IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v17y2000i3p439-461.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When policy advisors cannot reach a consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Otto H. Swank

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, Tinbergen Institute, OCFFB, PO Box 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Wilko Letterie

    (Maastricht University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, MW-ORG, P.O. Box 616, NL-6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands)

  • Hendrik P. van Dalen

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, Tinbergen Institute, OCFFB, PO Box 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

In this paper advisors are selected by two ministers with conflicting interests in order to (1) acquire information, and (2) obtain political legitimacy concerning a project. In the end, parliament decides whether or not the project, of which the consequences are uncertain, is implemented. In principle a minister wants to appoint an advisor whose preferences are similar. However, since the advisor needs to convince the decisive player in the model, the minister may appoint an advisor whose preferences are closer to those of the agents to be persuaded. We also show when polarised advice occurs (the advisors have different preferences) and when consensual advice occurs (they have the same preferences).

Suggested Citation

  • Otto H. Swank & Wilko Letterie & Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2000. "When policy advisors cannot reach a consensus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(3), pages 439-461.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:17:y:2000:i:3:p:439-461
    Note: Received: 29 June 1998/Accepted: 26 May 1999
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/papers/0017003/00170439.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    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. Li Hao & Wing Suen, 2009. "Viewpoint: Decision‐making in committees," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 359-392, May.

    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:spr:sochwe:v:17:y:2000:i:3:p:439-461. 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.