On the existence of consistent rules to adjudicate conflicting claims: A constructive geometric approach

Review of Economic Design

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 225-251

  Thomson, William ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Claims problems; Consistent extensions; Constrained equal awards rule; Constrained equal losses rule; Proportional rule

Indexed keywords

EID: 35248868774     PISSN: 14344742     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10058-007-0027-2     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aumann R, Maschler M (1985) Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud. J Econ Theory 36:195-213
2. Balinski M, Young P (1982) Fair representation. Yale University Press, New Haven
3. Chambers C, Thomson W (2002) Group order preservation and the proportional rule for bankruptcy problems. Math Soc Sci 44:235-252
4. Chun Y (1999) Equivalence of axioms for bankruptcy problems. Int J Game Theory 28:511-520
5. Dagan N (1996) New characterizations of old bankruptcy rules. Soc Choice Welf 13:51-59
6. Dagan N, Volij O (1997) Bilateral comparisons and consistent fair division rules in the context of bankruptcy problems. Int J Game Theory 26:11-25
7. Davis M, Maschler M (1965) The kernel of a cooperative game. Nav Res Logist Q 12:223-259
8. Dominguez D, Thomson W (2006) A new solution to the problem of adjudicating conflicting claims. Econ Theory 28:283-307
9. Hokari T, Thomson W (2000) On properties of division rules lifted by bilateral consistency, mimeo
10. Hokari T, Thomson W (2003) Bankruptcy problems and weighted Talmud rules. Econ Theory 21:241-261
11. Kaminski M (2000) Hydraulic rationing. Math Soc Sci 40:131-155
12. Kaminski M (2006) Parametric rationing methods. Games Econ Behav 54:115-133
13. Lensberg T (1988) Stability and the Nash solution. J Econ Theory 45:330-341
14. Maschler M, Owen G (1989) The consistent Shapley value for hyperplane games. Int J Game Theory 18:389-407
15. Moulin H (2000) Priority rules and other asymmetric rationing methods. Econometrica 68:643-684
16. O'Neill B (1982) A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud. Math Soc Sci 2:345-371
17. Peleg B (1985) An axiomatization of the core of cooperative games without side-payments. J Math Econ 14:203-214
18. Sasaki H, Toda M (1992) Consistency and characterization of the core of two-sided matching problems. J Econ Theory 56:218-227
19. Schummer J, Thomson W (1997) Two derivations of the uniform rule. Econ Lett 55:333-337
20. Tadenuma K, Thomson W (1991) No-envy and consistency in economies with indivisible goods. Econometrica 59:1755-1767
21. Thomson W (1988) A study of choice correspondences in economies with a variable number of agents. J Econ Theory 46:247-259
22. Thomson W (1994) Consistent extensions. Math Soc Sci 28:35-49
23. Thomson W (2001) A characterization of a family of rules for the resolution of conflicting claims, mimeo, revised 2006
24. Thomson W (2002) Two families of rules for the adjudication of conflicting claims, mimeo
25. Thomson W (2003) Axiomatic and strategic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey. Math Soc Sci 45:249-297
26. Thomson W (2006) Consistent allocation rules, mimeo
27. Thomson W (2007) The claims-truncated proportional rule has no consistent extension: a geometric proof. Econ Lett (forthcoming)
28. Thomson W, Lensberg T (1989) The axiomatic theory of bargaining with a variable number of agents. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
29. Thomson W, Myerson RB (1980) Monotonicity and independence axioms. Int J Game Theory 9:37-49
30. Thomson W, Yeh C-H (2001) Minimal rights, maximal claims, duality and convexity for division rules, mimeo, revised 2003
31. Young P (1987) On dividing an amount according to individual claims or liabilities. Math Oper Res 12: 398-414