We study how to optimally allocate a limited resource (community solar (CS) capacity) among consumers with heterogeneous income levels and private resource valuations. We identify the shortcomings of existing CS program designs, and study various alternatives. Our recommendation offers consumers income-dependent menus of subscription capacity and rate options; this significantly improves social welfare. We further illustrate its usefulness using numerical studies calibrated by real data.

US nonprofits disclose three expenses annually: program to meet their beneficiaries' needs; fundraising to raise donations; administration to build and maintain capacity. We characterize the optimal budget allocations to program, fundraising, and administration using a two-period model, which also includes the nonprofit’s capacity, return on program (the net value of program to beneficiaries) and uncertain future needs of beneficiaries. The optimal allocation depends on the nonprofit's capacity.

As consumers, policy makers and NGOs associate low environmental impact with “uniformly green” (UG) products or higher recycled/reused content, we explore two issues: (i) Should distinct green preferences be “targeted” with distinct product variants? (ii) Is profitable UG adoption environmentally superior? We show that optimal and eco-friendly UG adoption requires design/quality control and reduced production/material costs, and blindly demanding UG adoption may worsen environmental results.