IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zur/econwp/056.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A geometric approach to mechanism design

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob K. Goeree
  • Alexey Kushnir

Abstract

We develop a novel geometric approach to mechanism design using an important result in convex analysis: the duality between a closed convex set and its support function. By deriving the support function for the set of feasible interim values we extend the wellknown Maskin-Riley-Matthews-Border conditions for reduced-form auctions to social choice environments. We next refine the support function to include incentive constraints using a geometric characterization of incentive compatibility. Borrowing results from majorization theory that date back to the work of Hardy, Littlewood, and Polya (1929) we elucidate the "ironing" procedure introduced by Myerson (1981) and Mussa and Rosen (1978). The inclusion of Bayesian and dominant strategy incentive constraints result in the same support function, which establishes equivalence between these implementation concepts. Using Hotelling's lemma we next derive the optimal mechanism for any social choice problem and any linear objective, including revenue and surplus maximization. We extend the approach to include general concave objectives by providing a fixed-point condition characterizing the optimal mechanism. We generalize reduced-form implementation to environments with multi-dimensional, correlated types, non-linear utilities, and interdependent values. When value interdependencies are linear we are able to include incentive constraints into the support function and provide a condition when the second-best allocation is ex post incentive compatible.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir, 2011. "A geometric approach to mechanism design," ECON - Working Papers 056, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jun 2013.
  • Handle: RePEc:zur:econwp:056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/53578/5/econwp056.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir, 2011. "On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation in a general class of social choice problems," ECON - Working Papers 021, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Simo Puntanen, 2011. "Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications, Second Edition by Albert W. Marshall, Ingram Olkin, Barry C. Arnold," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 79(2), pages 293-293, August.
    3. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    4. Alejandro M. Manelli & Daniel R. Vincent, 2010. "Bayesian and Dominant‐Strategy Implementation in the Independent Private‐Values Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(6), pages 1905-1938, November.
    5. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    6. George J. Mailath & Andrew Postlewaite, 1990. "Asymmetric Information Bargaining Problems with Many Agents," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 57(3), pages 351-367.
    7. Martin F. Hellwig, 2003. "Public-Good Provision with Many Participants," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 589-614.
    8. Alex Gershkov & Benny Moldovanu & Xianwen Shi, 2011. "Bayesian and Dominant Strategy Implementation Revisited," Working Papers tecipa-422, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    9. Hernando-Veciana, Ángel & Michelucci, Fabio, 2011. "Second best efficiency and the English auction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 496-506.
    10. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    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. Georg Nöldeke & Larry Samuelson, 2018. "The Implementation Duality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(4), pages 1283-1324, July.
    2. Goeree, Jacob K. & Kushnir, Alexey, 2016. "Reduced form implementation for environments with value interdependencies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 250-256.
    3. Alexey Kushnir, 2013. "On the equivalence between Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation: the case of correlated types," ECON - Working Papers 129, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    4. Segal-Halevi, Erel & Nitzan, Shmuel & Hassidim, Avinatan & Aumann, Yonatan, 2017. "Fair and square: Cake-cutting in two dimensions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-28.
    5. Andreas Kleiner & Benny Moldovanu & Philipp Strack, 2021. "Extreme Points and Majorization: Economic Applications," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(4), pages 1557-1593, July.
    6. Elizabeth Baldwin & Paul Klemperer, 2019. "Understanding Preferences: “Demand Types”, and the Existence of Equilibrium With Indivisibilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 867-932, May.
    7. Craig Brett & John A. Weymark, 2020. "Majority rule and selfishly optimal nonlinear income tax schedules with discrete skill levels," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 337-362, March.
    8. Chen, Yi-Chun & Li, Jiangtao, 2018. "Revisiting the foundations of dominant-strategy mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 294-317.
    9. Alexey Kushnir & Shuo Liu, 2015. "On the equivalence of bayesian and dominant strategy implementation: the case of non-linear utilities," ECON - Working Papers 212, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    10. Alexey Kushnir & Shuo Liu, 2019. "On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation for environments with nonlinear utilities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(3), pages 617-644, April.
    11. Kushnir, Alexey, 2015. "On sufficiency of dominant strategy implementation in environments with correlated types," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 4-6.
    12. Alexey Kushnir & Shuo Liu, 2017. "On linear transformations of intersections," ECON - Working Papers 255, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.

    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. Alex Gershkov & Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir & Benny Moldovanu & Xianwen Shi, 2013. "On the Equivalence of Bayesian and Dominant Strategy Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 197-220, January.
    2. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2018. "A Mechanism Design Approach to the Tiebout Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(2), pages 735-760.
    3. Simon Loertscher & Leslie M. Marx, 2022. "To sell public or private goods," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 385-415, September.
    4. Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir, 2011. "On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation in a general class of social choice problems," ECON - Working Papers 021, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Fang,H. & Norman,P., 2003. "An efficiency rationale for bundling of public goods," Working papers 19, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    6. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2010. "Optimal Provision of Multiple Excludable Public Goods," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 1-37, November.
    7. Bierbrauer, Felix & Winkelmann, Justus, 2020. "All or nothing: State capacity and optimal public goods provision," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    8. Bierbrauer, Felix & Netzer, Nick, 2016. "Mechanism design and intentions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 557-603.
    9. Rong, Kang, 2014. "Proportional individual rationality and the provision of a public good in a large economy," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 187-196.
    10. Martimort, David, 2019. ""When Olson Meets Dahl": From Inefficient Groups Formation to Inefficient Policy-Making," CEPR Discussion Papers 13843, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Yeon‐Koo Che & Jinwoo Kim & Konrad Mierendorff, 2013. "Generalized Reduced‐Form Auctions: A Network‐Flow Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2487-2520, November.
    12. Andreas Gerster & Michael Kramm, 2024. "Optimal Internality Taxation of Product Attributes," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 394-419, August.
    13. Csapó, Gergely & Müller, Rudolf, 2013. "Optimal mechanism design for the private supply of a public good," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 229-242.
    14. Dilip Mookherjee, 2008. "The 2007 Nobel Memorial Prize in Mechanism Design Theory," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(2), pages 237-260, June.
    15. Börgers, Tilman & Postl, Peter, 2009. "Efficient compromising," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 2057-2076, September.
    16. Li, Yunan & Zhang, Xingtan, 2024. "Collective decision through an informed mediator," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    17. Peter Norman, 2004. "Efficient Mechanisms for Public Goods with Use Exclusions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(4), pages 1163-1188.
    18. Jean‐Jacques Laffont, 1989. "A Brief Overview of the Economics of Incomplete Markets," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 65(1), pages 54-65, March.
    19. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    20. Marek Pycia & Peter Troyan, 2023. "A Theory of Simplicity in Games and Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1495-1526, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mechanism design; convex set; support function; duality; majorization; ironing; Hotelling's lemma; reduced-from implementation; BIC-DIC equivalence; concave objectives; interdependent values; second-best mechanisms;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    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:zur:econwp:056. 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: Severin Oswald (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seizhch.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.