Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Protective Properties and the Constrained Equal Awards Rule for Claims Problems: A Note

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate the implications of two protective properties, sustainability and exemption, for the resolution of conflicting claims. Under the properties, agents with sufficiently small claims in relation to the other claims and to the amount available are fully reimbursed. Our main results are three characterizations of the constrained equal awards rule. Namely, (1) it is the only rule satisfying sustainability and claims monotonicity, (2) it is the only rule satisfying sustainability and super-modularity, and (3) it is the only rule satisfying exemption, order preservation, and consistency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aumann RJ, Maschler M (1985) Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud. J Econ Theory 36:195–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun Y, Schummer J, Thomson W (2001) Constrained egalitarianism: a new solution to claims problems. Seoul J Econ 14:269–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagan N (1996) New characterization of old bankruptcy rules. Soc Choice Welfare 13:51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagan N, Serrano R, Volij O (1997) A noncooperative view of consistent bankruptcy rules. Games Econ Behav 18:55–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrero C, Villar A (2001) The three musketeers: four classical solutions to bankruptcy problems. Math Soc Sci 42:307–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrero C, Villar A (2002) Sustainability in bankruptcy problems. TOP 10:261–273

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Moulin H (2000) Priority rules and other asymmetric rationing methods. Econometrica 68:643–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill B (1982) A problem of rights arbitration from the Talmud. Math Soc Sci 2:345–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson W (2000) Consistent allocation rules. University of Rochester, Rochester, Mimeo

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson W (2001) How to divide when there isn’t enough. Book manuscript, University of Rochester, Rochester

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson W (2003) Axiomatic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey. Math Soc Sci 45:249–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson W, Yeh C-H (2001) Minimal rights, maximal claims, and duality for division rules. University of Rochester, Rochester, Mimeo

    Google Scholar 

  • Young P (1987) On dividing an amount according to individual claims or liabilities. Math Oper Res 12:398–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young P (1988) Distributive justice in taxation. J Econ Theory 43:321–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, 115, Taiwan

    Chun-Hsien Yeh

Authors
  1. Chun-Hsien Yeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chun-Hsien Yeh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yeh, CH. Protective Properties and the Constrained Equal Awards Rule for Claims Problems: A Note. Soc Choice Welfare 27, 221–230 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-006-0122-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-006-0122-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation