More than 100,000 children in the US foster care system are currently waiting for an adoptive placement. Adoption agencies differ significantly in what systems they use to identify matches between families and children. We consider two prominent alternatives: (1) family-driven search, where families respond to announcements made by the caseworker responsible for a child, and (2) caseworker-driven search, where caseworkers utilize a software tool to perform a targeted search for families. In this work, we compare these two systems via a game-theoretic analysis. We introduce a dynamic search-and-matching model that captures the heterogeneous preferences of families and children. This allows us to study their incentives during the search process, and we can compare the resulting welfare of the two systems in equilibrium. We first show that, in general, no system dominates the other, neither in terms of family welfare nor in terms of child welfare. This result maybe surprising, given that the caseworker-driven approach employs a less wasteful search process. However, we do identify various advantages of the caseworker-driven approach. Our main theoretical result establishes that the equilibrium outcomes in caseworker-driven search can Pareto-dominate the outcomes in family-driven search, but not the other way around. We illustrate our results numerically to demonstrate the effect different model parameters (e.g., search costs and discount factors) have on welfare.
翻译:美国寄养照料系统中的10万多名儿童目前正在等待收养安置。收养机构在他们用来确定家庭和儿童之间匹配的系统方面差异很大。我们考虑两种突出的替代方法:(1) 家庭驱动的搜索,即家庭对负责儿童个案工作者的公告作出反应,(2) 个案工作者驱动的搜索,即个案工作者使用软件工具对家庭进行有针对性的搜索。在这项工作中,我们通过游戏理论分析对这两个系统进行比较。我们引入了一种动态搜索和匹配模式,以捕捉家庭和儿童的不同偏好。这使我们能够在搜索过程中研究其激励因素,我们可以比较两种系统在平衡中产生的福利。我们首先表明,总体而言,没有任何系统在家庭福祉和儿童福利方面主导其他系统。这也许令人惊讶,因为个案工作者驱动的方法采用了较少浪费的搜索过程。但我们确实发现了案例工作者驱动方法的各种优势。我们的主要理论结果确定,由个案工作者驱动的搜索结果是平衡的,但我们可以比较两种系统在平衡中产生的福利。我们首先表明,在家庭福利和儿童福利方面,一般而言,没有任何系统主导其他系统,无论是在家庭福利方面,还是在儿童福利方面。这或许令人惊讶的是,因为由个案工作者驱动的搜索方法运用了不同的结果。我们在搜索模型中展示了其他的数值上的结果。