IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v60y2023i3d10.1007_s00355-022-01429-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The equal share proportional solution in a permit sharing problem

Author

Listed:
  • Sang-Chul Suh

    (University of Windsor)

  • Yuntong Wang

    (University of Windsor)

Abstract

A permit sharing problem is described by a list of countries, each of which owns a certain amount of emission permits and has a unique technology that requires permits to produce output. We consider the solutions of sharing the optimal global surplus generated beyond the autarky economy output. We divide countries into two groups based on the types of contribution, the technology contributors and the permit contributors. Suppose that the division of the total surplus between the two groups is fixed at an arbitrary ratio $$\alpha \in [0,1]$$ α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] (Separation Principle of parameter $$\alpha $$ α ). The fixed amount of surplus assigned to each group is distributed based on the contributions of the members of the group. By requiring that no subgroup of countries can increase their share by reallocating the total amount of their contributions among themselves (Permit Reallocation-Proofness and Technology Reallocation-Proofness), we characterize a family of solutions indexed by parameter $$\alpha \in [0,1]$$ α ∈ [ 0 , 1 ] , called the proportional solution of parameter $$\alpha $$ α . By further requiring that each country receives at least the level of output it can produce with its own technology and permit (Voluntary Participation), we show that only the solution with $$\alpha =1/2$$ α = 1 / 2 , called the equal share proportional solution, meets this requirement. Under this solution, the technology contributors and the permit contributors are treated equally.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang-Chul Suh & Yuntong Wang, 2023. "The equal share proportional solution in a permit sharing problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(3), pages 477-501, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:60:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s00355-022-01429-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-022-01429-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-022-01429-z
    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/s00355-022-01429-z?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. Chun, Youngsub, 1988. "The proportional solution for rights problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 231-246, June.
    2. Youngsub Chun, 1999. "Equivalence of Axioms for Bankruptcy Problems," Working Paper Series no1, Institute of Economic Research, Seoul National University.
    3. Hervé Moulin, 1990. "Joint Ownership of a Convex Technology: Comparison of Three Solutions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 57(3), pages 439-452.
    4. Moulin, Herve, 2002. "Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 289-357, Elsevier.
    5. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    6. Moulin, Herve, 1985. "Egalitarianism and Utilitarianism in Quasi-linear Bargaining," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(1), pages 49-67, January.
    7. Kalai, Ehud, 1977. "Proportional Solutions to Bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1623-1630, October.
    8. Youngsub Chun, 1999. "Equivalence of axioms for bankruptcy problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(4), pages 511-520.
    9. Jin Li & Sang-Chul Suh & Yuntong Wang, 2020. "Sharing pollution permits under welfare upper bounds," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 28(2), pages 489-505, July.
    10. Sungwhee Shin & Sang-Chul Suh, 2000. "Strategy-proofness and efficiency in a simple production economy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(3), pages 523-532.
    11. Shin, Sungwhee & Suh, Sang-Chul, 2007. "Non-Manipulability vs. Individual Rationality in a permit sharing problem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 103-108, July.
    12. Ju, Biung-Ghi & Miyagawa, Eiichi & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Non-manipulable division rules in claim problems and generalizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 1-26, January.
    13. Roemer John E. & Silvestre Joaquim, 1993. "The Proportional Solution for Economies with Both Private and Public Ownership," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 426-444, 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. Sang-Chul Suh & Yuntong Wang, 2018. "The Proportional Solution in a Permit Sharing Problem," Working Papers 1802, University of Windsor, Department of Economics.
    2. Ju, Biung-Ghi & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2018. "Entitlement Theory Of Justice And End-State Fairness In The Allocation Of Goods," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 317-341, November.
    3. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak & Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2020. "Priority and proportionality in bankruptcy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(4), pages 559-579, April.
    4. Bas Dietzenbacher & Yuki Tamura & William Thomson, 2024. "Partial-implementation invariance and claims problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 203-229, August.
    5. Jens Leth Hougaard & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2010. "Baseline Rationing," Discussion Papers 10-16, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    6. Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2023. "Additive adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 93-116, March.
    7. Jens Hougaard & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Lars Østerdal, 2013. "Rationing with baselines: the composition extension operator," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 179-191, December.
    8. Siwei Chen, 2015. "Systematic favorability in claims problems with indivisibilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(2), pages 283-300, February.
    9. Christopher P. Chambers & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2017. "Taxation and poverty," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 153-175, January.
    10. Youngsub Chun & Kazuo Nishimura & Makoto Yano, 2022. "Introduction to the special issue in honor of William Thomson," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 3-5, March.
    11. Sinan Ertemel & Rajnish Kumar, 2018. "Proportional rules for state contingent claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 229-246, March.
    12. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    13. Kasajima, Yoichi & Velez, Rodrigo A., 2010. "Non-proportional inequality preservation in gains and losses," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1079-1092, November.
    14. Yoichi Kasajima & Rodrigo Velez, 2011. "Reflecting inequality of claims in gains and losses," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(2), pages 283-295, February.
    15. van den Brink, René & Funaki, Yukihiko & van der Laan, Gerard, 2013. "Characterization of the Reverse Talmud bankruptcy rule by Exemption and Exclusion properties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 413-417.
    16. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    17. Peter Knudsen & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "Merging and splitting in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 763-774, November.
    18. Juarez, Ruben & Ko, Chiu Yu & Xue, Jingyi, 2018. "Sharing sequential values in a network," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 734-779.
    19. Juan D Moreno-Ternero & John E Roemer, 2006. "Impartiality, Priority, and Solidarity in the Theory of Justice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(5), pages 1419-1427, September.
    20. Alfredo Valencia-Toledo & Juan Vidal-Puga, 2020. "Reassignment-proof rules for land rental problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(1), pages 173-193, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pollution permits; Voluntary participation; Separation principle; Proportional solution;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D70 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    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:60:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s00355-022-01429-z. 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.