IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ash/wpaper/111.html

Fair allocation with (semi-single-peaked) preferences over location and quantity

Author

Listed:
  • Mihir Bhattacharya

    (Ashoka University)

  • Ojasvi Khare

    (Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi)

Abstract

We consider the problem of dividing and allocating a perfectly divisible heterogeneous good where agents have a preference for location and quantity. We assume that preferences are single-peaked in quantity, i.e., semi-single-peaked which can be represented by continuous indifference curves (ICs). We show existence of envy-free and Pareto efficient allocation rules, and characterize the set of all such rules using the notion of a balanced IC. We define the balanced-curve allocation (BCA) which uses the region between the two balanced ICs to obtain feasible allocations. We show that an allocation rule is envy-free and Pareto efficient if and only if it is in the set specified by the BCA rule. We show that there is no strategy-proof, envy-free and Pareto efficient allocation rule. We provide some insights into the problem when there are more than 2 agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Mihir Bhattacharya & Ojasvi Khare, 2024. "Fair allocation with (semi-single-peaked) preferences over location and quantity," Working Papers 111, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ash:wpaper:111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dp.ashoka.edu.in/ash/wpaper/paper111_0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    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. Takuma Wakayama, 2017. "Bribe-proofness for single-peaked preferences: characterizations and maximality-of-domains results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(2), pages 357-385, August.
    2. James Schummer, 1999. "Almost-dominant Strategy Implementation," Discussion Papers 1278, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    3. Stefan Ambec, 2020. "Environmental markets exacerbate inequalities," Working Papers hal-02945513, HAL.
    4. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    5. Leroux, Justin, 2004. "Pooling Private Technologies: Improving upon Autarky," Working Papers 2004-08, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    6. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2018. "Multilateral Trade Bargaining And Dominant Strategies," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(4), pages 1785-1824, November.
    7. Kazuhiko Hashimoto & Takuma Wakayama, 2021. "Fair reallocation in economies with single-peaked preferences," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(3), pages 773-785, September.
    8. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2023. "All sequential allotment rules are obviously strategy-proof," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    9. José M. Jiménez Gómez, 2010. "Noncooperative justifications for old bankruptcy rules," Working Papers. Serie AD 2010-15, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    10. Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2007. "Bribe-proof rules in the division problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 331-343, November.
    11. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O, 1995. "Strategy-Proof Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(1), pages 51-87, January.
    12. N. A. Korgin & V. O. Korepanov, 2017. "Experimental Gaming Comparison of Resource Allocation Rules in Case of Transferable Utilities," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(02), pages 1-11, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2014. "Assigning agents to a line," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 539-553.
    15. R. Pablo Arribillaga & Agustín G. Bonifacio, 2025. "Not obviously manipulable allotment rules," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 80(1), pages 355-380, August.
    16. Hervé Moulin & Jay Sethuraman, 2013. "The Bipartite Rationing Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1087-1100, October.
    17. Bochet, Olivier & Sakai, Toyotaka & Thomson, William, 2024. "Preference manipulations lead to the uniform rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    18. Youngsub Chun & Boram Park, 2017. "A graph theoretic approach to the slot allocation problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 133-152, January.
    19. Yefen Chen & Feimin Zhong & Zhongbao Zhou, 2023. "Supply commitment contract in capacity allocation games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 329(1), pages 373-399, October.
    20. Kranich, Laurence, 1995. "Equity and economic theory: reflections on methodology and scope," UC3M Working papers. Economics 3919, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ash:wpaper:111. 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: Ashoka University (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ashoka.edu.in .

    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.