IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/jrp/jrpwrp/2013-034.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Procedurally fair collective provision: its requirements and experimental functionality

Author

Listed:
  • Werner Güth

    (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group)

  • Hartmut Kliemt

    (Frankfurt School of Finance & Management)

  • Anastasios Koukoumelis

    (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena)

  • M. Vittoria Levati

    (Max Planck Institute of Economics, Jena and Department of Economics, University of Verona)

  • Matteo Ploner

    (DECO-CEEL, University of Trento)

Abstract

This paper derives and justifies a procedurally fair bidding mechanism and reviews experiments that apply the mechanism to public projects pro- vision. In the experiments, not all parties benefit from provision, and the projects' costs can be negative. The experimental results indicate that the mechanism is conducive to efficiency, despite the multiplicity of equilibria and underbidding incentives. The only condition is that the cost of the most efficient project must be positive.

Suggested Citation

  • Werner Güth & Hartmut Kliemt & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2013. "Procedurally fair collective provision: its requirements and experimental functionality," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    • Handle: RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2013-034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://oweb.b67.uni-jena.de/Papers/jerp2013/wp_2013_034.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Douglass C. North, 1988. "Ideology and Political/Economic Institutions," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 8(1), pages 15-28, Spring/Su.
    2. Hume, David, 1740. "A Treatise of Human Nature (III) Of Morals," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 3, number hume1740.
    3. Werner Güth & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2013. "Providing negative cost public projects under a fair mechanism: An experimental analysis," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-021, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Güth, Werner & Vittoria Levati, M. & Montinari, Natalia, 2014. "Ranking alternatives by a fair bidding rule: A theoretical and experimental analysis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 206-221.
    5. Smith, Vernon L, 1977. "The Principle of Unanimity and Voluntary Consent in Social Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(6), pages 1125-1139, December.
    6. Hume, David, 1739. "A Treatise of Human Nature (I) Of the Understanding," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number hume1739.
    7. Hume, David, 1739. "A Treatise of Human Nature (II) Of the Passions," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 2, number hume1739a.
    8. Werner Güth & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati, 2011. ""One man's meat is another man's poison." An experimental study of voluntarily providing public projects that raise mixed feelings," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    9. Buchanan, James M, 1975. "A Contractarian Paradigm for Applying Economic Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 225-230, May.
    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. Güth, Werner, 2014. "Endogenous community formation and collective provision – A procedurally fair mechanism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 389-395.
    2. Werner Güth, 2015. "Collectively ranking candidates via bidding in procedurally fair ways," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(1), pages 23-31, January.

    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. Werner Güth & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2012. "Public projects benefiting some and harming others: three experimental studies," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. James F Fieser, 2022. "A response to Kendra Asher," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 500-504, October.
    3. Gilles, Robert P. & Pesce, Marialaura & Diamantaras, Dimitrios, 2020. "The provision of collective goods through a social division of labour," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 287-312.
    4. Masahiko Aoki, 2013. "Institutions as cognitive media between strategic interactions and individual beliefs," Chapters, in: Comparative Institutional Analysis, chapter 17, pages 298-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Shi Li, 2014. "How to Make a Grateful Child? Reflection on Gratitude Campaigns in China in Recent Years," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, November.
    6. Franz Dietrich & Antonios Staras & Robert Sugden, 2021. "Savage’s response to Allais as Broomean reasoning," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 143-164, April.
    7. Smith, Vernon L., 2005. "Behavioral economics research and the foundations of economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-150, March.
    8. Agranov, Marina & Elliott, Matt & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2021. "The importance of Social Norms against Strategic Effects: The case of Covid-19 vaccine uptake," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    9. Alessandra Smerilli, 2012. "We-thinking and vacillation between frames: filling a gap in Bacharach’s theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 539-560, October.
    10. Johanna P. Maksimainen & Tuomas Eerola & Suvi H. Saarikallio, 2019. "Ambivalent Emotional Experiences of Everyday Visual and Musical Objects," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, September.
    11. Sheila Dow, 2010. "The Psychology of Financial Markets: Keynes, Minsky and Emotional Finance," Chapters, in: Dimitri B. Papadimitriou & L. Randall Wray (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Hyman Minsky, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. DeSteno, David & Li, Ye & Dickens, Leah & Lerner, Jennifer, 2014. "Gratitude: A Tool for Reducing Economic Impatience," Scholarly Articles 12185844, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Hausman, Daniel M., 2023. "Eliciting preferences and respecting values: Why ask?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    14. David Simpson, 2013. "The Rediscovery of Classical Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15080.
    15. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    16. Werner Güth & Anastasios Koukoumelis & M. Vittoria Levati & Matteo Ploner, 2013. "Providing negative cost public projects under a fair mechanism: An experimental analysis," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-021, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    17. Andrea Stevenson Thorpe & Stephen Roper, 2019. "The Ethics of Gamification in a Marketing Context," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 597-609, March.
    18. Graham Dawson, 2008. "The Economic Science Fiction Of Climate Change: A Free‐Market Perspective On The Stern Review And The Ipcc," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 42-47, December.
    19. Smith, Vernon L., 2010. "Theory and experiment: What are the questions?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 3-15, January.
    20. Colin, Price, 2011. "Optimal rotation with declining discount rate," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 307-318, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public project; Bidding behavior; Procedural fairness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets

    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:jrp:jrpwrp:2013-034. 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: Markus Pasche (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jenecon.de .

    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.