IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/igi/igierp/359.html

Extremal Incentive Compatible Transfers

Author

Listed:
  • Nenad Kos
  • Matthias Messner

Abstract

We characterize the boundaries of the set of transfers implementing a given allocation rule without imposing any assumptions on the agent's type space or utility function besides quasi-linearity. In particular, we characterize the pointwise largest and the pointwise smallest transfer that implement a given allocation rule and are equal to zero at some prespecified type (extremal transfers). Exploiting the concept of extremal transfers allows us to obtain an exact characterization of the set of all implementable allocation rules (the set of transfers is non-empty) and the set of allocation rules satisfying Revenue Equivalence (the extremal transfers coincide). Furthermore, we show how the extremal transfers can be put to use in mechanism design problems where Revenue Equivalence does not hold. To this end we first explore the role of extremal transfers when the agents with type dependent outside options are free to participate in the mechanism. Finally, we consider the question of budget balanced implementation. We show that an allocation rule can be implemented in an incentive compatible, individually rational and ex post budget balanced mechanism if and only if there exists an individually rational extremal transfer scheme that delivers an ex ante budget surplus.

Suggested Citation

  • Nenad Kos & Matthias Messner, 2010. "Extremal Incentive Compatible Transfers," Working Papers 359, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:igi:igierp:359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.unibocconi.it/igier/igi/wp/2010/359.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Kos, Nenad & Messner, Matthias, 2013. "Incentive compatibility in non-quasilinear environments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 12-14.
    2. Rahman, David M., 2024. "Detecting profitable deviations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    3. Carrasco, Vinicius & Farinha Luz, Vitor & Kos, Nenad & Messner, Matthias & Monteiro, Paulo & Moreira, Humberto, 2018. "Optimal selling mechanisms under moment conditions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 245-279.
    4. Rohit Lamba, 2022. "Efficiency with(out) intermediation in repeated bilateral trade," Papers 2202.04201, arXiv.org.
    5. Rahul Deb & Debasis Mishra, 2014. "Implementation With Contingent Contracts," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2371-2393, November.
    6. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Müller, Rudolf, 2015. "Implementability under monotonic transformations in differences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 114-131.
    7. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Müller, Rudolf, 2017. "Monotonicity and revenue equivalence domains by monotonic transformations in differences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 29-35.
    8. Mishra, Debasis & Pramanik, Anup & Roy, Souvik, 2014. "Multidimensional mechanism design in single peaked type spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 103-116.
    9. , & ,, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional dichotomous domains," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(2), May.
    10. Debasis Mishra & Anup Pramanik & Souvik Roy, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional domains with ordinal restrictions," Discussion Papers 13-07, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    11. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & Ely, Jeffrey C., 2013. "Mechanism design without revenue equivalence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 104-133.
    12. Berger, A. & Müller, R.J. & Naeemi, S.H., 2010. "Path-monotonicity and incentive compatibility," Research Memorandum 035, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    13. Frongillo, Rafael M. & Kash, Ian A., 2021. "General truthfulness characterizations via convex analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 636-662.
    14. Nenad Kos & Matthias Messner, 2015. "Selling to the Mean," CESifo Working Paper Series 5443, CESifo.
    15. Yamashita, Takuro & Zhu, Shuguang, 2021. "Type-contingent Information Disclosure," TSE Working Papers 21-1242, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    16. Nejat Anbarci & Gorkem Celik, 2025. "Ideal Default For Resolving Disputes Efficiently," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 66(1), pages 201-221, February.
    17. Mehmet Ekmekci & Nenad Kos & Rakesh Vohra, 2016. "Just Enough or All: Selling a Firm," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(3), pages 223-256, August.
    18. Dilip Mookherjee & Masatoshi Tsumagari, 2014. "Mechanism Design with Communication Constraints," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(5), pages 1094-1129.
    19. Dworczak, Piotr & Zhang, Anthony Lee, 2017. "Implementability, Walrasian equilibria, and efficient matchings," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 57-60.
    20. Alfredo di Tillio & Nenad Kos & Matthias Messner, 2017. "The Design of Ambiguous Mechanisms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(1), pages 237-276.
    21. Krähmer, Daniel & Strausz, Roland, 2025. "Unidirectional incentive compatibility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    22. Chen, Yi-Chun & Li, Jiangtao, 2018. "Revisiting the foundations of dominant-strategy mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 294-317.
    23. Piotr Dworczak, 2020. "Mechanism Design With Aftermarkets: Cutoff Mechanisms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2629-2661, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:igi:igierp:359. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.igier.unibocconi.it/ .

    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.