arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Giovanni Valvassori Bolgè.
In this paper, we characterize the extreme points of a class of multidimensional monotone functions. This result is then applied to large contests, where it provides a useful representation of optimal allocation rules under a broad class of distributional preferences of the contest designer. In contests with complete information, the representation significantly simplifies the characterization of the equilibria.
A set of agents has to make a decision about the provision of a public good and its financing. Agents have heterogeneous values for the public good and each agent's value is private information. An agenda-setter has the right to make a proposal about a public-good level and a vector of contributions. For the proposal to be approved, only the favourable votes of a subset of agents are needed. If the proposal is not approved, a type-dependent outside option is implemented. I characterize the optimal public-good provision and the coalition-formation for any outside option in dominant strategies. Optimal public-good provision might be a non-monotonic function of the outside option public-good level. Moreover, the optimal coalition might be a non-convex set of types.
This paper seeks to explore the potential trade-off arising between the theories of $\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$ and $\textit{Opportunity Pluralism}$. Whereas the first theory has received much attention in the literature on Welfare Economics, the second one has only recently been introduced with the publication of the book by Joseph Fishkin, $\textit{Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity}$. After arguing extensively that any notion of human flourishing is incompatible with traditional theories of $\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$, the author proposes an alternative theory squarely based on a broad notion of human development. This paper seeks to formalize the argument made in this book through the lens of economic theory. My analysis suggests that traditional theories of $\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$ are not incompatible with $\textit{Opportunity Pluralism}$.