Robust mechanism design and dominant strategy voting rules
We develop an analysis of voting rules that is robust in the sense that we do not make any assumption regarding voters’ knowledge about each other. In dominant strategy voting rules, voters’ behavior can be predicted uniquely without making any such assumption. However, on full domains, the only dominant strategy voting rules are random dictatorships. We show that the designer of a voting rule can achieve Pareto improvements over random dictatorship by choosing rules in which voters’ behavior can depend on their beliefs. The Pareto improvement is achieved for all possible beliefs. The mechanism that we use to demonstrate this result is simple and intuitive, and the Pareto improvement result extends to all equilibria of the mechanism that satisfy a mild refinement. We also show that the result only holds for voters’ interim expected utilities, not for their ex post expected utilities.
|Date of creation:||03 Nov 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2003.
"Robust Mechanism Design,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
1421, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2003. "Robust Mechanism Design," Levine's Bibliography 666156000000000035, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2003. "Robust Mechanism Design," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1421R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Apr 2004.
- Stephen Morris & Dirk Bergemann, 2004. "Robust Mechanism Design," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm380, Yale School of Management.
- Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2005. "Robust Mechanism Design," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews 666156000000000593, www.najecon.org.
- Salvador Barberà, 2010.
"Strategy-proof social choice,"
420, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- Schmitz, Patrick W. & Tröger, Thomas, 2011.
"The (sub-)optimality of the majority rule,"
32716, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kim-Sau Chung & Jeffrey C. Ely, 2003.
"Foundations of Dominant Strategy Mechanisms,"
1372, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Jeff Ely, 2003. "Foundations of Dominant Strategy Mechanisms," Theory workshop papers 658612000000000064, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Jeffrey C. Ely & Kim-Sau Chung, 2004. "Foundations of Dominant Strategy Mechanisms," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 169, Econometric Society.
- Tilman Börgers & Peter Postl, 2005.
122247000000000801, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Bengt Holmstrom & Roger B. Myerson, 1981.
"Efficient and Durable Decision Rules with Incomplete Information,"
495, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Holmstrom, Bengt & Myerson, Roger B, 1983. "Efficient and Durable Decision Rules with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(6), pages 1799-819, November.
- Matthew O. Jackson, 2001.
"A crash course in implementation theory,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 655-708.
- Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
- Jobst Heitzig & Forest Simmons, 2012. "Some chance for consensus: voting methods for which consensus is an equilibrium," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 43-57, January.
- Bhaskar Dutta & Hans Peters & Arunava Sen, 2008.
"Strategy-proof cardinal decision schemes,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 701-702, May.
- Dutta, Bhaskar & Peter, Hans & Sen, Arunava, 2005. "Strategy-proof Cardinal Decision Schemes," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 722, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Blin, Jean-Marie & Satterthwaite, Mark A, 1977. "On Preferences, Beliefs, and Manipulation within Voting Situations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 881-88, May.
- Tilman Borgers & Doug Smith, 2012. "Robustly Ranking Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 325-29, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:37027. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.