Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation
"Strategy-proofness" is one of the axioms that are most frequently used in the recent literature on social choice theory. It requires that by misrepresenting his preferences, no agent can manipulate the outcome of the social choice rule in his favor. The stronger requirement of "group strategy-proofness" is also often employed to obtain clear characterization results of social choice rules. Group strategy-proofness requires that no group of agents can manipulate the outcome in their favors. In this paper, we advocate "effective pairwise strategy-proofness." It is the requirement that the social choice rule should be immune to unilateral manipulation and "self-enforcing" pairwise manipulation in the sense that no agent of a pair has the incentive to betray his partner. We apply the axiom of effective pairwise strategy-proofness to three types of economies: public good economy, pure exchange economy, and allotment economy. Although effective pairwise strategy-proofness is seemingly a much weaker axiom than group strategy-proofness, effective pairwise strategy-proofness characterizes social choice rules that are analyzed by using different axioms in the literature.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 26 (2006)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/index.htm|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Serizawa, Shigehiro & Weymark, John A., 2003.
"Efficient strategy-proof exchange and minimum consumption guarantees,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 246-263, April.
- Shigehiro Serizawa & John A. Weymark, 2002. "Efficient Strategy-Proof Exchange and Minimum Consumption Guarantees," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0216, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics, revised Aug 2002.
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1996.
"Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies (*),"
Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 501-512.
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1997. "Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 379-380.
- Serizawa, Shigehiro, 1996. "Strategy-Proof and Individually Rational Social Choice Functions for Public Good Economies," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 501-12, April.
- Eric Maskin, 1998.
"Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1829, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Musgrave, R.A., 1985. "A brief history of fiscal doctrine," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 1-59 Elsevier.
- Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-19, March.
- Salvador Barbera & Matthew O. Jackson, 1993.
1021, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Rajat Deb & Shinji Ohseto, 1999. "Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies: A note," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 685-689.
- H. Moulin, 1980. "On strategy-proofness and single peakedness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-455, January.
- Schummer, James, 2000.
"Manipulation through Bribes,"
Journal of Economic Theory,
Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 180-198, April.
- Bezalel Peleg & Peter Sudhölter, 1998.
"Single-Peakedness and Coalition-Proofness,"
290, Bielefeld University, Center for Mathematical Economics.
- Ohseto, Shinji, 1997. "Strategy-proof mechanisms in public good economies," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 157-183, April.
- Satterthwaite, Mark A & Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1981. "Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms at Differentiable Points," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 587-97, October.
- Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2002. "Inefficiency of Strategy-Proof Rules for Pure Exchange Economies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 219-241, October.
- James Schummer, 1996. "Strategy-proofness versus efficiency on restricted domains of exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 47-56.
- Shigehiro Serizawa, 1999. "Strategy-Proof and Symmetric Social Choice Functions for Public Good Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 121-146, January.
- Moulin, Herve, 1994. "Serial Cost-Sharing of Excludable Public Goods," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 305-25, April.
- Lin Zhou, 1990. "Inefficiency of Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms in Pure Exchange Economies," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 954, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:305-331. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.