IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aub/autbar/353.96.html

Maximal Domain for Strategy-Proof Rules with one Public Good

Author

Listed:
  • Berga, D
  • Serizawa, S

Abstract

In the context of the provision of one pure public good, we raise the following question : how large can a preference domain be to allow for the existence fo strategy-proof rules satisfying the no vetoer condition? This question is qualified by the additional requirement that a domain should include " a minimal rich domain". We discuss that this requirement is weak since the conditions for minimal richness are satisfied by a variety of small domains including the class of quadratic preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Berga, D & Serizawa, S, 1996. "Maximal Domain for Strategy-Proof Rules with one Public Good," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 353.96, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    • Handle: RePEc:aub:autbar:353.96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Massó, Jordi & Moreno de Barreda, Inés, 2011. "On strategy-proofness and symmetric single-peakedness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 467-484, June.
    2. Marc Vorsatz, 2008. "Scoring rules on dichotomous preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(1), pages 151-162, June.
    3. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Massó, Jordi, 2016. "Comparing generalized median voter schemes according to their manipulability," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    4. Susumu Cato, 2011. "Pareto principles, positive responsiveness, and majority decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 503-518, October.
    5. Tomoya Kazumura & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2016. "Efficiency and strategy-proofness in object assignment problems with multi-demand preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 633-663, October.
    6. Bordes, G. & Laffond, G. & Le Breton, Michel, 2012. "Euclidean Preferences, Option Sets and Strategy Proofness," TSE Working Papers 12-302, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Bonifacio, Agustín G. & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Pablo, 2023. "Preference restrictions for simple and strategy-proof rules: Local and weakly single-peaked domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Felix Brandt & Matthias Greger & Erel Segal-Halevi & Warut Suksompong, 2024. "Optimal Budget Aggregation with Star-Shaped Preference Domains," Papers 2402.15904, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    9. Georges Bordes & Gilbert Laffond & Michel Le Breton, 2011. "Euclidean preferences, option sets and strategyproofness," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 469-483, December.
    10. Alcalde-Unzu, Jorge & Gallo, Oihane & Vorsatz, Marc, 2024. "Strategy-proofness with single-peaked and single-dipped preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 107-127.
    11. Rodríguez-Álvarez, Carmelo, 2023. "Maximal domains for strategy-proof pairwise exchange," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 107-118.
    12. Rebelo, S., 1997. "On the Determinant of Economic Growth," RCER Working Papers 443, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    13. Masso, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2001. "Maximal Domain of Preferences in the Division Problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 367-387, November.
    14. Agustín Germán Bonifacio & Jordi Massó & Pablo Neme, 2021. "Preference restrictions for strategy-proof and simple rules: local and weakly single-peaked domains," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4441, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    15. 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).
    16. Alcalde-Unzu, Jorge & Vorsatz, Marc, 2018. "Strategy-proof location of public facilities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 21-48.
    17. Ehlers, Lars, 2002. "Coalitional Strategy-Proof House Allocation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 298-317, August.
    18. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sanver, Remzi & Sen, Arunava, 2013. "On domains that admit well-behaved strategy-proof social choice functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1050-1073.
    19. Ehlers, Lars, 2001. "Independence axioms for the provision of multiple public goods as options," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 239-250, March.
    20. Hagen, Martin & Hernando-Veciana, Ángel, 2021. "Multidimensional bargaining and posted prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    21. Kentaro Hatsumi & Dolors Berga & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2014. "A maximal domain for strategy-proof and no-vetoer rules in the multi-object choice model," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(1), pages 153-168, February.
    22. Shuhei Morimoto, 2013. "Maximal domain for strategy-proof probabilistic rules in economies with one public good," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(3), pages 637-669, September.
    23. Jordi MassóAuthor-Email: jordi.masso@uab.es & Alejandro Neme, 2002. "A Maximal Domain of Preferences for Tops-only Rules in the Division Problem," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 535.02, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    24. Berga, Dolors, 1998. "Strategy-proofness and single-plateaued preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 105-120, March.
    25. Bordes, G. & Laffond, G. & Le Breton, Michel, 2012. "Euclidean Preferences, Option Sets and Strategy Proofness," IDEI Working Papers 717, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:aub:autbar:353.96. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Xavier Vila (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ufuabes.html .

    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.