Showing papers on "Excludability published in 2023"
2 citations
23 Feb 2023
TL;DR: The authors provide an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics and provide an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical, as well as a comprehensive dictionary of ecological economics.
Abstract: This comprehensive Dictionary brings together an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics. Assembling contributions from distinguished scholars, it provides an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical.
[...]
23 Feb 2023
TL;DR: The authors provide an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics and provide an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical, as well as a comprehensive dictionary of ecological economics.
Abstract: This comprehensive Dictionary brings together an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics. Assembling contributions from distinguished scholars, it provides an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical.
09 Jun 2023
TL;DR: The authors discusses protocols intended to provide protection of prompts, elevating their status as intellectual property, thus confirming the intellectual property rights of prompt engineers, and potentially supporting the flourishing of an open market for LLM prompts.
Abstract: With the rapid adoption of AI in the form of large language models (LLMs), the potential value of carefully engineered prompts has become significant. However, to realize this potential, prompts should be tradable on an open market. Since prompts are, at present, generally economically non-excludable, by virtue of their nature as text, no general competitive market has yet been established. This note discusses two protocols intended to provide protection of prompts, elevating their status as intellectual property, thus confirming the intellectual property rights of prompt engineers, and potentially supporting the flourishing of an open market for LLM prompts.
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors examined the impact of institutional arrangements on the nature of private goods by examining whether institutional arrangements developed for the management of private assets can reduce the degrees of excludability of these goods.
Abstract:
The question of the impact of institutional arrangements on the nature of goods is insufficiently addressed in the literature. By the nature of goods, we refer to the economic taxonomy of goods, meaning their privateness is defined according to their degrees of excludability and subtractability. This paper aims to fill this research gap by examining whether institutional arrangements developed for the management of private goods can reduce the degrees of excludability of these goods. To this end, we analyse four collective farmland management projects in the Isère department in France. We adapt the tool of property as a bundle of rights in order to characterize the impact of these projects on the nature of farmland. Our results show that the distribution of land rights, as well as the rules designed to define land rights, influence the degree of excludability of farmland. We discuss the impact of these findings on public policy-making.
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors focus on the access-incentives stalemate over device-generated data and take recourse to literature on economics of knowledge and innovation in search of guidance as to how the trade-off between the broad accessibility of data and the protection of innovation incentives should be resolved.
Abstract: This contribution reflects on the question posed by Professor Hanns Ullrich: Which concepts and principles of intellectual property law inform the design of a regulatory framework for the data economy? Even though data and knowledge do not lend themselves to form a perfect analogy, their governance underlies the same dilemma of whether, and to what extent, resources that are non-rivalrous in use should be treated as excludable or a non-excludable economic goods. The analysis focuses on the ‘access-incentives stalemate’ over device-generated data and takes recourse to literature on economics of knowledge and innovation in search of guidance as to how the trade-off between the broad accessibility of data and the protection of innovation incentives should be resolved.
19 May 2023
TL;DR: In this article , the authors study the excludable and binary public project model where the decision is binary (build or not build) and propose a single deadline mechanism and a group-based optimal deadline mechanism.
Abstract: We study the excludable public project model where the decision is binary (build or not build). In a classic excludable and binary public project model, an agent either consumes the project in its whole or is completely excluded. We study a setting where the mechanism can set different project release time for different agents, in the sense that high-paying agents can consume the project earlier than low-paying agents. The release delay, while hurting the social welfare, is implemented to incentivize payments to cover the project cost. The mechanism design objective is to minimize the maximum release delay and the total release delay among all agents. We first consider the setting where we know the prior distribution of the agents' types. Our objectives are minimizing the expected maximum release delay and the expected total release delay. We propose the single deadline mechanisms. We show that the optimal single deadline mechanism is asymptotically optimal for both objectives, regardless of the prior distribution. For small number of agents, we propose the sequential unanimous mechanisms by extending the largest unanimous mechanisms from [Ohseto 2000]. We propose an automated mechanism design approach via evolutionary computation to optimize within the sequential unanimous mechanisms. We next study prior-free mechanism design. We propose the group-based optimal deadline mechanism and show that it is competitive against an undominated mechanism under minor technical assumptions.
[...]
23 Feb 2023
TL;DR: The authors provide an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics and provide an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical, as well as a comprehensive dictionary of ecological economics.
Abstract: This comprehensive Dictionary brings together an extensive range of definitive terms in ecological economics. Assembling contributions from distinguished scholars, it provides an intellectual map to this evolving subject ranging from the practical to the philosophical.
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors discuss the importance of the unused land as a potential source of inspiration for the development of new technologies and propose a method to use it for sustainable development.
Abstract: 오스트롬의 공동자원 정의의 문제를 제기한 최현(2019)은 동아시아 사례 연구를 통해 경합성과 독점정당성을 기준으로 하는 공동자원에 대한 수정된 정의를 제시했다. 이 논문은 수정된 공동자원 정의를 동아시아 이외 지역 사례를 통해 예증한다. 수정된 공동자원 정의가 미국•브라질•남아프리카공화국•인도의 사례에도 적합한가를 검토하는 것이다.이 사례들은 노숙자처럼 생활이 곤란한 사람들이 생존에 필수적이라면 이미 소유권이 확정된 빈집이나 공한지(unused land) 같은 사적재도 공동자원으로 사용할 수 있다는 ‘황금률’적 인식에서 출발했다. 그리고 이러한 인식은 이전에는 공동자원이 아니었던 자원을 공동자원화하는 운동을 통해 제도화되고 시민들에게 더욱 분명히 각인 됐다.이는 신자유주의가 심화하는 사회적 맥락 속에서 자원이 인간의 생존을 위해 사용되어야 할 필요와 이러한 필요에 입각한 운동이 낳은 사회적 인식의 변화가 해당 자원을 공동자원으로 만든다는 것, 즉 자원의 사회적·윤리적 속성에 의해 공동자원화가 결정된다는 것을 보여준다. 결국 공동자원의 새로운 정의는 동아시아를 넘어 전 세계 각지에서 전개되고 있는 공동관리 운동을 뒷받침할 수 있는 적실한 개념틀을 제공한다. Ostrom’s commons theory is based on the erroneous premise that differences in the resource management method originate from the physical or economic attributes of resources such as subtractability and non-excludability. Thus, the theory fails to explain that the same resource may become private goods and toll goods, or common pool resources and public goods depending on the social conditions. Commons must be defined not by physical attributes but by social ones. In this study, legitimacy of monopoly are presented as the criteria for resource classification instead of non-excludability. Moreover, it was tested through commoning movements in USA, Brazil, Republic of South Africa, and India.
01 Jan 2023
TL;DR: In this article , the authors give a useful characterization of truthfulness for IDV public projects, parallel to the known characterization for independent private values, and provide possibility and impossibility results for welfare approximation in public projects with SOS valuations.
Abstract: In the interdependent values (IDV) model introduced by Milgrom and Weber [1982], agents have private signals that capture their information about different social alternatives, and the valuation of every agent is a function of all agent signals. While interdependence has been mainly studied for auctions, it is extremely relevant for a large variety of social choice settings, including the canonical and practically important setting of public projects. The IDV model is much more realistic but also very challenging relative to the standard independent private values model. Welfare guarantees for IDV have been achieved mainly through two alternative conditions known as single-crossing and submodularity over signals (SOS). In either case, the existing theory falls short of solving the public projects setting.Our contribution is twofold: (i) We give a useful characterization of truthfulness for IDV public projects, parallel to the known characterization for independent private values, and identify the domain frontier for which this characterization applies; (ii) Using this characterization, we provide possibility and impossibility results for welfare approximation in public projects with SOS valuations. Our main impossibility result is that, in contrast to auctions, no universally truthful mechanism performs better for public projects with SOS valuations than choosing a project at random. Our main positive result applies to excludable public projects with SOS, for which we establish a constant factor approximation similar to auctions. Our results suggest that exclusion may be a key tool for achieving welfare guarantees in the IDV model.* The full version of the paper can be accessed at https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.08044. This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 866132), by the Israel Science Foundation (ISF grant nos. 317/17 and 336/18), by an Amazon Research Award, and by the NSF-BSF (grant no. 2020788).