IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v26y2006i2p305-331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation

Author

Listed:
  • Shigehiro Serizawa

Abstract

"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.)

Suggested Citation

  • Shigehiro Serizawa, 2006. "Pairwise Strategy-Proofness and Self-Enforcing Manipulation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(2), pages 305-331, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:305-331
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-006-0099-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00355-006-0099-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-006-0099-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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Sudhölter & Bezalel Peleg, 1999. "Single-peakedness and coalition-proofness," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 4(4), pages 381-387.
    2. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-519, March.
    3. Shigehiro Serizawa, 1999. "Strategy-Proof and Symmetric Social Choice Functions for Public Good Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 121-146, January.
    4. Eric Maskin, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 23-38.
    5. Shigehiro Serizawa, 1997. "Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(2), pages 379-380.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O, 1995. "Strategy-Proof Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 51-87, January.
    9. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen, 1975. "Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-217, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Schummer, James, 2000. "Manipulation through Bribes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 180-198, April.
    12. James Schummer, 1996. "Strategy-proofness versus efficiency on restricted domains of exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 14(1), pages 47-56.
    13. Mark A. Satterthwaite & Hugo Sonnenschein, 1981. "Strategy-Proof Allocation Mechanisms at Differentiable Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(4), pages 587-597.
    14. H. Moulin, 1980. "On strategy-proofness and single peakedness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-455, January.
    15. Ohseto, Shinji, 1997. "Strategy-proof mechanisms in public good economies," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 157-183, April.
    16. Rajat Deb & Shinji Ohseto, 1999. "Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies: A note," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 14(3), pages 685-689.
    17. Hervé Moulin, 1994. "Serial Cost-Sharing of Excludable Public Goods," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 61(2), pages 305-325.
    18. Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2002. "Inefficiency of Strategy-Proof Rules for Pure Exchange Economies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 219-241, October.
    19. A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), 1985. "Handbook of Public Economics," Handbook of Public Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    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. BOSSERT, Walter & WEYMARK, J.A., 2006. "Social Choice: Recent Developments," Cahiers de recherche 2006-01, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    2. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2005. "Strategy-proof risk sharing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 225-254, February.
    3. Mridu Goswami & Arunava Sen & Sonal Yadav, 2015. "A Hurwicz type result in a model with public good production," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 867-887, December.
    4. Shuhei Morimoto & Shigehiro Serizawa & Stephen Ching, 2013. "A characterization of the uniform rule with several commodities and agents," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 871-911, March.
    5. Salvador Barberà, 2010. "Strategy-proof social choice," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 828.10, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    6. James Schummer, 1999. "Almost-dominant Strategy Implementation," Discussion Papers 1278, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    7. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    8. Moreno, Diego, 1994. "Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods," UC3M Working papers. Economics 2917, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    9. Barbera, S. & Masso, J. & Serizawa, S., 1998. "Strategy-Proof Voting on Compact Ranges," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 272-291, November.
    10. Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2009. "Strategic requirements with indifference: single-peaked versus single-plateaued preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(2), pages 275-298, February.
    11. Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2016. "Group Strategy-Proofness in Private Good Economies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(4), pages 1073-1099, April.
    12. Raghavan, Madhav, 2020. "Influence in private-goods allocation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 14-28.
    13. Diego Moreno & María Moscoso, 2013. "Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 315-336, January.
    14. William Thomson, 2016. "Non-bossiness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 665-696, October.
    15. Madhav Raghavan, 2018. "Influence in Private-Good Economies," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.05, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    16. Ohseto, Shinji, 2000. "Characterizations of Strategy-Proof Mechanisms for Excludable versus Nonexcludable Public Projects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 51-66, July.
    17. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2004. "Continuous selections from the Pareto correspondence and non-manipulability in exchange economies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 573-592, August.
    18. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    19. Hidekazu Anno & Hiroo Sasaki, 2013. "Second-best efficiency of allocation rules: strategy-proofness and single-peaked preferences with multiple commodities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(3), pages 693-716, November.
    20. Beviá, Carmen & Corchón, Luis C., 2009. "Cooperative production and efficiency," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 143-154, 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:spr:sochwe:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:305-331. 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.