IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v9y2019i1p2158244019837468.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Power of None

Author

Listed:
  • Neal D. Hulkower
  • John Neatrour

Abstract

Borda with None (BwN) adds the binding option of “None of these candidates,†N , to the Borda Count (BC), differing from a method of Dodgson in the scoring of ties. The method incorporates the benefits of approval voting, which allows a simple yes/no vote on each candidate and avoids the disadvantages of adding N as a binding outcome to plurality voting. We prove that BwN uniquely satisfies five rational properties which can be viewed as potential axioms that provide a theoretical basis for the method. It allows individual voters to express a personal veto over all or part of the slate which could, with sufficient numbers, become a veto by the electorate. The power of none, then, is offering a voice to otherwise disaffected voters. We introduce a metric similar to one used in the Bak–Sneppen Evolutionary model, candidate fitness, a number between 0 and 1, which measures a candidate’s ranking relative to N . We illustrate its evolution with a hypothetical example. We examine courses of action if N is ranked in the first place. Using BwN to accommodate partial voting is proposed. We explore the general applicability of BwN. Finally, we address the practical considerations for introducing BwN.

Suggested Citation

  • Neal D. Hulkower & John Neatrour, 2019. "The Power of None," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:2158244019837468
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244019837468
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244019837468
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244019837468?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Emerson, 2013. "The original Borda count and partial voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 353-358, February.
    2. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen, 1975. "Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-217, April.
    3. Saari,Donald G., 2008. "Disposing Dictators, Demystifying Voting Paradoxes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521731607, January.
    4. José Alcantud & Annick Laruelle, 2014. "Dis&approval voting: a characterization," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(1), pages 1-10, June.
    5. Saari,Donald G., 2008. "Disposing Dictators, Demystifying Voting Paradoxes," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521516051, January.
    6. Saari, Donald G, 1990. "Susceptibility to Manipulation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 64(1), pages 21-41, January.
    7. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric Kamwa, 2022. "Scoring Rules, Ballot Truncation, and the Truncation Paradox," Working Papers hal-03632662, HAL.
    2. Eric Kamwa, 2022. "Scoring rules, ballot truncation, and the truncation paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 192(1), pages 79-97, July.
    3. Keith L. Dougherty & Julian Edward, 2022. "The effect of unconditional preferences on Sen’s paradox," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 427-447, October.
    4. Pierre Dehez & Victor Ginsburgh, 2020. "Approval voting and Shapley ranking," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 415-428, September.
    5. Erdamar, Bora & Sanver, M. Remzi & Sato, Shin, 2017. "Evaluationwise strategy-proofness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 227-238.
    6. Diss, Mostapha & Tsvelikhovskiy, Boris, 2021. "Manipulable outcomes within the class of scoring voting rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 11-18.
    7. Tomas J. McIntee, 2017. "A geometric model of sensitivity of multistage elections to change," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(1), pages 89-115, June.
    8. Julia Grundner, 2018. "Governance in Africa: Convergence or Divergence?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(1), pages 71-88.
    9. Davide Grossi, 2021. "Lecture Notes on Voting Theory," Papers 2105.00216, arXiv.org.
    10. James Green-Armytage, 2014. "Strategic voting and nomination," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 111-138, January.
    11. Maurice Salles, 2014. "‘Social choice and welfare’ at 30: its role in the development of social choice theory and welfare economics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Hans Peters & Souvik Roy & Ton Storcken, 2012. "On the manipulability of approval voting and related scoring rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 399-429, July.
    13. Lirong Xia, 2022. "The Impact of a Coalition: Assessing the Likelihood of Voter Influence in Large Elections," Papers 2202.06411, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    14. Truchon, Michel, 2004. "Aggregation of Rankings in Figure Skating," Cahiers de recherche 0402, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    15. Donald Campbell & Jerry Kelly, 2009. "Gains from manipulating social choice rules," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 349-371, September.
    16. Andrew C. Eggers, 2021. "A diagram for analyzing ordinal voting systems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 143-171, January.
    17. Aki Lehtinen, 2011. "A welfarist critique of social choice theory," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(3), pages 359-381, July.
    18. Stefano Vannucci, 2022. "Agenda manipulation-proofness, stalemates, and redundant elicitation in preference aggregation. Exposing the bright side of Arrow's theorem," Papers 2210.03200, arXiv.org.
    19. Truchon, Michel, 1999. "La démocratie : oui, mais laquelle?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 75(1), pages 189-214, mars-juin.
    20. David Hartvigsen, 2008. "The Manipulation of Voting Systems," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 13-21, June.

    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:sae:sagope:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:2158244019837468. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.