The convex combination rule and its relationship to Gini coefficient in the problem of degressively proportional allocation

Katarzyna Cegiełka et al.

Review of Economic Design2025https://doi.org/10.1007/s10058-025-00377-1article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

Depending on the extent of agents’ entitlements, their desires about the outcome of the allocation of goods are distinct and asymmetric. Based on egalitarian concepts, agents with smaller entitlements tend to perceive equality as absolute equality, whereas those with larger entitlements tend to perceive it as equality of representation, i.e., proportionality. A concept which conciliates these asymmetric desires is the principle of degressively proportional goods allocation. Under this principle, both the interests of agents with small and large entitlements are protected. However, this is only a general principle and not a definite rule that allows for an unambiguous solution for each allocation problem. The following paper indicates a family of allocation rules, which, through a direct relationship with the Gini coefficient, allows for inequality control in the received allocation. Additionally, an allocation was shown in this family which reflects, as much as possible, the diversification of allocation satisfaction regarding the entitlements of all agents.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10058-025-00377-1

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{katarzyna2025,
  title        = {{The convex combination rule and its relationship to Gini coefficient in the problem of degressively proportional allocation}},
  author       = {Katarzyna Cegiełka et al.},
  journal      = {Review of Economic Design},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10058-025-00377-1},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The convex combination rule and its relationship to Gini coefficient in the problem of degressively proportional allocation

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.