Skip to main content

On the Future of Economic Design—The Personal Ruminations of a Matching Theorist

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Economic Design ((DESI))

Abstract

This note is a brief personal rumination on the state of economic design, advocating the importance of theory and listing broadly desirable features of future theoretical research agendas.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Hurwicz (1973).

References

  • Alva, S., & Manjunath, V. (2019). Strategy-proof Pareto-improvement. Journal of Economic Theory, 181, 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, T., & Svensson, L.-G. (2014). Non-manipulable house allocation with rent control. Econometrica, 82, 507–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., & Kesten, O. (2017). Chinese college admissions and school choice reforms: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 125, 99–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dur, U., Gitmez, A., & Yilmaz, O. (2015). School choice under partial fairness. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers, L., & Morrill, T. (2018). (Il)legal assignments in school choice. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers, L., & Westkamp, A. (2017). Strategy-proof tie-breaking in matching with priorities. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ergin, H. (2002). Efficient resource allocation on the basis of priorities. Econometrica, 70, 2489–2497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, X. (2018). Stable and efficient resource allocation under weak priorities. Games and Economic Behavior, 107, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurwicz, L. (1973). The design of mechanisms for resource allocation. American Economic Review, 63, 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. O. (2019). The role of theory in an age of design and big data. The Future of Economic Design.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kesten, O. (2006). On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems. Journal of Economic Theory, 127, 155–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesten, O. (2010). School choice with consent. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 1297–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T., & Sethuraman, J. (2011). Equivalence results in the allocation of indivisible objects: A unified view. Working paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, A. E. (2002). The economist as engineer: Game theory, experimentation, and computation as tools for design economics. Econometrica, 70, 1341–1378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Szilvia Papai .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Papai, S. (2019). On the Future of Economic Design—The Personal Ruminations of a Matching Theorist. In: Laslier, JF., Moulin, H., Sanver, M., Zwicker, W. (eds) The Future of Economic Design. Studies in Economic Design. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18050-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics