IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/hiasdp/hias-e-136.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Non-obvious manipulability and efficiency in package assignment problems with money for agents with income effects and hard budget constraints

Author

Listed:
  • SHINOZAKI, Hiroki

Abstract

We study a problem of assigning packages of objects to agents with money. We allow agents to have utility functions that exhibit income effects or face hard budget constraints. It is already known that one of income effects and hard budget constraints lead to the non-existence of a rule satisfying strategy-proofness, efficiency, individual rationality, and no subsidy (Dobzinski et al., 2012; Kazumura and Serizawa, 2016; Baisa; 2020, Malik and Mishra, 2021, etc.). Given such negative results, we search for rules satisfying non-obvious manipulability (Troyan and Morrill, 2020), an incentive property weaker than strategy-proofness, together with the other three properties. First, we identify a necessary and sufficient condition for a rule satisfying efficiency, individual rationality, and no subsidy to be non-obviously manipulable. By using the first result, we show that a slight modification of a (truncated) pay as bid rule satisfies non-obvious manipulability, efficiency, individual rationality, and no subsidy.

Suggested Citation

  • SHINOZAKI, Hiroki, 2023. "Non-obvious manipulability and efficiency in package assignment problems with money for agents with income effects and hard budget constraints," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-136, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:hiasdp:hias-e-136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/81452/070_hiasDP-E-136.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lavi, Ron & May, Marina, 2012. "A note on the incompatibility of strategy-proofness and Pareto-optimality in quasi-linear settings with public budgets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 100-103.
    2. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    3. Hiroki Saitoh & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2008. "Vickrey allocation rule with income effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(2), pages 391-401, May.
    4. Soo Chew & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2007. "Characterizing the Vickrey combinatorial auction by induction," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(2), pages 393-406, November.
    5. Demange, Gabrielle & Gale, David, 1985. "The Strategy Structure of Two-sided Matching Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(4), pages 873-888, July.
    6. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Bonifacio, Agustín G., 2024. "Obvious manipulations of tops-only voting rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 12-24.
    7. Pablo R. Arribillaga & Eliana Pepa Risma, 2023. "Obvious Manipulations in Matching with and without Contracts," Working Papers 257, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    8. Shengwu Li, 2017. "Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3257-3287, November.
    9. Holmstrom, Bengt, 1979. "Groves' Scheme on Restricted Domains," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1137-1144, September.
    10. Toyotaka Sakai, 2008. "Second price auctions on general preference domains: two characterizations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(2), pages 347-356, November.
    11. Le, Phuong, 2018. "Pareto optimal budgeted combinatorial auctions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    12. , & ,, 2015. "Strategy-proofness and efficiency with non-quasi-linear preferences: a characterization of minimum price Walrasian rule," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), May.
    13. Marzena Rostek & Nathan Yoder, 2020. "Matching With Complementary Contracts," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(5), pages 1793-1827, September.
    14. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    15. Baisa, Brian, 2017. "Auction design without quasilinear preferences," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    16. R. Pablo Arribillaga & E. Pepa Risma, 2023. "Obvious Manipulations in Matching without and with Contracts," Papers 2306.17773, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    17. Kelso, Alexander S, Jr & Crawford, Vincent P, 1982. "Job Matching, Coalition Formation, and Gross Substitutes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1483-1504, November.
    18. Hafalir, Isa E. & Ravi, R. & Sayedi, Amin, 2012. "A near Pareto optimal auction with budget constraints," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 699-708.
    19. Dobzinski, Shahar & Lavi, Ron & Nisan, Noam, 2012. "Multi-unit auctions with budget limits," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 486-503.
    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. Komal Malik & Debasis Mishra, 2018. "Pareto efficient combinatorial auctions: dichotomous preferences without quasilinearity," Discussion Papers 18-06, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    2. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Mechanism design without quasilinearity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(2), May.
    3. Malik, Komal & Mishra, Debasis, 2021. "Pareto efficient combinatorial auctions: Dichotomous preferences without quasilinearity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. SHINOZAKI, Hiroki, 2024. "Shill-proof rules in object allocation problems with money," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-137, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.
    5. Tomoya Kazumura & Debasis Mishra & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2017. "Strategy-proof multi-object auction design: Ex-post revenue maximization with no wastage," ISER Discussion Paper 1001, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    6. Baisa, Brian, 2020. "Efficient multi-unit auctions for normal goods," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(1), January.
    7. Yuya Wakabayashi & Ryosuke Sakai & Hiroki Shinozaki, 2024. "Strategy-proof allocation problem with hard budget constraints and income effects: weak efficiency and fairness," OSIPP Discussion Paper 24E003, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    8. Zhou, Yu & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2018. "Strategy-proofness and efficiency for non-quasi-linear and common-tiered-object preferences: Characterization of minimum price rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 327-363.
    9. Tomoya KAZUMURA, 2020. "When can we design efficient and strategy-proof rules in package assignment problems?," Discussion papers e-21-008, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    10. Tomoya Kazumura & Debasis Mishra & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2017. "Strategy-proof multi-object allocation: Ex-post revenue maximization with no wastage," Working Papers e116, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    11. Tomoya Kazumura & Debasis Mishra & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2017. "Strategy-proof multi-object auction design: Ex-post revenue maximization with no wastage," Discussion Papers 17-03, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    12. Tomoya Kazumura & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2016. "Efficiency and strategy-proofness in object assignment problems with multi-demand preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 633-663, October.
    13. Zhou, Yu & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2023. "Multi-object auction design beyond quasi-linearity: Leading examples," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 210-228.
    14. Baisa, Brian, 2016. "Overbidding and inefficiencies in multi-unit Vickrey auctions for normal goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 23-35.
    15. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2019. "Minimum price equilibrium in the assignment market," ISER Discussion Paper 1047, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    16. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2016. "Strategy-Proofness and Efficiency for Non-quasi-linear Common-Tiered-Object Preferences: Characterization of Minimum Price Rule," ISER Discussion Paper 0971, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    17. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Strategy-proof multi-object mechanism design: Ex-post revenue maximization with non-quasilinear preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    18. Toyotaka Sakai, 2013. "An equity characterization of second price auctions when preferences may not be quasilinear," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 17(1), pages 17-26, March.
    19. Yu Zhou & Youngsub Chun & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2022. "A characterization of the Vickrey rule in slot allocation problems," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 38-49, March.
    20. SHINOZAKI, Hiroki, 2023. "Efficiency and strategy-proofness in object allocation problems with payments: Externalities with income effects," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-135, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-obvious manipulations; Efficiency; Strategy-proofness; Non-quasi-linear utilities; Hard budget constraints; Package auctions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hit:hiasdp:hias-e-136. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ashitjp.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.