IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v120y2022icp1-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new fairness notion in the assignment of indivisible resources

Author

Listed:
  • Bu, Nanyang

Abstract

We study the problem of assigning objects. There may be multiple copies of each object. Each agent is assigned at most one. Monetary transfer is not allowed. We require a rule to be fair and efficient. We introduce an axiom that is a natural weakening of no-envy. We call it “bounded no-envy”. It states that for each pair of agents who receive objects of the same rank in their respective preferences, each of them should find his assignment at least as desirable as the other’s. Bounded no-envy is compatible with Pareto efficiency. In particular, the immediate acceptance rules (a.k.a. the “Boston mechanisms”) satisfy both. Our main result is that the immediate acceptance rules are the only rules satisfying weak non-wastefulness, bounded no-envy, rank-respecting invariance, resource monotonicity, and bilateral consistency.

Suggested Citation

  • Bu, Nanyang, 2022. "A new fairness notion in the assignment of indivisible resources," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-7.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:120:y:2022:i:c:p:1-7
    DOI: 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2022.08.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165489622000622
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2022.08.002?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. Fuhito Kojima & Mihai Manea, 2010. "Axioms for Deferred Acceptance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 633-653, March.
    2. Fuhito Kojima & M. Ünver, 2014. "The “Boston” school-choice mechanism: an axiomatic approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 515-544, April.
    3. Eric Maskin, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 23-38.
    4. Onur Kesten & Ayşe Yazıcı, 2012. "The Pareto-dominant strategy-proof and fair rule for problems with indivisible goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(2), pages 463-488, June.
    5. Ehlers, Lars & Klaus, Bettina, 2006. "Efficient priority rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 372-384, May.
    6. Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 1988. "Monotonicity properties of bargaining solutions when applied to economics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 11-27, February.
    7. EHLERS, Lars & KLAUS, Bettina, 2012. "Strategy-Proofness makes the Difference: Deferred-Acceptance with Responsive Priorities," Cahiers de recherche 2012-12, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    8. Harless, Patrick, 2014. "A School Choice Compromise: Between Immediate and Deferred Acceptance," MPRA Paper 61417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. John E. Roemer, 1986. "Equality of Resources Implies Equality of Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 751-784.
    10. Nanyang Bu, 2014. "Characterizations of the sequential priority rules in the assignment of object types," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(3), pages 635-645, October.
    11. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tayfun Sönmez, 2003. "School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 729-747, June.
    12. Umut Dur & Robert G. Hammond & Thayer Morrill, 2018. "Identifying the Harm of Manipulable School-Choice Mechanisms," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 187-213, February.
    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. Bertoli-Barsotti, Lucio & Gagolewski, Marek & Siudem, Grzegorz & Żogała-Siudem, Barbara, 2024. "Gini-stable Lorenz curves and their relation to the generalised Pareto distribution," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).

    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. Nanyang Bu, 2014. "Characterizations of the sequential priority rules in the assignment of object types," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(3), pages 635-645, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Doğan, Battal & Klaus, Bettina, 2018. "Object allocation via immediate-acceptance: Characterizations and an affirmative action application," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 140-156.
    4. Fuhito Kojima & M. Ünver, 2014. "The “Boston” school-choice mechanism: an axiomatic approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 515-544, April.
    5. Yajing Chen, 2017. "New axioms for deferred acceptance," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 393-408, February.
    6. Harless, Patrick, 2014. "A School Choice Compromise: Between Immediate and Deferred Acceptance," MPRA Paper 61417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Lars Ehlers & Bettina Klaus, 2014. "Strategy-Proofness Makes the Difference: Deferred-Acceptance with Responsive Priorities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 949-966, November.
    8. Basteck, Christian & Klaus, Bettina & Kübler, Dorothea, 2021. "How lotteries in school choice help to level the playing field," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 198-237.
    9. Afacan, Mustafa Og̃uz & Dur, Umut Mert, 2017. "When preference misreporting is Harm[less]ful?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 16-24.
    10. Ehlers, Lars & Klaus, Bettina, 2016. "Object allocation via deferred-acceptance: Strategy-proofness and comparative statics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 128-146.
    11. Jorge Alcalde-Unzu & Flip Klijn & Marc Vorsatz, 2023. "Constrained school choice: an experimental QRE analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(3), pages 587-624, October.
    12. Dur, Umut & Paiement, Scott, 2024. "A characterization of the top trading cycles mechanism for the school choice problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 93-100.
    13. Karakaya, Mehmet & Klaus, Bettina & Schlegel, Jan Christoph, 2019. "Top trading cycles, consistency, and acyclic priorities for house allocation with existing tenants," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Battal Doğan & Serhat Doğan & Kemal Yıldız, 2021. "Lexicographic choice under variable capacity constraints," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(1), pages 172-196, February.
    15. Lars Ehlers & Bettina Klaus, 2013. "House Allocation via Deferred-Acceptance," Cahiers de recherche 06-2013, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    16. William Thomson, 2016. "Non-bossiness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 665-696, October.
    17. Paula Jaramillo, 2017. "Minimal consistent enlargements of the immediate acceptance rule and the top trading cycles rule in school choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 177-195, January.
    18. Keisuke Bando & Kenzo Imamura, 2016. "A necessary and sufficient condition for weak Maskin monotonicity in an allocation problem with indivisible goods," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 589-606, October.
    19. Thayer Morrill, 2013. "An alternative characterization of top trading cycles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(1), pages 181-197, September.
    20. Onur Kesten & Ayşe Yazıcı, 2012. "The Pareto-dominant strategy-proof and fair rule for problems with indivisible goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(2), pages 463-488, June.

    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:matsoc:v:120:y:2022:i:c:p:1-7. 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/505565 .

    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.