IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v307y2023i2p785-801.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fair division of goods in the shadow of market values

Author

Listed:
  • Dall’Aglio, Marco

Abstract

Inheritances, divorces or liquidations of companies require common assets to be divided among the entitled parties. Legal methods usually consider the market value of goods, while fair division theory takes into account the parties’ preferences expressed as utilities. I combine the two practices to define a procedure that optimally allocates divisible goods with market values to people with easily elicited preferences. Imposing an exact equality onn the bundles’ monetary values may produce unacceptable solutions. I drop the tight requirement and suggest a procedure in which the differences in the monetary values are explained in terms of satisfaction per monetary share as perceived by the agents. A robustness study shows the consequences of misspecification in the model parameters.

Suggested Citation

  • Dall’Aglio, Marco, 2023. "Fair division of goods in the shadow of market values," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 785-801.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:307:y:2023:i:2:p:785-801
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2022.10.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037722172200813X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.10.025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    2. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin & Fedor Sandomirskiy & Elena Yanovskaya, 2017. "Competitive Division of a Mixed Manna," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85(6), pages 1847-1871, November.
    3. Gabrielle Demange & Ahmet Alkan & David Gale, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Money and Criteria of Justice," Post-Print halshs-00670945, HAL.
    4. Brooke Abrahams & Emilia Bellucci & John Zeleznikow, 2012. "Incorporating Fairness into Development of an Integrated Multi-agent Online Dispute Resolution Environment," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 3-28, January.
    5. Carmen BeviÂ, 1998. "Fair allocation in a general model with indivisible goods," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 3(3), pages 195-213.
    6. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin & Fedor Sandomirskiy & Elena Yanovskaia, 2019. "Dividing bads under additive utilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 395-417, March.
    7. Anna Bogomolnaia & Herve Moulin, 2022. "Fair Division with Money and Prices," Papers 2202.08117, arXiv.org.
    8. Elisha A. Pazner & David Schmeidler, 1978. "Egalitarian Equivalent Allocations: A New Concept of Economic Equity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 92(4), pages 671-687.
    9. Hervé Moulin, 2019. "Fair Division in the Internet Age," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 407-441, August.
    10. Alkan, Ahmet & Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David, 1991. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Criteria of Justice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 1023-1039, July.
    11. Weller, Dietrich, 1985. "Fair division of a measurable space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 5-17, February.
    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. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin & Fedor Sandomirskiy, 2022. "On the Fair Division of a Random Object," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1174-1194, February.
    2. Duygu Yengin, 2017. "No-envy and egalitarian-equivalence under multi-object-demand for heterogeneous objects," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 81-108, January.
    3. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    4. Anna Bogomolnaia & Hervé Moulin, 2023. "Guarantees in Fair Division: General or Monotone Preferences," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 160-176, February.
    5. Youngsub Chun, 2006. "No-envy in queueing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 29(1), pages 151-162, September.
    6. Fedor Sandomirskiy & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2019. "Efficient Fair Division with Minimal Sharing," Papers 1908.01669, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    7. Moshe Babaioff & Noam Nisan & Inbal Talgam-Cohen, 2021. "Competitive Equilibrium with Indivisible Goods and Generic Budgets," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 382-403, February.
    8. Chun, Youngsub & Mitra, Manipushpak & Mutuswami, Suresh, 2019. "Egalitarianism in the queueing problem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 48-56.
    9. Lahiri, Somdeb, 2008. "Envy-free solutions, Non-linear equilibrium and Egalitarian-equivalence for the Package Assignment Problem," MPRA Paper 8444, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Fujinaka, Yuji & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Maskin monotonicity in economies with indivisible goods and money," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 253-258, February.
    11. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2021. "Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Youngsub Chun & Manipushpak Mitra & Suresh Mutuswami, 2014. "Egalitarian equivalence and strategyproofness in the queueing problem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 425-442, June.
    13. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    14. Marco LiCalzi & Antonio Nicolò, 2009. "Efficient egalitarian equivalent allocations over a single good," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(1), pages 27-45, July.
    15. Sandomirskiy, Fedor & Ushchev, Philip, 2024. "The geometry of consumer preference aggregation," CEPR Discussion Papers 19100, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Rodrigo A. Velez, 2022. "A polynomial algorithm for maxmin and minmax envy-free rent division on a soft budget," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 93-118, July.
    17. Thomson, William, 2005. "Divide-and-permute," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 186-200, July.
    18. Francisco Sánchez Sánchez, 2022. "Envy-Free Solutions to the Problem of Room Assignment and Rent Division," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 703-721, June.
    19. Andersson, Tommy & Andersson, Christer & Talman, Adolphus Johannes Jan, 2010. "Sets in Excess Demand in Ascending Auctions with Unit-Demand Bidders," Working Papers 2010:15, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 28 Jun 2012.
    20. T. Andersson & C. Andersson & A. Talman, 2013. "Sets in excess demand in simple ascending auctions with unit-demand bidders," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 27-36, December.

    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:eee:ejores:v:307:y:2023:i:2:p:785-801. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.