Abstract

 
 

References (27)



 
 

Citations (10)



 


 



Priority Rules and Other Inequitable Rationing Methods


Hervé Moulin


Rice University - Department of Economics



Abstract:     
In a rationing problem, each agent demands a quantity of a certain commodity and the available resources fall short of total demand. A rationing method solves this problem at every level of resources and individual demands. We impose three axioms: Consistency (with respect to variations of the set of agents), Distributivity, and Distributivity* (with respect to variations of the available resources). In the model where the commodity comes in indivisible units, the three axioms characterize the family of priority rules, where individual demands are met lexicographically according to an exogeneous ordering of the agents. In the (more familiar) model where the commodity is divisible, these three axioms plus Scale Invariance (independence of the measurement unit )characterize a rich family of methods. It contains exactly three equitable methods, giving equal shares to equal demands: these are the familiar proportional, uniform gains and uniform losses methods. The inequitable methods in the family partition the agents into priority classes; within each class, they use either the proportional method or an asymmetric weighted version of the uniform gains or uniform losses methods.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

JEL Classification: D63, D70

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: June 28, 1998  

Suggested Citation

Moulin, Hervé, Priority Rules and Other Inequitable Rationing Methods. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=102612 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.102612

Contact Information

Hervé Moulin (Contact Author)
Rice University - Department of Economics ( email )
6100 South Main Street
MS 22, P.O. Box 1892
Houston, TX 77005
United States
713-348-3312 (Phone)
713-348-6329 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 507
Downloads: 64
Download Rank: 177,525
References:  27
Citations:  10

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.375 seconds