IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/etbull/v2y2014i2d10.1007_s40505-014-0036-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mechanism design without monotone differences: an example featuring buyer habits

Author

Listed:
  • Levent Ülkü

    (Department of Economics and CIE, ITAM)

Abstract

Within a simple parametric example, I show that if the buyer’s values fail the monotone differences condition, nonmonotone mechanisms are not just feasible but may even be desirable for a seller. The failure of monotone differences is caused by intertemporal consumption externalities in the form of habits. I show that for an interval of habit parameters the revenue maximizing mechanism is nonmonotone: the seller screens out low and high types.

Suggested Citation

  • Levent Ülkü, 2014. "Mechanism design without monotone differences: an example featuring buyer habits," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 2(2), pages 183-195, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:etbull:v:2:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s40505-014-0036-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40505-014-0036-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40505-014-0036-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40505-014-0036-6?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. Matthews, Steven & Moore, John, 1987. "Monopoly Provision of Quality and Warranties: An Exploration in the Theory of Multidimensional Screening," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 441-467, March.
    2. Dirk Bergemann & Juuso Valimaki, 2002. "Information Acquisition and Efficient Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 1007-1033, May.
    3. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    4. Jehiel, Philippe & Moldovanu, Benny, 2001. "Efficient Design with Interdependent Valuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1237-1259, September.
    5. Fernando Branco, 1996. "Multiple unit auctions of an indivisible good," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(1), pages 77-101.
    6. Mookherjee, Dilip & Reichelstein, Stefan, 1992. "Dominant strategy implementation of Bayesian incentive compatible allocation rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 378-399, April.
    7. Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994. "Monotone Comparative Statics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-180, January.
    8. Paul Milgrom & Ilya Segal, 2002. "Envelope Theorems for Arbitrary Choice Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 583-601, March.
    9. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Ely, Jeffrey C., 2013. "Mechanism design without revenue equivalence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 104-133.
    10. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 1987. "A necessary and sufficient condition for rationalizability in a quasi-linear context," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 191-200, April.
    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. Levent Ulku, 2012. "Nonmonotone Mechanism Design," Working Papers 1202, Centro de Investigacion Economica, ITAM.
    2. Ülkü, Levent, 2014. "Implementation in an interdependent value framework," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 64-70.
    3. Frongillo, Rafael M. & Kash, Ian A., 2021. "General truthfulness characterizations via convex analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 636-662.
    4. X. Ruiz del Portal, 2012. "Conditions for incentive compatibility in models with multidimensional allocation functions and one-dimensional types," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(4), pages 311-321, December.
    5. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Mechanism design without quasilinearity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(2), May.
    6. Che,Y.-K. & Kim,J., 2001. "Know thy enemies : knowledge of rivals' types and its effect on auctions," Working papers 9, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    7. Dirk Bergemann & Alessandro Pavan, 2015. "Introduction to JET Symposium Issue on "Dynamic Contracts and Mechanism Design"," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2016, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    8. Georg Nöldeke & Larry Samuelson, 2018. "The Implementation Duality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(4), pages 1283-1324, July.
    9. Noldeke, Georg & Samuelson, Larry, 2007. "Optimal bunching without optimal control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 405-420, May.
    10. Mishra, Debasis & Pramanik, Anup & Roy, Souvik, 2014. "Multidimensional mechanism design in single peaked type spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 103-116.
    11. Caleb Koch, 2020. "Implementation with ex post hidden actions," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 5(1), pages 1-35, December.
    12. Birgit Heydenreich & Rudolf Müller & Marc Uetz & Rakesh V. Vohra, 2009. "Characterization of Revenue Equivalence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 307-316, January.
    13. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Müller, Rudolf, 2017. "Monotonicity and revenue equivalence domains by monotonic transformations in differences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 29-35.
    14. André Berger & Rudolf Müller & Seyed Hossein Naeemi, 2017. "Characterizing implementable allocation rules in multi-dimensional environments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 367-383, February.
    15. Berger, A. & Müller, R.J. & Naeemi, S.H., 2010. "Path-monotonicity and incentive compatibility," Research Memorandum 035, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    16. Debasis Mishra & Anup Pramanik & Souvik Roy, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional domains with ordinal restrictions," Discussion Papers 13-07, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    17. Carbajal, Juan Carlos, 2010. "On the uniqueness of Groves mechanisms and the payoff equivalence principle," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 763-772, March.
    18. Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir, 2011. "On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation in a general class of social choice problems," ECON - Working Papers 021, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    19. Vijay Krishna & Motty Perry, 1997. "Efficient Mechanism Design," Game Theory and Information 9703010, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 28 Apr 1998.
    20. , & ,, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional dichotomous domains," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(2), May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Implementation; Monotonicity; Monotone differences; Habits;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • 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:spr:etbull:v:2:y:2014:i:2:d:10.1007_s40505-014-0036-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.