Second-best mechanisms in queuing problems without transfers:The role of random priorities

Bloch, 2017, Dynamic assignment of objects to queuing agents, AEJ Microecon., 9, 88, 10.1257/mic.20150183 Chun, 2006, No-envy in queueing problems, Econom. Theory, 29, 151, 10.1007/s00199-005-0011-4 Chun, 2014, Egalitarian equivalence and strategyproofness in the queueing problem, Econom. Theory, 56, 425, 10.1007/s00199-013-0793-8 Crès, 2001, Scheduling with opting out: improving upon random priority, Oper. Res., 49, 565, 10.1287/opre.49.4.565.11224 Crès, 2003, Commons with increasing marginal costs: random priority versus average cost*, Internat. Econom. Rev., 44, 1097, 10.1111/1468-2354.t01-1-00102 Hain, 2004, Simple sequencing problems with interdependent costs, Games Econom. Behav., 48, 271, 10.1016/j.geb.2003.09.005 Kayi, 2010, Characterizations of Pareto-efficient, fair, and strategy-proof allocation rules in queueing problems, Games Econom. Behav., 68, 220, 10.1016/j.geb.2009.07.003 Maniquet, 2003, A characterization of the Shapley value in queueing problems, J. Econom. Theory, 109, 90, 10.1016/S0022-0531(02)00036-4 Mitra, 2001, Mechanism design in queueing problems, Econom. Theory, 17, 277, 10.1007/PL00004107 Mitra, 2002, Achieving the first best in sequencing problems, Rev. Econ. Des., 7, 75 Moulin, 2007, On scheduling fees to prevent merging, splitting, and transferring of jobs, Math. Oper. Res., 32, 266, 10.1287/moor.1060.0239 Moulin, 2008, Proportional scheduling, split-proofness, and merge-proofness, Games Econom. Behav., 63, 567, 10.1016/j.geb.2006.09.002 Suijs, 1996, On incentive compatibility and budget balancedness in public decision making, Econ. Des., 2, 193