Robust Allocations with Diversity Constraints
  We consider the problem of allocating divisible items among multiple agents,
and consider the setting where any agent is allowed to introduce diversity
constraints on the items they are allocated. We motivate this via settings
where the items themselves correspond to user ad slots or task workers with
attributes such as race and gender on which the principal seeks to achieve
demographic parity. We consider the following question: When an agent expresses
diversity constraints into an allocation rule, is the allocation of other
agents hurt significantly? If this happens, the cost of introducing such
constraints is disproportionately borne by agents who do not benefit from
diversity. We codify this via two desiderata capturing robustness. These are no
negative externality -- other agents are not hurt -- and monotonicity -- the
agent enforcing the constraint does not see a large increase in value. We show
in a formal sense that the Nash Welfare rule that maximizes product of agent
values is uniquely positioned to be robust when diversity constraints are
introduced, while almost all other natural allocation rules fail this
criterion. We also show that the guarantees achieved by Nash Welfare are nearly
optimal within a widely studied class of allocation rules. We finally perform
an empirical simulation on real-world data that models ad allocations to show
that this gap between Nash Welfare and other rules persists in the wild.
