Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2502.06499

Marginal Mechanisms For Balanced Exchange

Abstract

We study balanced exchange problems in which agents with responsive preferences are endowed with multiple indivisible objects and can trade without transfers (e.g. shift exchange, time-banking). Eliciting full preferences over bundles is infeasible, so mechanisms often rely solely on marginal preferences, that is, rankings of individual objects. We characterize when eliciting only marginal preferences is enough to unambiguously identify allocations that are efficient and individually rational in the sense that these properties hold with respect to any responsive preferences consistent with the elicited marginals. We parameterize domains of marginal preferences by which indifference classes can contain endowed and non-endowed objects. We show that the essentially unique maximal domain for which an unambiguously efficient and unambiguously individually rational marginal mechanism exists is trichotomous: agents rank objects in three tiers, with the bottom tier containing no endowed objects. We also consider incentives for truthful preference revelation. The maximal domain for which an efficient, individually rational, and strategy-proof mechanism exists is strongly trichotomous: agents rank objects in three tiers, with the bottom tier containing no endowed objects and the middle tier containing no non-endowed objects. The canonical marginal mechanism achieving our three desiderata on that domain is a serial dictatorship over individually rational allocations. When employed on the larger trichotomous domain, this mechanism still admits a weakly dominant strategy: reveal the top tier truthfully and omit non-endowed objects from the middle tier. We propose a family of gradual-revelation mechanisms that are also unambiguously efficient and individually rational on the trichotomous domain while providing better incentives for truthful revelation across all three tiers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Vikram Manjunath, Alexander Westkamp. 2026-04-11. Marginal Mechanisms For Balanced Exchange. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.06499

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Log-concave functions and transformations thereof

I summarize Bagnoli and Bergstrom (2005)'s review on log-concave functions, make several corrections, and augment the discussion with further results that can be useful in establishing monotone hazard rates. I also provide an application to monopoly pricing, where log-concavity of the demand curve implies strict concavity of the revenue function in quantity.

econ.TH

Audit the Auditors: Commitment versus Professional Judgment

This paper provides a theoretical framework to evaluate the trade-off between the self-regulated peer review system and independent government inspection (PCAOB) in the auditing profession. We model the peer review system as a Judgment Regime, where a stakeholder utilizes professional expertise, captured as a private signal, to make ex-post decisions on verifying audit failures. In contrast, PCAOB inspection is modeled as a Commitment Regime, where the stakeholder lacks private information but can commit ex-ante to a predetermined level of verification. We find that the Judgment Regime benefits from a resource-allocation effect and a deterrence effect driven by informed verification, whereas the Commitment Regime deters audit failures through the first-mover advantage of ex-ante commitment. Our analysis demonstrates that the stakeholder prefers the peer review system if and only if the private signal is sufficiently informative. Furthermore, comparative statics reveal that higher verification costs or stronger audit incentives shift the stakeholder's preference toward PCAOB inspection.

econ.TH

Reputation, Disclosure, and the Scope of Entry

This paper studies how learning about an incumbent affects the scope of entry when competitive responses use resources shared across markets. An entrant chooses whether to launch in neither, one, or both of two markets. Entry into the second market reduces the incumbent's cost-reducing response in the first and can make one-market entry unattractive. The entrant learns about the incumbent's capability from a record of its response to an earlier rival. More frequent publication encourages a less capable incumbent to imitate a more capable one. An observed response then becomes less informative, and entry after that record expands. We compare publication of conduct with a public audit of capability. For an open set of parameters with uniform setup costs, full publication maximizes total surplus within the specified policy class when publication costs are low. Removing the interaction between response costs across markets reverses this choice, while preserving all early and singleton-market payoffs. A capability audit is dominated in both economies. Expected entry scope is constant across the considered policies within each technology, although productive investment and the allocation of entry change.

econ.TH