Decentralization of Pareto optima in economies with public projects,nonessential private goods and convex costs

Summary In the theory of economies with public goods one usually considers the case in which private goods are essential, i.e., each agent receives a fixed minimum level of utility if he consumes no private goods, irrespective of the public goods consumed. This paper develops the second welfare theorem for economies with public projects and possibly inessential private goods. As a corollary we also derive conditions under which valuation equilibria exist.hank Dolf Talman and an anonymous referee for many useful remarks and annotations of a previous draft of this paper.     

Heterogeneity, returns to scale, and collective action

Abstract .  I analyze the effects of resource inequality and valuation heterogeneity on the provision of public goods with increasing or decreasing returns to scale in production. The existing literature typically takes the agents' characteristics as given and known to the researcher. In contrast, this paper compares collective action provision across groups of agents with resources and valuations for the public good drawn from different known joint distributions. Specifically, I characterize the expected equilibrium public good level as function of various distributional properties and moments. A resource-valuation distribution that first-order stochastically dominates another distribution always results in higher expected public good provision level, independent of the production technology. With decreasing returns to scale in the public good production, higher resource inequality results in higher expected provision. With increasing returns the same result holds when the mean resource level is relatively low, but expected provision decreases in inequality when the mean resource level is high. A parallel result holds for agents' valuations.     

Role of honesty in full implementation

This paper introduces a new concept of full implementation that takes into account agents’ preferences for understanding how the process concerning honest reporting works. We assume that the agents have intrinsic preferences for honesty in the sense that they dislike the idea of lying when it does not influence their welfare but instead goes against the intention of the central planner. We show that the presence of such preferences functions in eliminating unwanted equilibria from the practical perspective, even if the degree of the preference for honesty is small. The mechanisms designed are detail free and involve only small fines.     

Public goods and optimal paternalism under present-biased preferences

This paper concerns the provision of a state-variable public good in a two-type model under present-biased consumer preferences. The preference for immediate gratification facing the high-ability type weakens the incentive to adjust public provision in response to the self-selection constraint.     

Terrorist threats,information disclosures,and consumer sovereignty

This paper proposes the use of consumers’ preferences in formulating policies for keeping secret information about terrorist activities and threats that might compromise future security. We report the results from two surveys indicating that support for government secrecy varies across situations depending on the threat and context. A majority of respondents preferred full disclosure of some information related to terrorist threats regardless of the consequences for specific industries or future threats, in particular threats involving attacks on commercial airlines. However a majority of respondents were willing to allow government authorities to withhold information about the details of threats to the financial system and to buildings if revealing the information might compromise future investigations. While the public generally recognizes the importance of keeping some information secret, a democratically elected government should seek to understand the preferences of its citizens on important policy issues related to public safety and security.     

Collective decisions with interdependent valuations

Many collective decision problems have in common that individuals’ desired outcomes are correlated but not identical. This paper studies collective decisions with private information about desired policies. Each agent holds private information which mainly concerns his own bliss point, but private information also affects all other agents. We concentrate on two specific mechanism, the median and mean mechanisms establish the existence of symmetric Bayesian Nash equilibria of the corresponding games and compare the performance of the mechanisms for different degrees of interdependencies. Applications of our framework include the provision of public goods and the design of decision processes in international organizations.     

On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems

We consider the priority-based allocation problem: there is a set of indivisible objects with multiple supplies (e.g., schools with seats) and a set of agents (e.g., students) with priorities over objects (e.g., proximity of residence area). We study two well-known and competing mechanisms. The agent-optimal stable mechanism (AOSM) allots objects via the deferred acceptance algorithm. The top trading cycles mechanism (TTCM) allots objects via Gale's top trading cycles algorithm. We show that the two mechanisms are equivalent, or TTCM is fair (i.e., respects agents’ priorities), or resource monotonic, or population monotonic, if and only if the priority structure is acyclic. Furthermore, if AOSM fails to be efficient (consistent) for a problem, TTCM also fails to be fair (consistent) for it. However, the converse is not necessarily true.     

Optimal ownership of public goods reconsidered

Consider a non-governmental organization (NGO) that can invest in a public good. Should the government or the NGO own the public project? In an incomplete contracting framework with split-the-difference bargaining, Besley and Ghatak (2001) argue that the party who values the public good most should be the owner. We demonstrate the robustness of their insight when the split-the-difference rule is replaced by the deal-me-out solution. Our finding is in contrast to the private good results of Chiu (1998) and De Meza and Lockwood (1998), who show that the optimal ownership structure crucially depends on whether the split-the-difference rule or the deal-me-out solution is used.     

Public choice versus constitutional economics: A methodological interpretation of the Buchanan research program

Through conceptual redirections, the Buchanan research program attempts to react to the fact that economic policy advice is often ignored. In terms of positive analyses, the research perspective is focused on institutions, i.e., the rules of economic as well as political games. In terms of normative analyses, the democratic criterion of unanimous consent is substituted for the normative efficiency criterion employed by welfare economics. The underlying idea is to direct positive analyses toward developing informative explanations on which normative analyses can build in order to provide intellectual orientation and thereby to contribute to democratic self-enlightenment. However, large parts of the existing public choice literature can be regarded as empirically oriented welfare-economic analyses of the political sector. Consequently, they run the danger of duplicating the failure of economic policy advice. This is why, during the 80s James Buchanan has changed the name of his research program from public choice to constitutional economics.     

Convergence of the Aumann–Davis–Maschler and Geanakoplos bargaining sets

Summary. Geanakoplos [17] defined a notion of bargaining set, and proved that his bargaining set is approximately competitive in large finite transferable utility (TU) exchange economies with smooth preferences. Shapley and Shubik [26] showed that the Aumann–Davis–Maschler bargaining set is approximately competitive in replica sequences of TU exchange economies with smooth preferences. We extend Geanakoplos result to nontransferable utility (NTU) exchange economies without smooth preferences, and we extend the Shapley and Shubik result to non-replica sequences of NTU exchange economies with smooth preferences.Received: November 11, 1996This revised version was published online in February 2005 with corrections to the cover date.     

Competitive bargaining equilibrium

In a simple exchange economy we propose a bargaining procedure that leads to a Walrasian outcome as the agents become increasingly patient. The competitive outcome therefore obtains even if agents have market power and are not price-takers. Moreover, where in other bargaining protocols the final outcome depends on bargaining power or relative impatience, the outcome here is determinate and depends only on preferences and endowments. Our bargaining procedure involves bargaining over prices and maximum quantity constraints, and it guarantees convergence to a Walrasian outcome for any standard exchange economy. In contrast, without quantity constraints we show that equilibrium is generically inefficient.     

Favoritism and reverse discrimination

We analyze the inefficiency that may arise in the form of reverse discrimination in the presence of favoritism or nepotism. Favoritism is typically associated with inefficient transfers to the core support of the incumbent government. But inefficiency that is opposite in nature may also arise through the electoral process in a political environment where favoritism is pervasive. We show that if the policy maker is sufficiently office seeking, a socially efficient action may never be taken if it yields benefits to his core support due to reputational concerns. Hence, the core support of the incumbent may fare worse than other groups. We also consider the implications of policies such as anti-nepotism laws or term limits in the presence of favoritism.     

A nonsmooth, nonconvex model of optimal growth

This paper analyzes the nature of economic dynamics in a one-sector optimal growth model in which the technology is generally nonconvex, nondifferentiable, and discontinuous. The model also allows for irreversible investment and unbounded growth. We develop various tools to overcome the technical difficulties posed by the generality of the model. We provide sufficient conditions for optimal paths to be bounded, to converge to zero, to be bounded away from zero, and to grow unboundedly. We also show that under certain conditions, if the discount factor is close to 1, any optimal path from a given initial capital stock converges to a small neighborhood of the golden rule capital stock, at which sustainable consumption is maximized. If it is maximized at infinity, then as the discount factor approaches 1, any optimal path either grows unboundedly or converges to an arbitrarily large capital stock.     

ON DETAIL‐FREE MECHANISM DESIGN AND RATIONALITY*

Mechanism design theory has been criticized, because mechanisms depend on the detail of specification and agents’ behaviour relies on strong rationality assumptions. Hence the study of “detail‐free” mechanism design with weak rationality is important as a practical theory. This paper emphasizes that, even if we confine our attention to detail‐free mechanisms with weak rationality, there exists plenty of scope for the development of new and significant ideas. I describe my recent work along these lines, and argue that stochastic decisions work in large double auction environments, and that moral preferences improve the implementability of social choice functions.     

The Income Splitting Method: Is it Good for Both Marriage Partners?

Abstract. This paper analyzes how deviating from individual taxation affects married couples. The focus is on time allocation, on investment in family‐specific human capital and on distribution of income within the family. Two insights are discussed in detail. First, the distribution of tax‐reduction gains due to the income splitting system depends on whether the family has been started or not. After marriage, joint taxation increases redistribution among family members. Second, although joint taxation reduces the tax burden of the family, it might harm the marriage partner that is more productive in household production provided that potential marriage partners foresee the effects of joint filing on the time allocation within the family.