IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20070062.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consistency, Monotonicity and Implementation of Egalitarian Shapley Values

Author

Listed:
  • René van den Brink

    (VU University, Amsterdam)

  • Yukihiko Funaki

    (Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan)

  • Yuan Ju

    (Keele University, Keele, UK)

Abstract

One of the main issues in economics is the trade-off between marginalism and egalitarianism. In the context of cooperative games this trade-off can be framed as one of choosing to allocate according to the Shapley value or the equal division solution. In this paper we provide tools that make it possible to study this trade-off in a consistent way by providing three types of results on egalitarian Shapley values being convex combinations of the Shapley value and the equal division solution. First, we show that all these solutions satisfy the same reduced game consistency. Second, we characterize this class of solutions using monotonicity properties. Finally, we provide a non-cooperative implementation for these solutions which only differ in the probability of breakdown at a certain stage of the game.

Suggested Citation

  • René van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2007. "Consistency, Monotonicity and Implementation of Egalitarian Shapley Values," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-062/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20070062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/07062.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Perez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2001. "Bidding for the Surplus : A Non-cooperative Approach to the Shapley Value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 274-294, October.
    2. Yuan Ju & David Wettstein, 2009. "Implementing cooperative solution concepts: a generalized bidding approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 39(2), pages 307-330, May.
    3. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2009. "Axiomatizations of a Class of Equal Surplus Sharing Solutions for TU-Games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 303-340, September.
    4. Theo Driessen & Elena Yanovskaya, 2002. "Note On linear consistency of anonymous values for TU-games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 30(4), pages 601-609.
    5. Sergiu Hart, 2006. "Shapley Value," Discussion Paper Series dp421, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    6. René van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2004. "Axiomatizations of a Class of Equal Surplus Sharing Solutions for Cooperative Games with Transferable Utility," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-136/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Hart, Sergiu & Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1996. "Bargaining and Value," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 357-380, March.
    8. (*), Gerard van der Laan & RenÊ van den Brink, 1998. "Axiomatizations of the normalized Banzhaf value and the Shapley value," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(4), pages 567-582.
    9. Hart, Sergiu & Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1989. "Potential, Value, and Consistency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 589-614, May.
    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. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2013. "Reconciling marginalism with egalitarianism: consistency, monotonicity, and implementation of egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 693-714, March.
    2. Rene van den Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2010. "Axiomatization and Implementation of Discounted Shapley Values," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-065/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki, 2015. "Implementation and axiomatization of discounted Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(2), pages 329-344, September.
    4. Calvo, Emilio & Gutiérrez-López, Esther, 2021. "Recursive and bargaining values," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 97-106.
    5. Andrea Caggese & Ander Pérez-Orive, 2017. "Capital Misallocation and Secular Stagnation," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-009, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    6. Yuan Ju & David Wettstein, 2009. "Implementing cooperative solution concepts: a generalized bidding approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 39(2), pages 307-330, May.
    7. David Wettstein & David Pérez-Castrillo & Inés Macho-Stadler, 2017. "Extensions of the Shapley value for Environments with Externalities," Working Papers 1002, Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Yuan Ju & Peter Borm & Pieter Ruys, 2007. "The consensus value: a new solution concept for cooperative games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 28(4), pages 685-703, June.
    9. Emilio Calvo Ramón & Esther Gutiérrez-López, 2022. "The equal collective gains value in cooperative games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 51(1), pages 249-278, March.
    10. McQuillin, Ben & Sugden, Robert, 2018. "Balanced externalities and the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 81-92.
    11. Emilio Calvo & Esther Gutiérrez-López, 2016. "A strategic approach for the discounted Shapley values," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 271-293, February.
    12. Chessa, Michela & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Lardon, Aymeric & Yamada, Takashi, 2023. "An experiment on the Nash program: A comparison of two strategic mechanisms implementing the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 88-104.
    13. Geoffroy de Clippel & Roberto Serrano, 2008. "Marginal Contributions and Externalities in the Value," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1413-1436, November.
    14. Sylvain Béal & Sylvain Ferrières & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2017. "Axiomatic and bargaining foundation of an allocation rule for ordered tree TU-games," Post-Print halshs-01644797, HAL.
    15. Ju, Yuan & Chun, Youngsub & van den Brink, René, 2014. "Auctioning and selling positions: A non-cooperative approach to queueing conflicts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 33-45.
    16. Yu-Hsien Liao, 2022. "A Weighted Solution Concept under Replicated Behavior," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Gustavo Bergantiños & Juan Vidal-Puga, 2005. "The Consistent Coalitional Value," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 832-851, November.
    18. Casajus, André & Huettner, Frank, 2018. "Decomposition of solutions and the Shapley value," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 37-48.
    19. Koji Yokote & Takumi Kongo & Yukihiko Funaki, 2021. "Redistribution to the less productive: parallel characterizations of the egalitarian Shapley and consensus values," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 81-98, July.
    20. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2019. "Recent developments in the queueing problem," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Shapley value; Equal division solution; Egalitarian Shapley value; Reduced Game Consistency; Monotonicity; Implementation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D60 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - General

    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:tin:wpaper:20070062. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.