IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04097849.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Marginalism, egalitarianism and efficiency in multi-choice games

Author

Listed:
  • David Lowing

    (Kyushu University)

  • Kevin Techer

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon - Saint-Etienne - ENS de Lyon - École normale supérieure de Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UJM - Université Jean Monnet - Saint-Étienne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

The search for a compromise between marginalism and egalitarianism has given rise to many discussions. In the context of cooperative games, this compromise can be understood as a trade-off between the Shapley value and the Equal division value. We investigate this compromise in the context of multi-choice games in which players have several activity levels. To do so, we propose new extensions of the Shapley value and of the Weighted Division values to multi-choice games. Contrary to the existing solution concepts for multi-choice games, each one of these values satisfies a core condition introduced by Grabisch and Xie (2007), namely Multi-Efficiency. We compromise between marginalism and egalitarianism by introducing the multi-choice Egalitarian Shapley values, computed as the convex combination of our extensions. To conduct this study, we introduce new axioms for multi-choice games. This allows us to provide an axiomatic foundation for each of these values.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • David Lowing & Kevin Techer, 2022. "Marginalism, egalitarianism and efficiency in multi-choice games," Post-Print hal-04097849, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04097849
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-022-01412-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Grabisch & Lijue Xie, 2007. "A new approach to the core and Weber set of multichoice games," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 66(3), pages 491-512, December.
    2. Yves Sprumont, 2005. "On the Discrete Version of the Aumann-Shapley Cost-Sharing Method," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1693-1712, September.
    3. Zhengxing Zou & René Brink & Youngsub Chun & Yukihiko Funaki, 2021. "Axiomatizations of the proportional division value," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 35-62, July.
    4. Hans Peters & Horst Zank, 2005. "The Egalitarian Solution for Multichoice Games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 399-409, July.
    5. Yan-An Hwang & Yu-Hsien Liao, 2011. "The multi-core, balancedness and axiomatizations for multi-choice games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 40(4), pages 677-689, November.
    6. Michel Grabisch & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2010. "A model of influence with an ordered set of possible actions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 635-656, October.
    7. Sylvain Béal & André Casajus & Frank Huettner & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2016. "Characterizations of weighted and equal division values," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(4), pages 649-667, April.
    8. Techer, Kevin, 2021. "Stable agreements through liability rules: A multi-choice game approach to the social cost problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 77-88.
    9. R. Branzei & N. Llorca & J. Sánchez-Soriano & S. Tijs, 2009. "Multi-choice clan games and their core," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 17(1), pages 123-138, July.
    10. Hsiao, Chih-Ru & Raghavan, T E S, 1992. "Monotonicity and Dummy Free Property for Multi-choice Cooperative Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(3), pages 301-312.
    11. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    12. S. Béal & A. Lardon & E. Rémila & P. Solal, 2012. "The average tree solution for multi-choice forest games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 27-51, July.
    13. Sylvain Béal & André Casajus & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2021. "Cohesive efficiency in TU-games: axiomatizations of variants of the Shapley value, egalitarian values and their convex combinations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 302(1), pages 23-47, July.
    14. José Zarzuelo & Marco Slikker & Flip Klijn, 1999. "Characterizations of a multi-choice value," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(4), pages 521-532.
    15. Michel Grabisch & Fabien Lange, 2007. "Games on lattices, multichoice games and the shapley value: a new approach," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 65(1), pages 153-167, February.
    16. Calvo, Emilio & Santos, Juan Carlos, 2000. "A value for multichoice games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, November.
    17. Albizuri, M.J. & Dietzenbacher, B.J. & Zarzuelo, J.M., 2020. "Bargaining with independence of higher or irrelevant claims," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 11-17.
    18. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.
    19. Casajus, André & Huettner, Frank, 2013. "Null players, solidarity, and the egalitarian Shapley values," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 58-61.
    20. Moulin, Herve & Shenker, Scott, 1992. "Serial Cost Sharing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1009-1037, September.
    21. Hervé Moulin, 1995. "On Additive Methods To Share Joint Costs," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 46(4), pages 303-332, December.
    22. R. Branzei & N. Llorca & J. Sánchez-Soriano & S. Tijs, 2014. "A constrained egalitarian solution for convex multi-choice games," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 860-874, October.
    23. Casajus, André, 2018. "Sign symmetry vs symmetry: Young’s characterization of the Shapley value revisited," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 59-62.
    24. Derks, Jean & Peters, Hans, 1993. "A Shapley Value for Games with Restricted Coalitions," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 21(4), pages 351-360.
    25. Eric Bahel & Christian Trudeau, 2013. "A discrete cost sharing model with technological cooperation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(2), pages 439-460, May.
    26. Takaaki Abe & Satoshi Nakada, 2019. "The weighted-egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 197-213, February.
    27. M. Albizuri, 2009. "The multichoice coalition value," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 363-374, November.
    28. René Brink & Yukihiko Funaki & Yuan Ju, 2013. "Reconciling marginalism with egalitarianism: consistency, monotonicity, and implementation of egalitarian Shapley values," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 693-714, March.
    29. Yan-An Hwang & Yu-Hsien Liao, 2009. "Equivalence theorem, consistency and axiomatizations of a multi-choice value," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 597-613, December.
    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. Sylvain Béal & Adriana Navarro-Ramos & Eric Rémila & Philippe Solal, 2023. "Sharing the cost of hazardous transportation networks and the Priority Shapley value," Working Papers hal-04222245, HAL.
    2. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.
    3. Lowing, David, 2024. "Cost allocation in energy distribution networks," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. David Lowing & Makoto Yokoo, 2023. "Sharing values for multi-choice games: an axiomatic approach," Working Papers hal-04018735, HAL.
    5. Lowing, David & Techer, Kevin, 2022. "Priority relations and cooperation with multiple activity levels," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. David Lowing, 2023. "Cost allocation in energy distribution networks," Working Papers hal-03680156, HAL.
    7. Kevin Techer, 2023. "Hazardous waste transportation: a cost allocation analysis," Working Papers hal-04099139, HAL.

    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. David Lowing & Kevin Techer, 2021. "Marginalism, Egalitarianism and E ciency in Multi-Choice Games," Working Papers halshs-03334056, HAL.
    2. David Lowing, 2023. "Allocation rules for multi-choice games with a permission tree structure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 320(1), pages 261-291, January.
    3. David Lowing & Makoto Yokoo, 2023. "Sharing values for multi-choice games: an axiomatic approach," Working Papers hal-04018735, HAL.
    4. Lowing, David & Techer, Kevin, 2022. "Priority relations and cooperation with multiple activity levels," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    5. S. Béal & A. Lardon & E. Rémila & P. Solal, 2012. "The average tree solution for multi-choice forest games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 27-51, July.
    6. Yu-Hsien Liao, 2012. "Converse consistent enlargements of the unit-level-core of the multi-choice games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 20(4), pages 743-753, December.
    7. Larrea, C. & Santos, J.C., 2007. "A characterization of the pseudo-average cost method," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 140-149, March.
    8. Branzei, R. & Tijs, S. & Zarzuelo, J., 2009. "Convex multi-choice games: Characterizations and monotonic allocation schemes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 571-575, October.
    9. Txus Ortells & Juan Santos, 2011. "The pseudo-average rule: bankruptcy, cost allocation and bargaining," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 73(1), pages 55-73, February.
    10. Fanyong Meng & Qiang Zhang & Xiaohong Chen, 2017. "Fuzzy Multichoice Games with Fuzzy Characteristic Functions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 565-595, May.
    11. Yan-An Hwang & Yu-Hsien Liao, 2008. "The solutions for multi-choice games: TU games approach," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(43), pages 1-7.
    12. Calvo, Emilio & Santos, Juan Carlos, 2000. "A value for multichoice games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, November.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2008:i:43:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Hsiao, Chih-Ru & Chiou, Wen-Lin, 2009. "Modeling a Multi-Choice Game Based on the Spirit of Equal Job opportunities," MPRA Paper 15285, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Albizuri, M.J. & Díez, H. & Sarachu, A., 2014. "Monotonicity and the Aumann–Shapley cost-sharing method in the discrete case," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(2), pages 560-565.
    16. Eric Bahel & Christian Trudeau, 2018. "Consistency requirements and pattern methods in cost sharing problems with technological cooperation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(3), pages 737-765, September.
    17. Techer, Kevin, 2021. "Stable agreements through liability rules: A multi-choice game approach to the social cost problem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 77-88.
    18. R. Branzei & N. Llorca & J. Sánchez-Soriano & S. Tijs, 2014. "A constrained egalitarian solution for convex multi-choice games," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(3), pages 860-874, October.
    19. Larrea, Concepcion & Santos, J.C., 2006. "Cost allocation schemes: An asymptotic approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 63-72, October.
    20. Brânzei, R. & Tijs, S.H. & Zarzuelo, J., 2007. "Convex Multi-Choice Cooperative Games and their Monotonic Allocation Schemes," Other publications TiSEM 5549df35-acc3-4890-be43-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    21. M. Albizuri, 2009. "The multichoice coalition value," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 363-374, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games

    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:hal:journl:hal-04097849. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.