fischer & Andreas Nicklisch, 2007. "Ex Interim Voting: An Experimental Study of Referendums for Public-Good Provision," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 56-74, March.
    18. repec:dpr:wpaper:0874 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Amnon Rapoport & Darryl A. Seale & Ido Erev & James A. Sundali, 1998. "Equilibrium Play in Large Group Market Entry Games," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 119-141, January.
    20. Sven Fischer & Andreas Nicklisch, 2006. "Ex Interim Voting in Public Good Provision," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2006_23, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    21. Dziubiński, Marcin & Roy, Jaideep, 2012. "Popularity of reinforcement-based and belief-based learning models: An evolutionary approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 433-454.
    22. Steffen Ziss, 1996. "Public good provision and the Smith Process," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 2(1), pages 245-261, December.
    23. Lars P. Feld, 2007. "Ex Interim Voting: An Experimental Study of Referendums for Public-Good Provision. Comment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(1), pages 75-80, March.

    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:oup:restud:v:55:y:1988:i:2:p:301-322.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.