A Mechanism for Participatory Budgeting With Funding Constraints and Project Interactions

Participatory budgeting (PB) has been widely adopted and has attracted significant research efforts; however, there is a lack of mechanisms for PB which elicit project interactions, such as substitution and complementarity, from voters. Also, the outcomes of PB in practice are subject to various minimum/maximum funding constraints on 'types' of projects. We propose a novel preference elicitation scheme for PB which allows voters to express how their utilities from projects within 'groups' interact. We consider preference aggregation done under minimum and maximum funding constraints on 'types' of projects, where a project can have multiple type labels as long as this classification can be defined by a 1-laminar structure (henceforth called 1-laminar funding constraints). Overall, we extend the Knapsack voting model of Goel et al. [26] in two ways - enriching the preference elicitation scheme to include project interactions and generalizing the preference aggregation scheme to include 1-laminar funding constraints. We show that the strategyproofness results of Goel et al. [26] for Knapsack voting continue to hold under 1-laminar funding constraints. Moreover, when the funding constraints cannot be described by a 1-laminar structure, strategyproofness does not hold. Although project interactions often break the strategyproofness, we study a special case of vote profiles where truthful voting is a Nash equilibrium under substitution project interactions. We then study the computational complexity of preference aggregation. Social welfare maximization under project interactions is NP-hard. As a workaround for practical instances, we give a fixed parameter tractable (FPT) algorithm for social welfare maximization with respect to the maximum number of projects in a group when the overall budget is specified in a fixed number of bits.

[1]  Jan Maly,et al.  The (Computational) Social Choice Take on Indivisible Participatory Budgeting , 2023, ArXiv.

[2]  Gerdus Benade,et al.  Participatory Budgeting Design for the Real World , 2023, ArXiv.

[3]  K. Munagala,et al.  Auditing for Core Stability in Participatory Budgeting , 2022, WINE.

[4]  Chung Keung Poon,et al.  Candidate selections with proportional fairness constraints , 2021, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[5]  Ya'akov Gal,et al.  Proportional Participatory Budgeting with Substitute Projects , 2021, ArXiv.

[6]  Martin Lackner,et al.  Participatory Budgeting with Donations and Diversity Constraints , 2021, AAAI.

[7]  C. Johnson,et al.  Testing the Participation Hypothesis: Evidence from Participatory Budgeting , 2021, Political Behavior.

[8]  Meirav Zehavi,et al.  Participatory Budgeting with Project Groups , 2020, IJCAI.

[9]  Nimrod Talmon,et al.  Participatory Budgeting with Project Interactions , 2020, IJCAI.

[10]  Ronald de Haan,et al.  Designing Participatory Budgeting Mechanisms Grounded in Judgment Aggregation , 2020, KR.

[11]  Arindam Khan,et al.  Group Fairness for Knapsack Problems , 2020, AAMAS.

[12]  Kamesh Munagala,et al.  Advertising for Demographically Fair Outcomes , 2020, ArXiv.

[13]  Haris Aziz,et al.  Participatory Budgeting: Models and Approaches , 2020, Pathways Between Social Science and Computational Social Science.

[14]  P. Skowron,et al.  Proportionality and the Limits of Welfarism , 2019, EC.

[15]  Ashish Goel,et al.  Knapsack Voting for Participatory Budgeting , 2019, ACM Trans. Economics and Comput..

[16]  David M. Pennock,et al.  Truthful Aggregation of Budget Proposals , 2019, EC.

[17]  Martin Koutecký,et al.  Voting and Bribing in Single-Exponential Time , 2018, STACS.

[18]  Jianxin Wang,et al.  Multiwinner Voting with Restricted Admissible Sets: Complexity and Strategyproofness , 2018, IJCAI.

[19]  Gerhard J. Woeginger,et al.  Committee Selection with Intraclass and Interclass Synergies , 2018, AAAI.

[20]  Ruta Mehta,et al.  Substitution with Satiation: A New Class of Utility Functions and a Complementary Pivot Algorithm , 2018, Math. Oper. Res..

[21]  Piotr Faliszewski,et al.  Multiwinner Elections with Diversity Constraints , 2017, AAAI.

[22]  Nisheeth K. Vishnoi,et al.  Multiwinner Voting with Fairness Constraints , 2017, IJCAI.

[23]  R. Niedermeier,et al.  Mixed Integer Programming with Convex/Concave Constraints: Fixed-Parameter Tractability and Applications to Multicovering and Voting , 2017, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[24]  Rani Izsak,et al.  Working Together: Committee Selection and the Supermodular Degree , 2017, AAMAS Workshops.

[25]  Ariel D. Procaccia,et al.  Preference Elicitation For Participatory Budgeting , 2017, AAAI.

[26]  Kamesh Munagala,et al.  The Core of the Participatory Budgeting Problem , 2016, WINE.

[27]  Elliot Anshelevich,et al.  Randomized Social Choice Functions under Metric Preferences , 2015, IJCAI.

[28]  Piotr Skowron,et al.  FPT approximation schemes for maximizing submodular functions , 2015, Inf. Comput..

[29]  James Green-Armytage Direct voting and proxy voting , 2015 .

[30]  Uriel Feige,et al.  Welfare maximization and the supermodular degree , 2013, ITCS '13.

[31]  Gianpaolo Baiocchi,et al.  The Power of Ambiguity: How Participatory Budgeting Travels the Globe , 2012, Regular Issue.

[32]  David P. Williamson,et al.  The Design of Approximation Algorithms , 2011 .

[33]  M. Dufwenberg Game theory. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[34]  H. Wainwright Making A People's Budget In Porto Alegre , 2003 .

[35]  Daniel Kaufmann,et al.  Governance Matters , 1999, Report of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board.

[36]  Douglas Muzzio,et al.  Approval Voting , 1978, American Political Science Review.

[37]  M. Satterthwaite Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions , 1975 .

[38]  A. Gibbard Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result , 1973 .

[39]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[40]  Dorothea Baumeister,et al.  Bounded Approval Ballots: Balancing Expressiveness and Simplicity for Multiwinner Elections , 2023, Adaptive Agents and Multi-Agent Systems.

[41]  Dorothea Baumeister,et al.  Complexity of Manipulative Interference in Participatory Budgeting , 2021, ADT.

[42]  Laurent Bulteau,et al.  Partition Aggregation for Participatory Budgeting , 2021, AAMAS.

[43]  Gerdus Benade,et al.  Efficiency and Usability of Participatory Budgeting Methods , 2018 .

[44]  K. Arrow,et al.  Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare , 2011 .

[45]  Hitoshi Matsushima,et al.  Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Volume 1 (Book) , 2004 .

[46]  T. Sowell Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study , 2004 .

[47]  Y. Cabannes Participatory budgeting: a significant contribution to participatory democracy , 2004 .

[48]  Maxim Sviridenko,et al.  A note on maximizing a submodular set function subject to a knapsack constraint , 2004, Oper. Res. Lett..

[49]  Brian Wampler,et al.  A Guide to Participatory Budgeting , 2000 .

[50]  J. Nash Equilibrium Points in N-Person Games. , 1950, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[51]  P. Fishburn,et al.  Voting Procedures , 2022 .