不平等社会的机制设计

Marco Reuter, Carl-Christian Groh
{"title":"不平等社会的机制设计","authors":"Marco Reuter, Carl-Christian Groh","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3688376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We study optimal mechanisms for a utilitarian designer who seeks to assign multiple units of an indivisible good to a group of agents with unit demand. The agents have heterogeneous marginal utilities of money, which implies that utility is not perfectly transferable between them. Heterogeneous marginal utilities of money may naturally arise in environments where agents have different wealth endowments. We show that the ex post efficient allocation rule is not optimal in our setting. Firstly, a high willingness to pay may stem from a low marginal utility of money. Moreover, the transfer rule does not only facilitate implementation of the desired social choice function in our setting, but also directly affects social welfare. In the optimal mechanism, rationing may occur, which entails a conflict between ex ante and ex post efficiency. In an extension, we show that it is still not utilitarian optimal to allocate the good solely based on willingness to pay even when redistribution is not possible. Finally, we highlight how our mechanism can be implemented as an auction with minimum bids and bidding subsidies.","PeriodicalId":129815,"journal":{"name":"Microeconomics: Welfare Economics & Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanism Design for Unequal Societies\",\"authors\":\"Marco Reuter, Carl-Christian Groh\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3688376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We study optimal mechanisms for a utilitarian designer who seeks to assign multiple units of an indivisible good to a group of agents with unit demand. The agents have heterogeneous marginal utilities of money, which implies that utility is not perfectly transferable between them. Heterogeneous marginal utilities of money may naturally arise in environments where agents have different wealth endowments. We show that the ex post efficient allocation rule is not optimal in our setting. Firstly, a high willingness to pay may stem from a low marginal utility of money. Moreover, the transfer rule does not only facilitate implementation of the desired social choice function in our setting, but also directly affects social welfare. In the optimal mechanism, rationing may occur, which entails a conflict between ex ante and ex post efficiency. In an extension, we show that it is still not utilitarian optimal to allocate the good solely based on willingness to pay even when redistribution is not possible. Finally, we highlight how our mechanism can be implemented as an auction with minimum bids and bidding subsidies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Microeconomics: Welfare Economics & Collective Decision-Making eJournal\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Microeconomics: Welfare Economics & Collective Decision-Making eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3688376\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microeconomics: Welfare Economics & Collective Decision-Making eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3688376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

我们研究了功利主义设计师的最优机制,他们寻求将多个单位的不可分割商品分配给具有单位需求的一组代理。代理人具有异质的货币边际效用,这意味着效用在他们之间不是完全可转移的。在代理人拥有不同财富禀赋的环境中,货币的异质边际效用可能自然产生。我们表明事后有效分配规则在我们的设置中不是最优的。首先,高支付意愿可能源于货币的低边际效用。此外,在我们的设置中,转移规则不仅促进了所期望的社会选择函数的实现,而且直接影响到社会福利。在最优机制下,可能会出现配给制,这就导致了事前效率和事后效率的冲突。在一个扩展中,我们表明,即使在不可能进行再分配的情况下,仅仅根据支付意愿来分配商品仍然不是功利主义的最优选择。最后,我们强调如何以最低出价和竞标补贴的拍卖方式实施我们的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mechanism Design for Unequal Societies
We study optimal mechanisms for a utilitarian designer who seeks to assign multiple units of an indivisible good to a group of agents with unit demand. The agents have heterogeneous marginal utilities of money, which implies that utility is not perfectly transferable between them. Heterogeneous marginal utilities of money may naturally arise in environments where agents have different wealth endowments. We show that the ex post efficient allocation rule is not optimal in our setting. Firstly, a high willingness to pay may stem from a low marginal utility of money. Moreover, the transfer rule does not only facilitate implementation of the desired social choice function in our setting, but also directly affects social welfare. In the optimal mechanism, rationing may occur, which entails a conflict between ex ante and ex post efficiency. In an extension, we show that it is still not utilitarian optimal to allocate the good solely based on willingness to pay even when redistribution is not possible. Finally, we highlight how our mechanism can be implemented as an auction with minimum bids and bidding subsidies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Opportunity and Inequality Across Generations Auctioning Corporate Bonds: A Uniform-Price under Investment Mandates The Role of Effort Cost Perception in Outcome Bias (Mis-)Perception of Inequality: Measures, Determinants, and Consequences Dynamic Resource Allocation with Cost Externality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1