IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v19y2002i3p659-664.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward general impossibility theorems in pure exchange economies

Author

Listed:
  • Miki Kato

    (Department of Social Welfare, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397, Japan)

  • Shinji Ohseto

    (Faculty of Economics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hachioji, Tokyo 192-0397, Japan)

Abstract

We study the possibility of strategy-proof and efficient mechanisms in pure exchange economies. In his remarkable paper, Zhou (1991) establishes an elegant impossibility result: there is no strategy-proof, efficient, and non-dictatorial mechanism in the two-agent case. He conjectures that there is no strategy-proof, efficient, and "non-inversely-dictatorial" mechanism in the case of three or more agents. However, we discover some counterexamples to his conjecture in the case of four or more agents. We present a new interesting open question: Is there any strategy-proof, efficient, and "non-alternately-dictatorial" mechanism?

Suggested Citation

  • Miki Kato & Shinji Ohseto, 2002. "Toward general impossibility theorems in pure exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(3), pages 659-664.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:19:y:2002:i:3:p:659-664
    Note: Received: 17 October 2000/Accepted: 20 April 2001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/papers/2019003/20190659.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Harless, Patrick & Phan, William, 2022. "Efficient mixtures of priority rules for assigning objects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 73-89.
    2. Serizawa, Shigehiro & Weymark, John A., 2003. "Efficient strategy-proof exchange and minimum consumption guarantees," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 246-263, April.
    3. Momi, Takeshi, 2017. "Efficient and strategy-proof allocation mechanisms in economies with many goods," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), September.
    4. Takeshi Momi, 2020. "Efficient and strategy-proof allocation mechanisms in many-agent economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(2), pages 325-367, August.
    5. Sasaki, Hiroo, 2003. "Limitation of Efficiency: Strategy-Proofness and Single-Peaked Preferences with Many Commodities," Working Papers 2003-01, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    6. Axel Niemeyer & Justus Preusser, 2023. "Simple Allocation with Correlated Types," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_486, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    7. Leroux, Jistin, 2004. "Strategy-Proofness and Efficiency Are Incompatible in Production Economies," Working Papers 2004-07, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    8. Miki Kato & Shinji Ohseto, 2004. "Non‐Dummy Agents in Pure Exchange Economies," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 55(2), pages 212-220, June.
    9. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2005. "Strategy-proof risk sharing," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 225-254, February.
    10. Leroux, Justin, 2004. "Strategy-proofness and efficiency are incompatible in production economies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 335-340, December.
    11. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    12. Ryan Tierney, 2016. "On the manipulability of efficient exchange rules," ISER Discussion Paper 0987, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    13. Kazuhiko Hashimoto, 2008. "Strategy-proofness versus efficiency on the Cobb-Douglas domain of exchange economies," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(3), pages 457-473, October.
    14. Jin Li & Jingyi Xue, 2013. "Egalitarian division under Leontief Preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(3), pages 597-622, November.
    15. Momi, Takeshi, 2013. "Note on social choice allocation in exchange economies with many agents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1237-1254.

    More about this item

    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:sochwe:v:19:y:2002:i:3:p:659-664. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.