IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/series/v2y2011i4p453-467.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Allocation problems with indivisibilities when preferences are single-peaked

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Herrero
  • Ricardo Martínez

Abstract

We consider allocation problems with indivisible goods when agents’ preferences are single-peaked. Two natural procedures (up methods and temporary satisfaction methods) are proposed to solve these problems. They are constructed by using priority methods on the cartesian product of agents and integer numbers, interpreted either as peaks or opposite peaks. Thus, two families of solutions arise this way. Our two families of solutions satisfy properties very much related to some well-known properties studied in the case of perfectly divisible goods, and they have a strong relationship with the continuous uniform and equal-distance rules, respectively.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Herrero & Ricardo Martínez, 2011. "Allocation problems with indivisibilities when preferences are single-peaked," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 453-467, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:series:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:453-467
    DOI: 10.1007/s13209-011-0046-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13209-011-0046-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13209-011-0046-7?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomson William, 1994. "Consistent Solutions to the Problem of Fair Division When Preferences Are Single-Peaked," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 219-245, August.
    2. Carmen Herrero & Ricardo Martínez, 2008. "Balanced allocation methods for claims problems with indivisibilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(4), pages 603-617, May.
    3. William Thomson, 2011. "Consistency and its converse: an introduction," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(4), pages 257-291, December.
    4. Dagan, Nir, 1996. "A Note on Thomson's Characterizations of the Uniform Rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 255-261, April.
    5. Carmen Herrero, 2002. "General allocation problems with single-peaked preferences: path-independence and related topics," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 19-40.
    6. Thomson, W., 1991. "Resource-Monotonic Solutions to the Problem of Fair Divosion when Preferences are Single-Peaked ," RCER Working Papers 301, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    7. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-519, March.
    8. Thomson, William, 1997. "The Replacement Principle in Economies with Single-Peaked Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 145-168, September.
    9. Sonmez, Tayfun, 1994. "Consistency, monotonicity, and the uniform rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 229-235, November.
    10. Barbera, Salvador & Jackson, Matthew O. & Neme, Alejandro, 1997. "Strategy-Proof Allotment Rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Youngsub Chun, 1999. "Equivalence of axioms for bankruptcy problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(4), pages 511-520.
    12. Carmen Herrero Blanco & Ricardo Martínez, 2004. "Egalitarian Rules In Claims Problems With Indivisible Goods," Working Papers. Serie AD 2004-20, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    13. Youngsub Chun, 1999. "Equivalence of Axioms for Bankruptcy Problems," Working Paper Series no1, Institute of Economic Research, Seoul National University.
    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. Carmen Herrero & Ricardo Martínez, 2008. "Up methods in the allocation of indivisibilities when preferences are single-peaked," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 16(2), pages 272-283, December.
    2. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2023. "All sequential allotment rules are obviously strategy-proof," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    3. Vito Fragnelli & Stefano Gagliardo & Fabio Gastaldi, 2014. "Integer solutions to bankruptcy problems with non-integer claims," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 892-933, October.
    4. Teresa Estañ & Natividad Llorca & Ricardo Martínez & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2021. "On the Difficulty of Budget Allocation in Claims Problems with Indivisible Items and Prices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1133-1159, October.

    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. Kim, Sunyoung & Bergantiños, Gustavo & Chun, Youngsub, 2015. "The separability principle in single-peaked economies with participation constraints," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 69-75.
    2. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2012. "The division problem with voluntary participation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 371-406, March.
    3. Moulin, Herve, 2002. "Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing," 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 1, chapter 6, pages 289-357, Elsevier.
    4. Erlanson, Albin & Flores-Szwagrzak, Karol, 2015. "Strategy-proof assignment of multiple resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 137-162.
    5. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Inés Moreno de Barreda & Alejandro Neme, 2015. "Stable partitions in many division problems: the proportional and the sequential dictator solutions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 227-250, September.
    6. Ruben Juarez & Jung S. You, 2019. "Optimality of the uniform rule under single-peaked preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(1), pages 27-36, May.
    7. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2012. "The division problem with maximal capacity constraints," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 29-57, March.
    8. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    9. Pablo Amorós, 2002. "Single-peaked preferences with several commodities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(1), pages 57-67.
    10. Rebelo, S., 1997. "On the Determinant of Economic Growth," RCER Working Papers 443, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    11. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jordi Massó & Alejandro Neme, 2021. "Individually rational rules for the division problem when the number of units to be allotted is endogenous," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(2), pages 376-401, April.
    12. Bettina Klaus & Hans Peters & Ton Storcken, 1997. "Reallocation of an infinitely divisible good," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 10(2), pages 305-333.
    13. Bergantiños, Gustavo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2015. "The division problem under constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 56-77.
    14. 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.
    15. Lars Ehlers, 2011. "A characterization of the uniform rule without Pareto-optimality," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 447-452, December.
    16. Takuma Wakayama, 2017. "Bribe-proofness for single-peaked preferences: characterizations and maximality-of-domains results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(2), pages 357-385, August.
    17. Schummer, James & Thomson, William, 1997. "Two derivations of the uniform rule and an application to bankruptcy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 333-337, September.
    18. William Thomson, 2011. "Consistency and its converse: an introduction," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(4), pages 257-291, December.
    19. Karol Flores-Szwagrzak, 2016. "The replacement principle in networked economies with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(4), pages 763-789, December.
    20. Moulin, Herve, 1999. "Rationing a Commodity along Fixed Paths," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 41-72, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Allocation problem; Indivisibilities; Single-peaked preferences; Priority standard; Temporary satisfaction methods; D61; D63; D74;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:spr:series:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:453-467. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.