Queues, Rations, and Market: Comparisons of Outcomes for the Poor and the Rich
Raaj Sah ()
American Economic Review, 1987, vol. 77, issue 1, 69-77
This paper presents a positive comparison of the outcomes of several alternative allocation systems (the queue system, convertible and nonconvertible rations, and the unhindered market) to distribute the limited quantity of a deficit good among heterogeneous individuals. The authors show that, for the poor, the ranking of systems (from better to worse) is: convertible rations, nonconvertible rations, the queue system, and nonintervention. The rich are found to be better off under nonintervention than under other systems. These and other results are notably robust not only to many parameters of the economy, but also to certain types of commodity taxes and administrative costs. Copyright 1987 by American Economic Association.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (30) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8282%2819870 ... O%3B2-X&origin=repec full text (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:77:y:1987:i:1:p:69-77
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
American Economic Review is currently edited by Esther Duflo
More articles in American Economic Review from American Economic Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Michael P. Albert ().