IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pit/wpaper/6903.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Detectability, Duality, and Surplus Extraction

Author

Listed:
  • Luca Rigotti

Abstract

We study surplus extraction in the general environment of McAfee and Reny (1992), and provide two alternative proofs of their main theorem. The first is an analogue of the classic argument of Cremer and McLean (1985, 1988), using geometric features of the set of agents’ beliefs to construct a menu of contracts extracting the desired surplus. This argument, which requires a finite state space, also leads to a counterexample showing that full extraction is not possible without further significant conditions on agents’ beliefs or surplus, even if the designer offers an infinite menu of contracts. The second argument uses duality and applies for an infinite state space, thus yielding the general result of McAfee and Reny (1992). Both arguments suggest methods for studying surplus extraction in settings beyond the standard model.

Suggested Citation

  • Luca Rigotti, 2020. "Detectability, Duality, and Surplus Extraction," Working Paper 6903, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    • Handle: RePEc:pit:wpaper:6903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.pitt.edu/sites/default/files/working_papers/WP.20.06.Web_.upload.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2016. "Selling to Intermediaries: Optimal Auction Design in a Common Value Model," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2064R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jul 2017.
    2. Aviad Heifetz & Zvika Neeman, 2006. "On the Generic (Im)Possibility of Full Surplus Extraction in Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 213-233, January.
    3. Gabriel Carroll & Ilya Segal, 2019. "Robustly Optimal Auctions with Unknown Resale Opportunities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(4), pages 1527-1555.
    4. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    5. McAfee, R Preston & Reny, Philip J, 1992. "Correlated Information and Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 395-421, March.
    6. Constantinos Daskalakis & Alan Deckelbaum & Christos Tzamos, 2017. "Strong Duality for a Multiple‐Good Monopolist," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 735-767, May.
    7. Riordan, Michael H. & Sappington, David E. M., 1988. "Optimal contracts with public ex post information," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 189-199, June.
    8. Cremer, Jacques & McLean, Richard P, 1985. "Optimal Selling Strategies under Uncertainty for a Discriminating Monopolist When Demands Are Interdependent," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(2), pages 345-361, March.
    9. Cremer, Jacques & McLean, Richard P, 1988. "Full Extraction of the Surplus in Bayesian and Dominant Strategy Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(6), pages 1247-1257, November.
    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. Guo, Huiyi, 2024. "Collusion-proof mechanisms for full surplus extraction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 263-284.
    2. Yeon‐Koo Che & Jinwoo Kim & Fuhito Kojima & Christopher Thomas Ryan, 2024. "“Near” Weighted Utilitarian Characterizations of Pareto Optima," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 92(1), pages 141-165, 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. Guo, Huiyi, 2024. "Collusion-proof mechanisms for full surplus extraction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 263-284.
    2. Guo, Huiyi, 2019. "Mechanism design with ambiguous transfers: An analysis in finite dimensional naive type spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 76-105.
    3. Krajbich, Ian & Camerer, Colin & Rangel, Antonio, 2017. "Exploring the scope of neurometrically informed mechanism design," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 49-62.
    4. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient Implementation with Interdependent Valuations and Maxmin Agents," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 92, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    5. Kosenok, Grigory & Severinov, Sergei, 2008. "Individually rational, budget-balanced mechanisms and allocation of surplus," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 126-161, May.
    6. Miller, Nolan H. & Pratt, John W. & Zeckhauser, Richard J. & Johnson, Scott, 2007. "Mechanism design with multidimensional, continuous types and interdependent valuations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 476-496, September.
    7. Bose, Subir & Zhao, Jinhua, 2007. "Optimal use of correlated information in mechanism design when full surplus extraction may be impossible," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 357-381, July.
    8. Michela CELLA, 2007. "Informed principal with correlation," Departmental Working Papers 2007-11, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    9. Lopomo, Giuseppe & Rigotti, Luca & Shannon, Chris, 2022. "Uncertainty and robustness of surplus extraction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    10. Cella, Michela, 2008. "Informed principal with correlation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 433-456, November.
    11. Herweg, Fabian & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2020. "Bayesian implementation and rent extraction in a multi-dimensional procurement problem," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Bose, Subir & Daripa, Arup, 2009. "A dynamic mechanism and surplus extraction under ambiguity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 2084-2114, September.
    13. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient implementation with interdependent valuations and maxmin agents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 693-726.
    14. Robert Gary‐Bobo & Yossi Spiegel, 2006. "Optimal state‐contingent regulation under limited liability," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(2), pages 431-448, June.
    15. Obara Ichiro, 2008. "The Full Surplus Extraction Theorem with Hidden Actions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-28, March.
    16. Fu, Hu & Haghpanah, Nima & Hartline, Jason & Kleinberg, Robert, 2021. "Full surplus extraction from samples," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    17. Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2009. "An Explicit Approach to Modeling Finite-Order Type Spaces and Applications," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt8hq7j89k, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    18. John Duggan & Joanne Roberts, 2002. "Implementing the Efficient Allocation of Pollution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1070-1078, September.
    19. Pagnozzi, Marco & Piccolo, Salvatore & Reisinger, Markus, 2021. "Vertical contracting with endogenous market structure," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    20. Chillemi, Ottorino & Galavotti, Stefano & Gui, Benedetto, 2020. "Optimal contracts with contingent allocation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D86 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Economics of Contract Law

    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:pit:wpaper:6903. 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: Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/depghus.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.