IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implementation with Securities


  • Rahul Deb
  • Debasis Mishra


We study mechanism design in a setting where agents know their types but are uncertain about the utility from any alternative. The final realized utility of each agent is observed by the principal and can be contracted upon. In such environments, the principal is not restricted to using only transfers but can employ security contracts which determine each agent's payoff as a function of their realized utility and the profile of announced types. We show that using security contracts instead of transfers expands the set of (dominant strategy) implementable social choice functions. Our main result is that in a finite type space, every social choice function that can be implemented using a security contract can also be implemented using a royalty contract. Royalty contracts are simpler and commonly used security contracts, in which agents initially pay a transfer and keep a fraction of their realized utility. We also identify a condition called acyclicity that is necessary and sufficient for implementation in these environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahul Deb & Debasis Mishra, 2013. "Implementation with Securities," Working Papers tecipa-484, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:tor:tecipa:tecipa-484

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Main Text
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Peter M. DeMarzo & Ilan Kremer & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2005. "Bidding with Securities: Auctions and Security Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 936-959, September.
    2. Mishra, Debasis & Roy, Souvik, 2013. "Implementation in multidimensional dichotomous domains," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 8(2), May.
    3. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1986. "Using Cost Observation to Regulate Firms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 614-641, June.
    4. Vohra,Rakesh V., 2011. "Mechanism Design," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107004368, March.
    5. Sushil Bikhchandani & Shurojit Chatterji & Ron Lavi & Ahuva Mu'alem & Noam Nisan & Arunava Sen, 2006. "Weak Monotonicity Characterizes Deterministic Dominant-Strategy Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 1109-1132, July.
    6. Carbajal, Juan Carlos & McLennan, Andrew & Tourky, Rabee, 2013. "Truthful implementation and preference aggregation in restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1074-1101.
    7. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    8. John G. Riley, 1988. "Ex Post Information in Auctions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(3), pages 409-429.
    9. Yeon-Koo Che & Jinwoo Kim, 2010. "Bidding with Securities: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1929-1935, September.
    10. Donald Brown & Caterina Calsamiglia, 2007. "The Nonparametric Approach to Applied Welfare Analysis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 31(1), pages 183-188, April.
    11. Vohra,Rakesh V., 2011. "Mechanism Design," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521179461, March.
    12. Claudio Mezzetti, 2004. "Mechanism Design with Interdependent Valuations: Efficiency," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(5), pages 1617-1626, September.
    13. Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2013. "Auctions with contingent payments — An overview," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 666-675.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Tymofiy Mylovanov & Andriy Zapechelnyuk, 2017. "Optimal Allocation with Ex Post Verification and Limited Penalties," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2666-2694, September.

    More about this item


    dominant strategy implementation; acyclicity; security contracts; royalty contracts; cycle monotonicity;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:tor:tecipa:tecipa-484. 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: (RePEc Maintainer) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.