IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jogath/v42y2013i1p115-130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coalitional unanimity versus strategy-proofness in coalition formation problems

Author

Listed:
  • Koji Takamiya

Abstract

This paper examines coalition formation problems from the viewpoint of mechanism design. We consider the case where (i) the list of feasible coalitions (those coalitions which are permitted to form) is given in advance; and (ii) each individual’s preference is a ranking over those feasible coalitions which include this individual. We are interested in requiring the mechanism to guarantee each coalition the “right” of forming that coalition at least when every member of the coalition ranks the coalition at the top. We name this property coalitional unanimity. We examine the compatibility between coalitional unanimity and incentive requirements, and prove that if the mechanism is strategy-proof and respects coalitional unanimity, then for each preference profile, there exists at most one strictly core stable partition, and the mechanism chooses such a partition whenever available. Further, the mechanism is coalition strategy-proof and respects coalitional unanimity if, and only if, the strictly core stable partition uniquely exists for every preference profile. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Koji Takamiya, 2013. "Coalitional unanimity versus strategy-proofness in coalition formation problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(1), pages 115-130, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:42:y:2013:i:1:p:115-130
    DOI: 10.1007/s00182-012-0318-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00182-012-0318-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00182-012-0318-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
    ---><---

    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. Shohei Takagi & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2010. "An impossibility theorem for matching problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 35(2), pages 245-266, July.
    2. Papai, Szilvia, 2004. "Unique stability in simple coalition formation games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 337-354, August.
    3. Takamiya, Koji, 2007. "Domains of social choice functions on which coalition strategy-proofness and Maskin monotonicity are equivalent," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 348-354, June.
    4. Antonio Romero-Medina & Katari´na Cechlárová, 2001. "Stability in coalition formation games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 29(4), pages 487-494.
    5. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Jackson, Matthew O., 2002. "The Stability of Hedonic Coalition Structures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 201-230, February.
    6. Tayfun Sönmez & Suryapratim Banerjee & Hideo Konishi, 2001. "Core in a simple coalition formation game," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(1), pages 135-153.
    7. Manabu Toda, 2006. "Monotonicity and Consistency in Matching Markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(1), pages 13-31, April.
    8. Dreze, J H & Greenberg, J, 1980. "Hedonic Coalitions: Optimality and Stability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 987-1003, May.
    9. Tayfun Sonmez, 1999. "Strategy-Proofness and Essentially Single-Valued Cores," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 677-690, May.
    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. Baumeister, Dorothea & Erdélyi, Gábor & Erdélyi, Olivia J. & Rothe, Jörg, 2015. "Complexity of manipulation and bribery in judgment aggregation for uniform premise-based quota rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 19-30.
    2. Mehmet Karakaya & Bettina Klaus, 2017. "Hedonic coalition formation games with variable populations: core characterizations and (im)possibilities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(2), pages 435-455, May.
    3. Bettina Klaus & Flip Klijn & Seçkin Özbilen, 2023. "Core Stability and Strategy-Proofness in Hedonic Coalition Formation Problems with Friend-Oriented Preferences," Working Papers 1399, Barcelona School of Economics.

    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. Carmelo Rodríguez-Álvarez, 2009. "Strategy-proof coalition formation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 38(3), pages 431-452, November.
    2. Alcalde, Jose & Revilla, Pablo, 2004. "Researching with whom? Stability and manipulation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 869-887, December.
    3. Papai, Szilvia, 2004. "Unique stability in simple coalition formation games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 337-354, August.
    4. Mehmet Karakaya & Bettina Klaus, 2017. "Hedonic coalition formation games with variable populations: core characterizations and (im)possibilities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(2), pages 435-455, May.
    5. José Alcalde & Pablo Revilla, 2001. "Tops Responsiveness, Strategy-Proofness And Coalition Formation Problems," Working Papers. Serie AD 2001-11, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    6. Carmelo Rodriguez-Alvarez, 2004. "On the Impossibility of Strategy-Proof Coalition Formation Rules," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(10), pages 1-8.
    7. Alison Watts, 2006. "Formation of Segregated and Integrated Groups," Working Papers 2006.127, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Dinko Dimitrov & Peter Borm & Ruud Hendrickx & Shao Sung, 2006. "Simple Priorities and Core Stability in Hedonic Games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(2), pages 421-433, April.
    9. Sheida Etemadidavan & Andrew J. Collins, 2021. "An Empirical Distribution of the Number of Subsets in the Core Partitions of Hedonic Games," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Alison Watts, 2007. "Formation of segregated and integrated groups," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 35(4), pages 505-519, April.
    11. Dinko Dimitrov & Emiliya A. Lazarova & Shao-Chin Sung, 2016. "Inducing stability in hedonic games," University of East Anglia School of Economics Working Paper Series 2016-09, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    12. Barbera, Salvador & Gerber, Anke, 2003. "Corrigendum to "On coalition formation: durable coalition structures": [Mathematical Social Sciences 45 (2003) 185-203]," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 355-356, December.
    13. Iehle, Vincent, 2007. "The core-partition of a hedonic game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 176-185, September.
    14. Francis Bloch & Effrosyni Diamantoudi, 2011. "Noncooperative formation of coalitions in hedonic games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(2), pages 263-280, May.
    15. Suksompong, Warut, 2015. "Individual and group stability in neutral restrictions of hedonic games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-5.
    16. Karakaya, Mehmet, 2011. "Hedonic coalition formation games: A new stability notion," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 157-165, May.
    17. Watts, Alison, 2006. "Formation of Segregated and Integrated Groups," Coalition Theory Network Working Papers 12171, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    18. Satoshi Nakada & Ryo Shirakawa, 2023. "On the unique core partition of coalition formation games: correction to İnal (2015)," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(3), pages 517-521, April.
    19. Yan Long, 2019. "Strategy-proof group selection under single-peaked preferences over group size," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(3), pages 579-608, October.
    20. Andrew J. Collins & Sheida Etemadidavan & Wael Khallouli, 2020. "Generating Empirical Core Size Distributions of Hedonic Games using a Monte Carlo Method," Papers 2007.12127, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Coalition formation problems; Strict core stability; Strategy-proofness; Coalitional unanimity; C71; C72; C78; D02; D71; D78;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation

    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:jogath:v:42:y:2013:i:1:p:115-130. 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.