IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cwl/cwldpp/498.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparison of Public Choice Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Robert J. Weber

Abstract

The area of social decision-making is one in which the disciplines of game theory, political science, and economics all meet. One of the simplest decisions to be faced is the election of one candidate from several. Various voting systems have been proposed for such elections. In order to compare these systems in terms of their tendency to elect a candidate representative of the voters' preferences, a measure of "effectiveness" has been developed. The study of the effectiveness of voting systems is continued in this paper. In particular, two families of voting systems are found to contain three- and four-candidate systems which are more effective than any previously discussed. Voting systems can be compared in terms of their effectiveness in representing the preferences of the voters. Several generalizations of the standard voting system (in which each voter casts a single vote) are considered, as in the Borda system (in which the candidates receive votes proportional to the ranks assigned them by the voters). For elections involving three or more candidates, it is found that the Borda voting system is markedly more effective than the standard system. For many-candidate elections, the Borda system is essentially as effective as any voting system can be.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert J. Weber, 1978. "Comparison of Public Choice Systems," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 498, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  • Handle: RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cowles.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/pub/d04/d0498.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Le Breton, Michel & Lepelley, Dominique & Smaoui, Hatem, 2012. "The Probability of Casting a Decisive Vote: From IC to IAC trhough Ehrhart's Polynomials and Strong Mixing," IDEI Working Papers 722, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    2. Le Breton, Michel & Lepelley, Dominique & Macé, Antonin & Merlin, Vincent, 2017. "Le mécanisme optimal de vote au sein du conseil des représentants d’un système fédéral," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 93(1-2), pages 203-248, Mars-Juin.
    3. Giles, Adam & Postl, Peter, 2014. "Equilibrium and effectiveness of two-parameter scoring rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 31-52.
    4. Olivier Mouzon & Thibault Laurent & Michel Breton & Dominique Lepelley, 2019. "Exploring the effects of national and regional popular vote Interstate compact on a toy symmetric version of the Electoral College: an electoral engineering perspective," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 51-95, April.
    5. Postl, Peter, 2017. "Évaluation et comparaison des règles de vote derrière le voile de l’ignorance : Tour d'horizon sélectif et analyse des règles de scores à deux paramètres," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 93(1-2), pages 249-290, Mars-Juin.
    6. Sandro Ambuehl & B. Douglas Bernheim, 2021. "Interpreting the will of the people: social preferences over ordinal outcomes," ECON - Working Papers 395, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jan 2024.
    7. Sandro Ambuehl & B. Douglas Bernheim, 2021. "Interpreting the Will of the People: A Positive Analysis of Ordinal Preference Aggregation," NBER Working Papers 29389, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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:cwl:cwldpp:498. 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: Brittany Ladd (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cowleus.html .

    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.