IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v74y2012i1p366-381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Out-of-equilibrium performance of three Lindahl mechanisms: Experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Van Essen, Matthew
  • Lazzati, Natalia
  • Walker, Mark

Abstract

We describe an experimental comparison of the out-of-equilibrium performance of three allocation mechanisms designed to achieve Lindahl outcomes as Nash equilibria: the mechanisms due to Walker (1981), Kim (1993), and Chen (2002). We find that Chenʼs mechanism, which is supermodular, converges closest and most rapidly to its equilibrium. However, we find that the properties that move subjects toward equilibrium in Chenʼs mechanism typically generate sizeable taxes and subsidies when not in equilibrium, and correspondingly large budget surpluses and deficits, which typically far outweigh the surplus created by providing the public good. The Kim mechanism, on the other hand, converges relatively close to its equilibrium and exhibits much better out-of-equilibrium efficiency properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Van Essen, Matthew & Lazzati, Natalia & Walker, Mark, 2012. "Out-of-equilibrium performance of three Lindahl mechanisms: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 366-381.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:74:y:2012:i:1:p:366-381
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2011.04.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089982561100073X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2011.04.005?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. Walker, Mark, 1981. "A Simple Incentive Compatible Scheme for Attaining Lindahl Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 65-71, January.
    2. Rabah Amir, 2005. "Supermodularity and Complementarity in Economics: An Elementary Survey," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(3), pages 636-660, January.
    3. Rabah Amir, 2005. "Supermodularity and Complementarity in Economics: An Elementary Survey," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 71(3), pages 636-660, January.
    4. Yan Chen & Robert Gazzale, 2004. "When Does Learning in Games Generate Convergence to Nash Equilibria? The Role of Supermodularity in an Experimental Setting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1505-1535, December.
    5. Chen, Yan & Plott, Charles R., 1996. "The Groves-Ledyard mechanism: An experimental study of institutional design," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 335-364, March.
    6. Yan Chen & Fang-Fang Tang, 1998. "Learning and Incentive-Compatible Mechanisms for Public Goods Provision: An Experimental Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(3), pages 633-662, June.
    7. J. Swarthout & Mark Walker, 2009. "Discrete implementation of the Groves–Ledyard mechanism," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 13(1), pages 101-114, April.
    8. Vega-Redondo, Fernando, 1989. "Implementation of Lindahl equilibrium: an integration of the static and dynamic approaches," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 211-228, December.
    9. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    10. L. Hurwicz, 1979. "Outcome Functions Yielding Walrasian and Lindahl Allocations at Nash Equilibrium Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(2), pages 217-225.
    11. Healy, Paul J., 2006. "Learning dynamics for mechanism design: An experimental comparison of public goods mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 114-149, July.
    12. Yan Chen, 2002. "A family of supermodular Nash mechanisms implementing Lindahl allocations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 773-790.
    13. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    14. Kim, Taesung, 1993. "A stable Nash mechanism implementing Lindahl allocations for quasi-linear environments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 359-371.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Federica Alberti & César Mantilla, 2024. "A mechanism requesting prices and quantities may increase the provision of heterogeneous public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 244-270, March.
    2. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    3. Van Essen, Matthew & Walker, Mark, 2017. "A simple market-like allocation mechanism for public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 6-19.
    4. Matt Van Essen, 2012. "A note on the stability of Chen’s Lindahl mechanism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 365-370, February.
    5. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    6. Matt Essen, 2014. "A Clarke tax tâtonnement that converges to the Lindahl allocation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 309-327, August.
    7. Matt Van Essen, 2015. "Bartering Games in the Kolm Triangle," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(3), pages 297-310, June.
    8. Caleb Cox & Arzé Karam & Matthias Pelster, 2022. "Two-Period Duopolies with Forward Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 60(1), pages 29-62, February.
    9. Matt Van Essen, 2012. "Information complexity, punishment, and stability in two Nash efficient Lindahl mechanisms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(1), pages 15-40, March.

    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. Van Essen, Matthew J., 2008. "A Simple Supermodular Mechanism that Implements Lindahl Allocations," MPRA Paper 12781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Matt Van Essen, 2012. "Information complexity, punishment, and stability in two Nash efficient Lindahl mechanisms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(1), pages 15-40, March.
    3. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    4. Van Essen, Matthew & Walker, Mark, 2017. "A simple market-like allocation mechanism for public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 6-19.
    5. Matt Van Essen, 2012. "A note on the stability of Chen’s Lindahl mechanism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 365-370, February.
    6. Masuda, Takehito & Okano, Yoshitaka & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2014. "The minimum approval mechanism implements the efficient public good allocation theoretically and experimentally," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 73-85.
    7. Healy, Paul J. & Jain, Ritesh, 2017. "Generalized Groves–Ledyard mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 204-217.
    8. Mathevet, Laurent & Taneva, Ina, 2013. "Finite supermodular design with interdependent valuations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 327-349.
    9. repec:dpr:wpaper:0874r is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:dpr:wpaper:0874 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Healy, Paul J., 2006. "Learning dynamics for mechanism design: An experimental comparison of public goods mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 114-149, July.
    12. Matt Van Essen, 2015. "Bartering Games in the Kolm Triangle," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 17(3), pages 297-310, June.
    13. Hassan Benchekroun & Charles Figuières & Mabel Tidball, 2016. "Implementation of the Lindahl Correspondance via Simple Indirect Mechanisms," Working Papers halshs-01378460, HAL.
    14. Arifovic, Jasmina & Ledyard, John, 2011. "A behavioral model for mechanism design: Individual evolutionary learning," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 374-395, May.
    15. Federica Alberti & César Mantilla, 2024. "A mechanism requesting prices and quantities may increase the provision of heterogeneous public goods," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 27(1), pages 244-270, March.
    16. Fehr, Ernst & Powell, Michael & Wilkening, Tom, 2021. "Behavioral Constraints on the Design of Subgame-Perfect Implementation Mechanisms," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 111(4), pages 1055-1091.
    17. Potters, Jan & Suetens, Sigrid, 2020. "Optimization incentives in dilemma games with strategic complementarity," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    18. Bracht, Juergen & Figuieres, Charles & Ratto, Marisa, 2008. "Relative performance of two simple incentive mechanisms in a public goods experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 54-90, February.
    19. Matt Essen, 2014. "A Clarke tax tâtonnement that converges to the Lindahl allocation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 309-327, August.
    20. Rayati, Mohammad & Teneketzis, Demosthenis, 2022. "Electricity market design and implementation in the presence of asymmetrically informed strategic producers and consumers: A surrogate optimization-based mechanism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    21. Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "Global Stability of Voluntary Contribution Mechanism with Heterogeneous Preferences," Working Papers SDES-2020-6, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jul 2020.
    22. Takuma Wakayama & Takehiko Yamato, 2023. "Comparison of the voluntary contribution and Pareto-efficient mechanisms under voluntary participation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 517-553, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public goods; Mechanism design; Lindahl;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior

    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:eee:gamebe:v:74:y:2012:i:1:p:366-381. 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/inca/622836 .

    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.