IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/cup/cbooks/9780521138338.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Social Choice and Legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Patty,John W.
  • Penn,Elizabeth Maggie

Abstract

Governing requires choices, and hence trade-offs between conflicting goals or criteria. This book asserts that legitimate governance requires explanations for such trade-offs and then demonstrates that such explanations can always be found, though not for every possible choice. In so doing, John W. Patty and Elizabeth Maggie Penn use the tools of social choice theory to provide a new and discriminating theory of legitimacy. In contrast with both earlier critics and defenders of social choice theory, Patty and Penn argue that the classic impossibility theorems of Arrow, Gibbard, and Satterthwaite are inescapably relevant to, and indeed justify, democratic institutions. Specifically, these institutions exist to do more than simply make policy - through their procedures and proceedings, these institutions make sense of the trade-offs required when controversial policy decisions must be made.

Suggested Citation

  • Patty,John W. & Penn,Elizabeth Maggie, 2014. "Social Choice and Legitimacy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521138338.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:cbooks:9780521138338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Vincent Anesi & Mikhail Safronov, 2021. "Cloturing Deliberation," DEM Discussion Paper Series 21-03, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    2. Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2019. "Introduction to a special issue in honor of Kenneth Arrow," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 1-6, April.
    3. Sean Ingham, 2019. "Why Arrow’s theorem matters for political theory even if preference cycles never occur," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 97-111, April.
    4. IONESCU, Gabriela-Mariana, 2020. "Why The Minimal Wage Shouldn’T Be Established On The Minimum Consumption Basket?," Journal of Financial and Monetary Economics, Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 8(1), pages 45-52, October.
    5. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Arrow’s decisive coalitions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 463-505, March.
    6. Farrer, Benjamin & Holahan, Robert & Shvetsova, Olga, 2017. "Accounting for heterogeneous private risks in the provision of collective goods: Controversial compulsory contracting institutions in horizontal hydrofracturing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 138-150.
    7. Emil Dinga & Cristina Tănăsescu & Gabriela-Mariana Ionescu, 2022. "An Automatic Anchoring of the Reference Social Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 935-957, July.
    8. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2021. "Axioms for defeat in democratic elections," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(4), pages 475-524, October.
    9. Dougherty, Keith L. & Heckelman, Jac C., 2020. "The probability of violating Arrow’s conditions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2015. "Arrow’s Theorem and its descendants," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 14, pages 237-262, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Sean Ingham, 2016. "Social choice and popular control," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(2), pages 331-349, April.
    12. John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2019. "A defense of Arrow’s independence of irrelevant alternatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 145-164, 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:cup:cbooks:9780521138338. 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: Ruth Austin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org .

    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.