IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/15580.html

The multiple-volunteers principle

Author

Listed:
  • Goldlücke, Susanne
  • Tröger, Thomas

Abstract

We consider mechanisms for assigning an unpleasant task among a group of agents with heterogenous abilities. We emphasize threshold rules: every agent decides whether or not to ``volunteer''; if the number of volunteers exceeds a threshold number, the task is assigned to a random volunteer; if the number is below the threshold, the task is assigned to a random non-volunteer. We show that any non-extreme threshold rule allows for a symmetric equilibrium in which every ability type is strictly better off than in a random assignment. This holds for arbitrarily high costs of performing the task. Within the class of binary-action mechanisms, some threshold rule is utilitarian optimal. The first-best can be approximated arbitrarily closely with a threshold rule as the group size tends to infinity; that is, there exist threshold numbers such that with probability arbitrarily close to 1 the task is performed by an agent with an ability arbitrarily close to the highest possible ability. The optimal threshold number goes to infinity as the group size tends to infinity.

Suggested Citation

  • Goldlücke, Susanne & Tröger, Thomas, 2020. "The multiple-volunteers principle," CEPR Discussion Papers 15580, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:15580
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP15580
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palfrey, Thomas R. & Rosenthal, Howard, 1984. "Participation and the provision of discrete public goods: a strategic analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 171-193, July.
    2. Makris, Miltiadis, 2009. "Private provision of discrete public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 292-299, September.
    3. Nöldeke, Georg & Peña, Jorge, 2020. "Group size and collective action in a binary contribution game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 42-51.
    4. Vijay Krishna & John Morgan, 2015. "Majority Rule and Utilitarian Welfare," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 339-375, November.
    5. Timothy Feddersen & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 1997. "Voting Behavior and Information Aggregation in Elections with Private Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(5), pages 1029-1058, September.
    6. Feng, Tangren & Niemeyer, Axel & Wu, Qinggong, 2023. "The limits of ex post implementation without transfers," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), May.
    7. Bliss, Christopher & Nalebuff, Barry, 1984. "Dragon-slaying and ballroom dancing: The private supply of a public good," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1-2), pages 1-12, November.
    8. Oechssler, Joerg & Reischmann, Andreas & Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "The conditional contribution mechanism for repeated public goods – The general case," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    9. Sahuguet, Nicolas, 2006. "Volunteering for heterogeneous tasks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 333-349, August.
    10. Vijay Krishna & John Morgan, 2011. "Overcoming Ideological Bias in Elections," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(2), pages 183-211.
    11. Mark Bagnoli & Barton L. Lipman, 1989. "Provision of Public Goods: Fully Implementing the Core through Private Contributions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 56(4), pages 583-601.
    12. Li, Zhuozheng & Rantakari, Heikki & Yang, Huanxing, 2016. "Competitive cheap talk," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 65-89.
    13. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    14. Paul Klemperer & Jeremy Bulow, 1999. "The Generalized War of Attrition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 175-189, March.
    15. Bilodeau, Marc & Slivinski, Al, 1996. "Toilet cleaning and department chairing: Volunteering a public service," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 299-308, February.
    16. Ledyard, John O. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2002. "The approximation of efficient public good mechanisms by simple voting schemes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 153-171, February.
    17. Andreas Diekmann, 1985. "Volunteer's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(4), pages 605-610, December.
    18. Reischmann, Andreas & Oechssler, Joerg, 2018. "The Binary Conditional Contribution Mechanism for public good provision in dynamic settings — Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 104-115.
    19. Susanne Goldluecke & Thomas Troeger, 2023. "The Multiple-Volunteers Principle for Assigning Unpleasant and Pleasant Tasks," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_464, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    20. Ted Bergstrom, 2017. "The Good Samaritan and Traffic on the Road to Jericho," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 33-53, May.
    21. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    22. Jehiel, Philippe & Moldovanu, Benny, 2001. "Efficient Design with Interdependent Valuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1237-1259, September.
    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. Susanne Goldlücke & Thomas Tröger, 2018. "Assigning an unpleasant task without payment," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2018_003, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    2. Goldlücke, Susanne & Tröger, Thomas, 2018. "Assigning an unpleasant task without payment," Working Papers 18-02, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    3. Jon X. Eguia & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2021. "Implementation by Vote-Buying Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(9), pages 2811-2828, September.
    4. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    5. Stefano Barbieri & Kai A. Konrad & David A. Malueg, 2020. "Preemption contests between groups," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(3), pages 934-961, September.
    6. Rajat Deb & Tae Seo, 2010. "Strategy-proofness and public good provision using referenda based on unequal cost sharing," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(1), pages 223-236, March.
    7. Jorge Peña & Georg Nöldeke, 2023. "Cooperative Dilemmas with Binary Actions and Multiple Players," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 1156-1193, December.
    8. Nava Kahana & Yosef Mealem & Shmuel Nitzan, 2009. "The Efficient and Fair Approval of “Multiple‐Cost‐Single‐Benefit” Projects under Unilateral Information," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 11(6), pages 947-960, December.
    9. Florian Morath, 2013. "Volunteering and the strategic value of ignorance," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(1), pages 99-131, June.
    10. Kai A. Konrad, 2025. "Multiple teams and the volunteer’s dilemma," Rationality and Society, , vol. 37(3), pages 338-355, August.
    11. Maaser, Nicola & Stratmann, Thomas, 2024. "Costly voting in weighted committees: The case of moral costs," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Li, Hongcheng, 2019. "Multi-Player War of Attrition with Asymmetric Incomplete Information," MPRA Paper 109511, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Aug 2021.
    13. Friedel Bolle, 2014. "Binary Threshold Public Goods," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 14, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
    14. E. Glen Weyl, 2017. "The robustness of quadratic voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 75-107, July.
    15. Gans, Joshua S. & Landry, Peter, 2022. "I’m not sure what to think about them: Confronting naive present bias in a dynamic threshold public goods game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 195-204.
    16. Stefano Barbieri & David Malueg, 2014. "Group efforts when performance is determined by the “best shot”," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 333-373, June.
    17. Deb, Rajat & Razzolini, Laura, 1999. "Voluntary cost sharing for an excludable public project," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 123-138, March.
    18. Cason, Timothy N. & Zubrickas, Robertas, 2017. "Enhancing fundraising with refund bonuses," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 218-233.
    19. Bergstrom, Ted & Garratt, Rodney & Leo, Greg, 2019. "Let me, or let George? Motives of competing altruists," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 269-283.
    20. Shakun D. Mago & Jennifer Pate, 2023. "Greed and fear: Competitive and charitable priming in a threshold volunteer's dilemma," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(1), pages 138-161, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods

    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:cpr:ceprdp:15580. 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: CEPR (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cepr.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.