Non-manipulable rules for land rental problems

Valencia-Toledo, Alfredo and Vidal-Puga, Juan (2015): Non-manipulable rules for land rental problems.

Abstract

We consider land rental problems where there are several communities that can act as lessors and a single tenant who does not necessary need all the available land. A rule should determine which communities become lessors, how much land they rent and at which price. Our first result is a complete characterization of the family of rules that satisfy land monotonicity and non-manipulability under land reassignment. We also define two parametric subfamilies. The first one is characterized by adding a property of weighted standard for two-person. The second one is characterized by adding consistency and continuity.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: land rental; non-manipulability; land reassignment; land monotonicity; consistency; standard for two-person
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D61 - Allocative Efficiency ; Cost-Benefit Analysis; D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

References

Akiwumi, F. A. (2014). Strangers and Sierra Leone mining: cultural heritage and sustainable development challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 84:773–782.

Albizuri, M. J. and Zarzuelo, J. M. (2007). The dual serial cost-sharing rule. Mathematical Social Sciences, 53(2):150–163.

Arellano-Yanguas, J. (2011). Aggravating the resource curse: Decentralisation, mining and conflict in Peru. The Journal of Development Studies, 47(4):617–638.

Azima, A., Sivapalan, S., Zaimah, R., Suhana, S., and Yusof, H. (2015). Boundry and customary land ownership dispute in Sarawak. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(4).

Chun, Y. (1988). The proportional solution for rights problems. Mathematical Social Sciences, 15(3):231 – 246.

de Frutos, M. A. (1999). Coalitional manipulations in a bankruptcy problem. Review of Economic Design, 4(3):255–272.

Dell, M. (2010). The persistent effects of Peru’s mining mita. Econometrica, 78(6):1863–1903.

Erlanson, A. and Flores-Szwagrzak, K. (2015). Strategy-proof assignment of multiple resources. Journal of Economic Theory, 159, Part A:137 – 162.

Gildenhuys, J. A. (2005). Indigenous peoples’ rights to minerals and the mining industry: Current developments in South Africa from a national and international perspective. Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law 23(4):465–481.

Gomez-Rua, M. and Vidal-Puga, J. (2011). Merge-proofness in minimum cost spanning tree problems. International Journal of Game Theory, 40(2):309–329.

Hart, S. and Mas-Colell, A. (1989). Potential, value, and consistency. Econometrica, 57(3):589–614.

Helwege, A. (2015). Challenges with resolving mining conflicts in Latin America. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(1):73–84.

Huettner, F. (2015). A proportional value for cooperative games with a coalition structure. Theory and Decision, 78(2):273–287. Jaramillo, P., Kayı, C., and Klijn, F. (2014). Asymmetrically fair rules for an indivisible good problem with a budget constraint. Social Choice and Welfare, 43(3):603–633.

Ju, B.-G. (2003). Manipulation via merging and splitting in claims problems. Review of Economic Design, 8(2):205–215.

Ju, B.-G. (2013). Coalitional manipulation on networks. Journal of Economic Theory, 148(2):627 – 662.

Ju, B.-G., Miyagawa, E., and Sakai, T. (2007). Non-manipulable division rules in claim problems and generalizations. Journal of Economic Theory, 132(1):1 – 26.

Ju, B.-G. and Moreno-Ternero, J. (2011). Progressive and merging-proof taxation. International Journal of Game Theory, 40(1):43–62.

Kaye, J. L. and Yahya, M. (2012). Land and Conflict: Tool and guidance for preventing and managing land and natural resources conflict. UN Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action. Guidance Note.

Kojima, F. and Manea, M. (2010). Incentives in the probabilistic serial mechanism. Journal of Economic Theory, 145(1):106 – 123.

Koster, M. (2012). Consistent cost sharing. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 75(1).

Masso, J., Nicolo, A., Sen, A., Sharma, T., and Ulku, L. (2015). On cost sharing in the provision of a binary and excludable public good. Journal of Economic Theory, 155:30 – 49.

Moreno-Ternero, J. D. (2006). Proportionality and non-manipulability in bankruptcy problems. International Game Theory Review, 8(1):127–139.

Moreno-Ternero, J. D. (2007). Bankruptcy rules and coalitional manipulation. International Game Theory Review, 9(2):411–424.

Morimoto, S. and Serizawa, S. (2015). Strategy-proofness and efficiency with non-quasi-linear preferences: a characterization of minimum price Walrasian rule. Theoretical Economics, 10(2):445–487.

Moulin, H. (1987). Equal or proportional division of a surplus, and other methods. International Journal of Game Theory, 16(3):161–186.

Moulin, H. (2002). Axiomatic cost and surplus sharing. In Kenneth J. Arrow, A. S. and Suzumura, K., editors, Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, volume I, chapter 6, pages 289–357. Elsevier.

Moulin, H. (2007). On scheduling fees to prevent merging, splitting, and transferring of jobs. Mathematics of Operations Research, 32(2):266–283.

Moulin, H. (2008). Proportional scheduling, split-proofness, and merge-proofness. Games and Economic Behavior, 63:567–587.

Moulin, H. and Shenker, S. (2001). Strategyproof sharing of submodular costs: budget balance versus efficiency. Economic Theory, 18(3):511–533.

O’Neill, B. (1982). A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud. Mathematical Social Sciences, 2(4):345 – 371.

Sosa, I. (2011). License to operate: Indigenous relations and free prior and informed consent in the mining industry. Sustainalytics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Sprumont, Y. (2005). On the discrete version of the Aumann-Shapley cost-sharing method. Econometrica, 73(5):1693–1712.

Sun, N. and Yang, Z. (2003). A general strategy proof fair allocation mechanism. Economics Letters, 81(1):73–79.

Svensson, L.-G. (2009). Coalitional strategy-proofness and fairness. Economic Theory, 40(2):227–245.

Tetreault, D. (2015). Social environmental mining conflicts in Mexico. Latin American Perspectives, 42(5):48–66.

Thomson, W. (2003). Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey. Mathematical Social Sciences, 45(3):249– 297.

Thomson, W. (2008). Two families of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims. Social Choice and Welfare, 31(4):667–692.

Thomson, W. (2015a). Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update. Mathematical Social Sciences, 74:41–59.

Thomson, W. (2015b). For claims problems, compromising between the proportional and constrained equal awards rules. Economic Theory, 60(3):495–520.

United Nations (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Adopted by the General Assembly on 2 October 2007.

van den Brink, R., Funaki, Y., and Ju, Y. (2013). Reconciling marginalism with egalitarianism: consistency, monotonicity, and implementation of egalitarian Shapley values. Social Choice and Welfare, 40(3):693–714.

Walter, M. and Urkidi, L. (2015). Community mining consultations in Latin America (2002–2012): The contested emergence of a hybrid institution for participation. Geoforum, In press.

Welker, M. A. (2009). Corporate security begins in the community: Mining, the corporate social responsibility industry, and environmental advocacy in Indonesia. Cultural Anthropology, 24(1):142–179.