IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v112y2002i1-2p167-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Borda Count versus Approval Voting: A Fuzzy Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia-Lapresta, Jose Luis
  • Martinez-Panero, Miguel

Abstract

In this paper we consider a fuzzy variant of the Borda count taking into account agents' intensities of preference. This fuzzy Borda count is obtained by means of score gradation and normalization processes from its original pattern. The advantages of the Borda count hold, and are even improved, providing an appropriate scheme in collective decision making. In addition, both classic and fuzzy Borda counts are related to approval voting, establishing a unified framework from distinct points of view. Copyright 2002 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia-Lapresta, Jose Luis & Martinez-Panero, Miguel, 2002. "Borda Count versus Approval Voting: A Fuzzy Approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 112(1-2), pages 167-184, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:112:y:2002:i:1-2:p:167-84
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0048-5829/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marcel Richter & Kam-Chau Wong, 2008. "Preference densities and social choices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 36(2), pages 225-238, August.
    2. Aki Lehtinen, 2007. "The Borda rule is also intended for dishonest men," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 133(1), pages 73-90, October.
    3. Onur Doğan & Ayça Giritligil, 2014. "Implementing the Borda outcome via truncated scoring rules: a computational study," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 83-98, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:112:y:2002:i:1-2:p:167-84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.