When a scarce good has to be allocated, 'first come, first served' is often considered a decent allocative principle. According to a recent study, however, this is inefficient because of the time wasted. Adopting the principle 'last-in, first-served' - provided everyone knows this - is more efficient, because people will stagger their arrival times.
The brief BBC report - here - also mentions the possibility of picking people from the 'queue' at random. I don't see a link in the report, but it seems to be based on 'The curse of first-in-first-out queue discipline', available as a working paper here, so it's an unpublished finding as far as I'm aware. I've not had chance to read the paper yet, but it sounds interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
In about two weeks’ time, voters in the UK will be given an historic opportunity to change the electoral system. The referendum motion asks ...
-
As the dust settles after June’s referendum, it’s notable that the leaders of the Leave campaign ( Johnson , Gove , Farage , Leadsom ) ...
-
J. S. Mill argues that individuals should be able to engage in 'experiments in living' free from social pressures (provided that the...
No comments:
Post a Comment