IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2004.00196.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equilibrium Selection in Data Markets: Multiple-Principal, Multiple-Agent Problems with Non-Rivalrous Goods

Author

Listed:
  • Samir Wadhwa
  • Roy Dong

Abstract

There are several aspects of data markets that distinguish them from a typical commodity market: asymmetric information, the non-rivalrous nature of data, and informational externalities. Formally, this gives rise to a new class of games which we call multiple-principal, multiple-agent problem with non-rivalrous goods. Under the assumption that the principal's payoff is quasilinear in the payments given to agents, we show that there is a fundamental degeneracy in the market of non-rivalrous goods. This multiplicity of equilibria also affects common refinements of equilibrium definitions intended to uniquely select an equilibrium: both variational equilibria and normalized equilibria will be non-unique in general. This implies that most existing equilibrium concepts cannot provide predictions on the outcomes of data markets emerging today. The results support the idea that modifications to payment contracts themselves are unlikely to yield a unique equilibrium, and either changes to the models of study or new equilibrium concepts will be required to determine unique equilibria in settings with multiple principals and a non-rivalrous good.

Suggested Citation

  • Samir Wadhwa & Roy Dong, 2020. "Equilibrium Selection in Data Markets: Multiple-Principal, Multiple-Agent Problems with Non-Rivalrous Goods," Papers 2004.00196, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2004.00196
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.00196
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Morgan, 2000. "Financing Public Goods by Means of Lotteries," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 67(4), pages 761-784.
    2. Shuo Zeng & Moshe Dror, 2019. "Serving many masters: an agent and his principals," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 90(1), pages 23-59, August.
    3. Attar, Andrea & Campioni, Eloisa & Piaser, Gwenaël & Rajan, Uday, 2010. "On multiple-principal multiple-agent models of moral hazard," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 376-380, January.
    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. Paskalev, Zdravko & Yildirim, Huseyin, 2017. "A theory of outsourced fundraising: Why dollars turn into “Pennies for Charity”," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 1-18.
    2. Lange, Andreas, 2006. "Providing public goods in two steps," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 173-178, May.
    3. Stéphane Gauthier & Guy Laroque, 2021. "Certainty Equivalence and Noisy Redistribution," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-03359574, HAL.
    4. Sanchez-Pages Santiago & Straub Stéphane, 2010. "The Emergence of Institutions," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, September.
    5. Robert Ridlon, 2016. "Does Manufacturer Advertising Crowd‐in or Crowd‐out Retailer Advertising? An Application of an Endogenous Prize Contest with Asymmetric Players," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(2), pages 364-379, October.
    6. Andrej Angelovski & Tibor Neugebauer & Maroš Servatka, 2019. "Can Rank-Order Competition Resolve the Free-Rider Problem in the Voluntary Provision of Impure Public Goods? Experimental Evidence," Working Papers CESARE 1705, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    7. Andreas Lange & Andrew Stocking, 2009. "Charitable Memberships, Volunteering, and Discounts: Evidence from a Large-Scale Online Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 14941, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Marco Faravelli, 2011. "The Important Thing Is Not (Always) Winning but Taking Part: Funding Public Goods with Contests," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, February.
    9. Becchetti, Leonardo & Pelligra, Vittorio, 2014. "Information & belief elicitation effects on charitable giving: An artefactual field experiment," AICCON Working Papers 132-2014, Associazione Italiana per la Cultura della Cooperazione e del Non Profit.
    10. Henrik Orzen, 2005. "Fundraising through Competition: Evidence from the Lab," Discussion Papers 2005-04, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    11. Craig E. Landry & Andreas Lange & John A. List & Michael K. Price & Nicholas G. Rupp, 2010. "Is a Donor in Hand Better Than Two in the Bush? Evidence from a Natural Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 958-983, June.
    12. Daniel McFadden, 2009. "The human side of mechanism design: a tribute to Leo Hurwicz and Jean-Jacque Laffont," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 13(1), pages 77-100, April.
    13. Andrea Attar & Eloisa Campioni & Gwenael Piaser, 2011. "Information Revelation in Competing Mechanism Games," CEIS Research Paper 205, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 04 Jul 2011.
    14. Paul Pecorino, 2016. "A Portion of Profits to Charity: Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Profitability," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(2), pages 380-398, October.
    15. John Duffy & Alexander Matros, 2014. "On the Use of Fines and Lottery Prizes to Increase Voter Turnout," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(2), pages 966-975.
    16. John Duffy & Alexander Matros, 2012. "On the Use of Fines and Lottery Prizes to Increase Voter Turnout," Working Paper 494, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Oct 2013.
    17. Gauthier, Stéphane & Laroque, Guy, 2017. "Redistribution by means of lotteries," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 707-716.
    18. Pecorino, Paul, 2001. "Can by-product lobbying firms compete?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 377-397, December.
    19. Jörg Franke & Wolfgang Leininger, 2013. "On the Efficient Provision of Public Goods by Means of Lotteries," Ruhr Economic Papers 0399, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    20. Attar, Andrea & Campioni, Eloisa & Piaser, Gwenaël, 2018. "On competing mechanisms under exclusive competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 1-15.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2004.00196. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.