Skip to main content
Log in

Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Economic Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We show that strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods are dictatorial—i.e., they always select an allocation in their range that maximizes the welfare of the same single individual (the dictator). Further, strategy-proof and efficient allocation mechanisms are strongly dictatorial—i.e., they select the dictator’s preferred allocation on the entire feasible set. Thus, our results reveal the extent to which the conflict between individual incentives and other properties that may be deemed desirable (e.g., fairness, equal treatment, distributive justice) pervades resource allocation problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barberà S., Jackson M.: Strategy-proof exchange. Econometrica 63, 51–87 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barberà S., Peleg B.: Strategy-proof voting schemes with continuous preferences. Soc Choice Welf 7, 31–38 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barberà, S.: Strategy-proof social choice. In: Barcelona GSE Working Paper Num. 40 (2010)

  • Bergemann D., Morris S.: Robust implementation in direct mechanisms. Rev Econ Stud 76, 1175–1204 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deb R., Ohseto S.: Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public good economies: a note. Econ Theory 14, 685–689 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbard A.: Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result. Econometrica 41, 587–602 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green J., Laffont J.-J.: Characterization of satisfactory mechanisms for the revelation of preferences for public goods. Econometrica 45, 427–438 (1977)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurwicz L.: On informationally decentralized systems. In: McGuire, E., Radner, R. (eds) Decisions and Organization, pp. 297–336. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurwicz L., Walker M.: On the generic non-optimality of dominant-strategy allocation mechanisms: a general results that includes pure exchange economies. Econometrica 58, 683–704 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledyard J.: Incomplete information and incentive compatibility. J Econ Theory 18, 171–189 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl E.: Just taxation: a positive solution. In: Musgrave, R., Peacock, A. (eds) Classics in the Theory of Public Finance, Macmillan, New York (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno D.: Nonmanipulable decision mechanisms for economic environments. Soc Choice Welf 11, 225–240 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno D.: Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for pure public goods economies when preferences are monotonic. Econ Theory 13, 183–197 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno D., Walker M.: Nonmanipulable voting schemes when participant’s interests are partially decomposable. Soc Choice Welf 8, 221–233 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moulin H.: On strategy-proofness and single peakedness. Public Choice 34, 87–97 (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  • Saijo T.: Incentive compatibility and individual rationality in public good economies. J Econ Theory 55, 203–212 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson P.: The pure theory of public expenditure. Rev Econ Stat 36, 387–389 (1954)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Satterthwaite M.: Strategy-proofness and arrow’s conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. J Econ Theory 35, 1–18 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  • Satterthwaite M., Sonnenschein H.: Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms at differentiable points. Rev Econ Stud 48, 587–597 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schummer J.: Strategy-proofness versus efficiency for small domains of preferences over public goods. Econ Theory 13, 709–722 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serizawa S.: Strategy-proof and individually rational social choice functions for public goods economies. Econ Theory 7, 501–512 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Serizawa S.: Strategy-proof and symmetric social choice functions for public goods economies. Econometrica 67, 121–145 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker M.: On the nonexistence of a dominant strategy mechanism for making optimal public decision. Econometrica 48, 1521–1540 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R.: Game theoretic analysis of trading processes. In: Bewley, T. (ed.) Advances in Economic Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou L.: Impossibility of strategy-proof allocation mechanisms in economies with public goods. Rev Econ Stud 58, 107–119 (1991a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou L.: Inefficiency of strategy-proof allocation mechanisms in pure exchange economies. Soc Choice Welf 8, 247–254 (1991b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diego Moreno.

Additional information

We gratefully acknowledge the comments and suggestions of the editor and referees. (In particular, we thank a referee who suggested a simple argument to deal with the case n > 2 in the proof by induction of Theorems 1 and 2.) We also thank Francisco Marhuenda and Carmelo Núñez for helpful discussion, and Carmen García-Miguel for helping us composing the figures. Financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Education, grants SEJ2007-67436 and Consolider-Ingenio 2010, and from the Comunidad de Madrid, grant Excelecon, is gratefully acknowledged.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moreno, D., Moscoso, M.J. Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods. Econ Theory 52, 315–336 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-011-0627-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-011-0627-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation