IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gra/wpaper/20-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the difficulty of budget allocation in claims problems with indivisible items of different prices

Author

Listed:
  • Teresa Estañ

    (Centro de Investigación Operativa (CIO), Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche.)

  • Natividad Llorca

    (Centro de Investigación Operativa (CIO), Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche.)

  • Ricardo Martínez

    (Department of Economic Theory and Economic History, University of Granada.)

  • Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano

    (Centro de Investigación Operativa (CIO), Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche.)

Abstract

In this paper we study the class of claims problems where the amount to be divided is perfectly divisible and claims are made on indivisible units of several items. Each item has a price, and the available amount falls short to be able to cover all the claims at the given prices. We propose several properties that may be of interest in this particular framework. These properties represent the common principles of fairness, efficiency, and non-manipulability. As we show, some combinations of the properties we consider are compatible, others are not. These findings contrast with the usual setting of claims problems (where both the claims and amount to be alloted are divisible).

Suggested Citation

  • Teresa Estañ & Natividad Llorca & Ricardo Martínez & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2020. "On the difficulty of budget allocation in claims problems with indivisible items of different prices," ThE Papers 20/09, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    • Handle: RePEc:gra:wpaper:20/09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ugr.es/~teoriahe/RePEc/gra/wpaper/thepapers20_09.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. ,, 2001. "Problems And Solutions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(6), pages 1157-1160, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Calleja, Pedro & Borm, Peter & Hendrickx, Ruud, 2005. "Multi-issue allocation situations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 730-747, August.
    4. R. Pablo Arribillaga & G. Bergantiños, 2022. "Cooperative and axiomatic approaches to the knapsack allocation problem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 805-830, November.
    5. Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2009. "The proportional rule for multi-issue bankruptcy problems," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(1), pages 474-481.
    6. Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano & Natividad Llorca & Encarnación Algaba, 2016. "Valuing managerial flexibility: An application of real-option theory to steel industry investments," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 26(2), pages 127-145.
    7. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    8. José-Manuel Giménez-Gómez & M. Marco-Gil, 2014. "A new approach for bounding awards in bankruptcy problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 447-469, August.
    9. Siwei Chen, 2015. "Systematic favorability in claims problems with indivisibilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(2), pages 283-300, February.
    10. Herrero, Carmen & Villar, Antonio, 2001. "The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 307-328, November.
    11. George B. Dantzig, 1957. "Discrete-Variable Extremum Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 266-288, April.
    12. Hervé Moulin, 2000. "Priority Rules and Other Asymmetric Rationing Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 643-684, May.
    13. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    14. Andreas Darmann & Christian Klamler, 2014. "Knapsack cost sharing," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 18(3), pages 219-241, September.
    15. Martin Feuerman & Harvey Weiss, 1973. "A Mathematical Programming Model for Test Construction and Scoring," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(8), pages 961-966, April.
    16. Ju, Biung-Ghi & Miyagawa, Eiichi & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Non-manipulable division rules in claim problems and generalizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 1-26, January.
    17. Gustavo Bergantiños & Leticia Lorenzo & Silvia Lorenzo-Freire, 2011. "New characterizations of the constrained equal awards rule in multi-issue allocation situations," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 74(3), pages 311-325, December.
    18. 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.
    19. ,, 2001. "Problems And Solutions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(5), pages 1025-1031, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    3. Martínez, Ricardo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2022. "Compensation and sacrifice in the probabilistic rationing of indivisible units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 740-751.
    4. Sinan Ertemel & Rajnish Kumar, 2018. "Proportional rules for state contingent claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 229-246, March.
    5. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    6. Rick K. Acosta & Encarnación Algaba & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2022. "Multi-issue bankruptcy problems with crossed claims," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 749-772, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Carmen Herrero & Juan Moreno-Ternero & Giovanni Ponti, 2010. "On the adjudication of conflicting claims: an experimental study," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(1), pages 145-179, January.
    9. Josep Maria Izquierdo Aznar & Pere Timoner Lledó, 2016. "Decentralized rationing problems," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/345, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    10. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jose María Chamorro & Leticia Lorenzo & Silvia Lorenzo‐Freire, 2018. "Mixed rules in multi‐issue allocation situations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 66-77, February.
    11. Vito Fragnelli & Fabio Gastaldi, 2017. "Remarks on the integer Talmud solution for integer bankruptcy problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 127-163, April.
    12. Thomson, William & Yeh, Chun-Hsien, 2008. "Operators for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 177-198, November.
    13. Erik Ansink & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2012. "Sequential sharing rules for river sharing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 187-210, February.
    14. Jingyi Xue, 2018. "Fair division with uncertain needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 105-136, June.
    15. Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Villar, Antonio, 2004. "The Talmud rule and the securement of agents' awards," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 245-257, March.
    16. José-manuel Giménez-gómez & Cori Vilella, 2017. "Recursive methods for discrete claims problems," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(3), pages 1653-1665.
    17. Ketelaars, Martijn & Borm, Peter, 2021. "On the Unification of Centralized and Decentralized Clearing Mechanisms in Financial Networks," Discussion Paper 2021-015, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Thomson, William, 2008. "The two-agent claims-truncated proportional rule has no consistent extension: A constructive proof," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 59-65, January.
    19. Timoner, Pere & Izquierdo, Josep M., 2016. "Rationing problems with ex-ante conditions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 46-52.
    20. Silvia Lorenzo-Freire & Balbina Casas-Méndez & Ruud Hendrickx, 2010. "The two-stage constrained equal awards and losses rules for multi-issue allocation situations," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 18(2), pages 465-480, December.

    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:gra:wpaper:20/09. 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: Angel Solano Garcia. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dtugres.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.