[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ewp/wpaper/347web.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Constrained multi-issue rationing problems

Author

Listed:
  • Josep Maria Izquierdo Aznar

    (Universitat de Barcelona)

  • Pere Timoner Lledó

    (Universitat de Barcelona)

Abstract
We study a variant of the multi-issue rationing model, where agents claim for several issues. In this variant, the available amount of resource intended for each issue is constrained to an amount fixed a priori according to exogenous criteria. The aim is to distribute the amount corresponding to each issue taking into account the allocation for the rest of issues (issue-allocation interdependence). We name these problems constrained multi-issue allocation situations (CMIA). In order to tackle the solution to these problems, we first reinterpret some single-issue egalitarian rationing rules as a minimization program based on the idea of finding the feasible allocation as close as possible to a specific reference point. We extend this family of egalitarian rules to the CMIA framework. In particular, we extend the constrained equal awards rule, the constrained equal losses rule and the reverse Talmud rule to the multi-issue rationing setting, which turn out to be particular cases of a family of rules, namely the extended a-egalitarian family. This family is analysed and characterized by using consistency principles (over agents and over issues) and a property based on the Lorenz dominance criterion.

Suggested Citation

  • Josep Maria Izquierdo Aznar & Pere Timoner Lledó, 2016. "Constrained multi-issue rationing problems," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/347, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ewp:wpaper:347web
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/bitstream/2445/101684/1/E16-347_Izquierdo_Constrained.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. Peyton Young, 1987. "On Dividing an Amount According to Individual Claims or Liabilities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 398-414, August.
    2. Arin, J. & Benito-Ostolaza, J. & Inarra, E., 2017. "The reverse Talmud family of rules for bankruptcy Problems: A characterization," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-49.
    3. Chun, Youngsub & Thomson, William, 1992. "Bargaining problems with claims," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 19-33, August.
    4. Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2009. "The proportional rule for multi-issue bankruptcy problems," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(1), pages 474-481.
    5. Peter Borm & Luisa Carpente & Balbina Casas-Méndez & Ruud Hendrickx, 2005. "The Constrained Equal Awards Rule for Bankruptcy Problems with a Priori Unions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 211-227, July.
    6. William Thomson, 2008. "Two families of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(4), pages 667-692, December.
    7. Juan Moreno-Ternero & Antonio Villar, 2006. "The TAL-Family of Rules for Bankruptcy Problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 231-249, October.
    8. Calleja, Pedro & Borm, Peter & Hendrickx, Ruud, 2005. "Multi-issue allocation situations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 730-747, August.
    9. Schummer, James & Thomson, William, 1997. "Two derivations of the uniform rule and an application to bankruptcy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 333-337, September.
    10. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
    11. Gustavo Bergantiños & Leticia Lorenzo & Silvia Lorenzo-Freire, 2011. "New characterizations of the constrained equal awards rule in multi-issue allocation situations," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 74(3), pages 311-325, December.
    12. van den Brink, René & Funaki, Yukihiko & van der Laan, Gerard, 2013. "Characterization of the Reverse Talmud bankruptcy rule by Exemption and Exclusion properties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 413-417.
    13. Yoichi Kasajima & Rodrigo Velez, 2011. "Reflecting inequality of claims in gains and losses," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 46(2), pages 283-295, February.
    14. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    15. Miguel Hinojosa & Amparo Mármol, 2014. "Multi-commodity rationing problems with maxmin payoffs," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 79(3), pages 353-370, June.
    16. Lorenzo-Freire, S. & Alonso-Meijide, J.M. & Casas-Mendez, B. & Hendrickx, R.L.P., 2005. "Balanced Contributions for Multi-Issue Allocation Situations," Discussion Paper 2005-93, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Silvia Lorenzo-Freire & Balbina Casas-Méndez & Ruud Hendrickx, 2010. "The two-stage constrained equal awards and losses rules for multi-issue allocation situations," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 18(2), pages 465-480, December.
    18. M. Hinojosa & A. Mármol & F. Sánchez, 2012. "A consistent talmudic rule for division problems with multiple references," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 20(3), pages 661-678, October.
    19. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    20. Thomson, William, 2012. "On The Axiomatics Of Resource Allocation: Interpreting The Consistency Principle," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 385-421, November.
    21. Lorenzo-Freire, Silvia & Alonso-Meijide, Jose M. & Casas-Mendez, Balbina & Hendrickx, Ruud, 2007. "Balanced contributions for TU games with awards and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(2), pages 958-964, October.
    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. Rick K. Acosta-Vega & Encarnaci'on Algaba & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2022. "On proportionality in multi-issue problems with crossed claims," Papers 2202.09877, arXiv.org.
    2. Rick K. Acosta & Encarnación Algaba & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2022. "Multi-issue bankruptcy problems with crossed claims," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 749-772, November.
    3. Algaba, E. & Márquez, G. & Martínez-Lozano, J. & Sánchez-Soriano, J., 2023. "A novel methodology for public management of annual greenhouse gas emissions in the European Union," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Acosta-Vega, Rick K. & Algaba, Encarnación & Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquín, 2023. "Design of water quality policies based on proportionality in multi-issue problems with crossed claims," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(2), pages 777-788.
    5. Rick K. Acosta-Vega & Encarnaci'on Algaba & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2022. "On priority in multi-issue bankruptcy problems with crossed claims," Papers 2205.00450, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.

    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. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.
    2. Sinan Ertemel & Rajnish Kumar, 2018. "Proportional rules for state contingent claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 229-246, March.
    3. Rick K. Acosta & Encarnación Algaba & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2022. "Multi-issue bankruptcy problems with crossed claims," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 318(2), pages 749-772, November.
    4. René Brink & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2017. "The reverse TAL-family of rules for bankruptcy problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 254(1), pages 449-465, July.
    5. Gustavo Bergantiños & Jose María Chamorro & Leticia Lorenzo & Silvia Lorenzo‐Freire, 2018. "Mixed rules in multi‐issue allocation situations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 66-77, February.
    6. Ephraim Zehavi & Amir Leshem, 2018. "On the Allocation of Multiple Divisible Assets to Players with Different Utilities," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(1), pages 253-274, June.
    7. Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2017. "A Talmudic Approach to Bankruptcy Problems," Working Papers 17.01, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    8. Arin, J. & Benito-Ostolaza, J. & Inarra, E., 2017. "The reverse Talmud family of rules for bankruptcy Problems: A characterization," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 43-49.
    9. Long, Yan & Sethuraman, Jay & Xue, Jingyi, 2021. "Equal-quantile rules in resource allocation with uncertain needs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    10. Sanchez-Soriano, Joaquin, 2021. "Families of sequential priority rules and random arrival rules with withdrawal limits," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 136-148.
    11. Teresa Estañ & Natividad Llorca & Ricardo Martínez & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2021. "On the Difficulty of Budget Allocation in Claims Problems with Indivisible Items and Prices," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1133-1159, October.
    12. Martínez, Ricardo & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D., 2022. "Compensation and sacrifice in the probabilistic rationing of indivisible units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 740-751.
    13. Josep Maria Izquierdo Aznar & Pere Timoner Lledó, 2016. "Decentralized rationing problems," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/345, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    14. Harless, Patrick, 2017. "Wary of the worst: Maximizing award guarantees when new claimants may arrive," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 316-328.
    15. Rick K. Acosta-Vega & Encarnaci'on Algaba & Joaqu'in S'anchez-Soriano, 2022. "On proportionality in multi-issue problems with crossed claims," Papers 2202.09877, arXiv.org.
    16. Jingyi Xue, 2018. "Fair division with uncertain needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 105-136, June.
    17. William Thomson, 2014. "Compromising between the proportional and constrained equal awards rules," RCER Working Papers 584, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    18. Teresa Estañ & Natividad Llorca & Ricardo Martínez & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano, 2020. "On the difficulty of budget allocation in claims problems with indivisible items of different prices," ThE Papers 20/09, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    19. Jaume García-Segarra & Miguel Ginés-Vilar, 2023. "Additive adjudication of conflicting claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(1), pages 93-116, March.
    20. Patrick Harless, 2017. "Endowment additivity and the weighted proportional rules for adjudicating conflicting claims," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 63(3), pages 755-781, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    rationing; multi-issue; reverse Talmud rule; equal losses rule; egalitarian family.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:ewp:wpaper:347web. 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: University of Barcelona School of Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feubaes.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.