IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.22652.html

Pareto-Improving Pricing: Why 3 Is Better Than 2

Author

Listed:
  • Zi Yang Kang
  • Piotr Dworczak

Abstract

We study the design of priority pricing systems with heterogeneous agents in environments in which improving quality for some agents reduces the average quality that can be provided. Contrary to the equity-efficiency tradeoff emphasized in public debates, we show that under economically natural conditions priority pricing can Pareto-improve on an equal-allocation benchmark. Three priority tiers suffice for such an improvement, combining higher quality for a fee, lower quality with compensation, and an intermediate tier at the benchmark quality; two tiers are never enough. Our results provide a framework for overcoming equity-efficiency tensions in applications such as lane pricing, waiting-line design, public provision, and insurance.

Suggested Citation

  • Zi Yang Kang & Piotr Dworczak, 2026. "Pareto-Improving Pricing: Why 3 Is Better Than 2," Papers 2609.22652, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.22652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.22652
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ostrovsky, Michael & Yang, Frank, 2024. "Effective and Equitable Congestion Pricing: New York City and Beyond," Research Papers 4228, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    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. Tarduno, Matthew, 2025. "Elasticities and tax incidence in urban ridesharing markets: Evidence from Chicago," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    2. Devansh Jalota & Xuan Di & Adam N. Elmachtoub, 2026. "Simple vs. Optimal Congestion Pricing," Papers 2602.21495, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2026.

    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:2609.22652. 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: https://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.