IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v66y2020i6p2291-2307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design of Lotteries and Wait-Lists for Affordable Housing Allocation

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Arnosti

    (Decision, Risk and Operations, Columbia Business School, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027)

  • Peng Shi

    (Data Sciences and Operations, USC Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089)

Abstract

We study a setting in which dynamically arriving items are assigned to waiting agents, who have heterogeneous values for distinct items and heterogeneous outside options. An ideal match would both target items to agents with the worst outside options and match them to items for which they have high value. Our first finding is that two common approaches—using independent lotteries for each item and using a waitlist in which agents lose priority when they reject an offer—lead to identical outcomes in equilibrium. Both approaches encourage agents to accept items that are marginal fits. We show that the quality of the match can be improved by using a common lottery for all items. If participation costs are negligible, a common lottery is equivalent to several other mechanisms, such as limiting participants to a single lottery, using a waitlist in which offers can be rejected without punishment, or using artificial currency. However, when there are many agents with low need, there is an unavoidable trade-off between matching and targeting. In this case, utilitarian welfare may be maximized by focusing on good matching (if the outside option distribution is light tailed) or good targeting (if it is heavy tailed). Using a common lottery achieves near-optimal matching, whereas introducing participation costs achieves near-optimal targeting.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Arnosti & Peng Shi, 2020. "Design of Lotteries and Wait-Lists for Affordable Housing Allocation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(6), pages 2291-2307, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:6:p:2291-2307
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2019.3311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3311
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3311?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Damiano, Ettore & Lam, Ricky, 2005. "Stability in dynamic matching markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 34-53, July.
    2. Baccara, Mariagiovanna & Lee, SangMok & Yariv, Leeat, 2020. "Optimal dynamic matching," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(3), July.
    3. John Kennes Jr. & Daniel Monte Jr. & Norovsambuu Tumennasan Jr., 2014. "The Day Care Assignment: A Dynamic Matching Problem," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 362-406, November.
    4. Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2004. "Kidney Exchange," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 457-488.
    5. R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    6. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2009. "The Theory of Assortative Matching Based on Costly Signals," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 253-281.
    7. Edward H. Kaplan, 1987. "Analyzing Tenant Assignment Policies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 395-408, March.
    8. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kaplan, Todd R., 2013. "Optimal allocation without transfer payments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 1-20.
    9. Manasi Deshpande & Yue Li, 2019. "Who Is Screened Out? Application Costs and the Targeting of Disability Programs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 213-248, November.
    10. Pereyra, Juan Sebastián, 2013. "A dynamic school choice model," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 100-114.
    11. Nichols, Albert L & Zeckhauser, Richard J, 1982. "Targeting Transfers through Restrictions on Recipients," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(2), pages 372-377, May.
    12. Van Ommeren, Jos N. & Van der Vlist, Arno J., 2016. "Households' willingness to pay for public housing," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 91-105.
    13. Xuanming Su & Stefanos Zenios, 2004. "Patient Choice in Kidney Allocation: The Role of the Queueing Discipline," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 280-301, June.
    14. Edward L. Glaeser & Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2003. "The Misallocation of Housing Under Rent Control," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1027-1046, September.
    15. Francis Bloch & David Cantala, 2017. "Dynamic Assignment of Objects to Queuing Agents," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 88-122, February.
    16. Xuanming Su & Stefanos A. Zenios, 2005. "Patient Choice in Kidney Allocation: A Sequential Stochastic Assignment Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 443-455, June.
    17. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1988. "Cash versus Kind, Self-selection, and Efficient Transfers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 691-700, September.
    18. Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2009. "Matching, Allocation, and Exchange of Discrete Resources," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 717, Boston College Department of Economics.
    19. Condorelli, Daniele, 2012. "What money canʼt buy: Efficient mechanism design with costly signals," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 613-624.
    20. Xuanming Su & Stefanos A. Zenios, 2006. "Recipient Choice Can Address the Efficiency-Equity Trade-off in Kidney Transplantation: A Mechanism Design Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1647-1660, November.
    21. Kaplan, Edward H., 1987. "Tenant assignment policies with time-dependent priorities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 305-310.
    22. Vivi Alatas & Abhijit Banerjee & Rema Hanna & Benjamin A. Olken & Ririn Purnamasari & Matthew Wai-Poi, 2016. "Self-Targeting: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(2), pages 371-427.
    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. Schummer, James, 2021. "Influencing waiting lists," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    2. Aziz, Haris & Huang, Xin & Mattei, Nicholas & Segal-Halevi, Erel, 2023. "Computing welfare-Maximizing fair allocations of indivisible goods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 773-784.
    3. In'acio B'o & Li Chen, 2021. "Designing Heaven's Will: The job assignment in the Chinese imperial civil service," Papers 2105.02457, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2021.
    4. Jerry Anunrojwong & Krishnamurthy Iyer & Vahideh Manshadi, 2023. "Information Design for Congested Social Services: Optimal Need-Based Persuasion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3778-3796, July.
    5. Sait Tunç & Burhaneddin Sandıkçı & Bekir Tanrıöver, 2022. "A Simple Incentive Mechanism to Alleviate the Burden of Organ Wastage in Transplantation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 5980-6002, August.
    6. Cody Cook & Pearl Z. Li & Ariel J. Binder, 2023. "Where to Build Affordable Housing? Evaluating the Tradeoffs of Location," Working Papers 23-62, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    7. Holzer, Jorge & McConnell, Kenneth, 2023. "Extraction rights allocation with liquidity constraints," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Maximilian Kasy & Alexander Teytelboym, 2023. "Matching with semi-bandits," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 26(1), pages 45-66.
    9. Lei, Xiaochang, 2023. "Optimal queue to minimize waste," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 87-94.

    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. Schummer, James, 2021. "Influencing waiting lists," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    2. Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak & Scott Duke Kominers, 2024. "Redistributive Allocation Mechanisms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 132(6), pages 1831-1875.
    3. Morimitsu Kurino, 2014. "House Allocation with Overlapping Generations," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 258-289, February.
    4. John Kennes & Daniel Monte & Norovsambuu Tumennasan, 2015. "Dynamic Matching Markets and the Deferred Acceptance Mechanism," Economics Working Papers 2015-23, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    5. Burhaneddin Sandıkçı & Lisa M. Maillart & Andrew J. Schaefer & Oguzhan Alagoz & Mark S. Roberts, 2008. "Estimating the Patient's Price of Privacy in Liver Transplantation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(6), pages 1393-1410, December.
    6. Itai Feigenbaum & Yash Kanoria & Irene Lo & Jay Sethuraman, 2020. "Dynamic Matching in School Choice: Efficient Seat Reassignment After Late Cancellations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 5341-5361, November.
    7. Anno, Hidekazu & Kurino, Morimitsu, 2016. "On the operation of multiple matching markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 166-185.
    8. Murat Kurt & Mark S. Roberts & Andrew J. Schaefer & M. Utku Ünver, 2011. "Valuing Prearranged Paired Kidney Exchanges: A Stochastic Game Approach," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 785, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 14 Oct 2011.
    9. Mertikopoulos, Panayotis & Nax, Heinrich H. & Pradelski, Bary S.R., 2024. "Quick or cheap? Breaking points in dynamic markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Vincent Iehlé, 2016. "Gradual College Admisssion," Post-Print halshs-02367006, HAL.
    11. Lei, Xiaochang, 2023. "Optimal queue to minimize waste," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 87-94.
    12. Laura Castell & Marc Gurgand & Clément Imbert & Todor Tochev, 2024. "Take-up of Social Benefits: Experimental Evidence from France," Institut des Politiques Publiques halshs-04720989, HAL.
    13. Baris Ata & Yichuan Ding & Stefanos Zenios, 2021. "An Achievable-Region-Based Approach for Kidney Allocation Policy Design with Endogenous Patient Choice," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 36-54, 1-2.
    14. Sahar Ahmadvand & Mir Saman Pishvaee, 2018. "An efficient method for kidney allocation problem: a credibility-based fuzzy common weights data envelopment analysis approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 587-603, December.
    15. Manasi Deshpande & Yue Li, 2019. "Who Is Screened Out? Application Costs and the Targeting of Disability Programs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 213-248, November.
    16. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kaplan, Todd R., 2013. "Optimal allocation without transfer payments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 1-20.
    17. Francis Bloch & David Cantala, 2014. "Dynamic Allocation of Objects to Queuing Agents: The Discrete Model," Post-Print halshs-01109667, HAL.
    18. Mustafa Akan & Oguzhan Alagoz & Baris Ata & Fatih Safa Erenay & Adnan Said, 2012. "A Broader View of Designing the Liver Allocation System," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 757-770, August.
    19. Zahra Gharibi & Michael Hahsler, 2021. "A Simulation-Based Optimization Model to Study the Impact of Multiple-Region Listing and Information Sharing on Kidney Transplant Outcomes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-20, January.
    20. Haeringer, Guillaume & Iehlé, Vincent, 2021. "Gradual college admission," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:6:p:2291-2307. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.