IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-01613138.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Procedural versus Opportunity-Wise Equal Treatment of Alternatives: Neutrality Revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Ihsan Ozkes

    (GREQAM - Groupement de Recherche en Économie Quantitative d'Aix-Marseille - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AMU - Aix Marseille Université - ECM - École Centrale de Marseille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Remzi Sanver

    (LAMSADE - Laboratoire d'analyse et modélisation de systèmes pour l'aide à la décision - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

We revisit the neutrality requirement in social choice theory. We propose a weakening of the standard neutrality condition, by allowing for different procedural treatment for different alternatives while entailing that alternatives enjoy same ex-ante possibility to be chosen. We compare these two conditions theoretically and computationally. Furthermore, we explore social choice problems in which this weakening resolves impossibilities that stem from a fundamental tension between neutrality and anonymity. Finally, we show that in certain social choice problems, this weakening provides an immediate refinement of anonymous, neutral, and Pareto optimal social choice rules towards retaining resoluteness.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Ihsan Ozkes & Remzi Sanver, 2017. "Procedural versus Opportunity-Wise Equal Treatment of Alternatives: Neutrality Revisited," Working Papers halshs-01613138, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-01613138
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01613138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01613138/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Sanver & William Zwicker, 2012. "Monotonicity properties and their adaptation to irresolute social choice rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 371-398, July.
    2. Campbell, Donald E. & Kelly, Jerry S., 2015. "The finer structure of resolute, neutral, and anonymous social choice correspondences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 109-111.
    3. Moulin,Hervi, 1991. "Axioms of Cooperative Decision Making," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521424585.
    4. Onur Doğan & Ayça Ebru Giritligil, 2015. "Anonymous and Neutral Social Choice:Existence Results on Resoluteness," Working Papers 201501, Murat Sertel Center for Advanced Economic Studies, Istanbul Bilgi University.
    5. Michele Gori, 2014. "Selecting anonymous, neutral and reversal symmetric minimal majority rules," Working Papers - Mathematical Economics 2014-04, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    6. Daniela Bubboloni & Michele Gori, 2014. "Anonymous and neutral majority rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 377-401, August.
    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. Ali I. Ozkes & M. Remzi Sanver, 2021. "Anonymous, neutral, and resolute social choice revisited," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 97-113, July.
    2. Bubboloni, Daniela & Gori, Michele, 2016. "Resolute refinements of social choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 37-49.
    3. Daniela Bubboloni & Michele Gori, 2021. "Breaking ties in collective decision-making," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 44(1), pages 411-457, June.
    4. Lirong Xia, 2022. "Most Equitable Voting Rules," Papers 2205.14838, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    5. Hiroki Saitoh, 2022. "Characterization of tie-breaking plurality rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(1), pages 139-173, July.
    6. Onur Doğan & Ayça Ebru Giritligil, 2015. "Anonymous and Neutral Social Choice:Existence Results on Resoluteness," Working Papers 201501, Murat Sertel Center for Advanced Economic Studies, Istanbul Bilgi University.
    7. Onur Doğan & Ayça Ebru Giritligil, 2022. "Anonymous and neutral social choice: a unified framework for existence results, maximal domains and tie-breaking," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 469-489, September.
    8. Bubboloni, Daniela & Gori, Michele, 2016. "On the reversal bias of the Minimax social choice correspondence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 53-61.
    9. Bubboloni, Daniela & Gori, Michele, 2015. "Symmetric majority rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 73-86.
    10. Christian Basteck, 2022. "Characterising scoring rules by their solution in iteratively undominated strategies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(1), pages 161-208, July.
    11. Gersbach, Hans, 2017. "Flexible Majority Rules in democracyville: A guided tour," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 37-43.
    12. Mostapha Diss & Michele Gori, 2022. "Majority properties of positional social preference correspondences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 319-347, March.
    13. Martin L. Weitzman, 2015. "A Voting Architecture for the Governance of Free-Driver Externalities, with Application to Geoengineering," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 117(4), pages 1049-1068, October.
    14. Omer F. Baris, 2018. "Timing effect in bargaining and ex ante efficiency of the relative utilitarian solution," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 547-556, June.
    15. Núñez, Matías & Sanver, M. Remzi, 2017. "Revisiting the connection between the no-show paradox and monotonicity," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 9-17.
    16. Antonin Macé, 2017. "Voting with evaluations: characterizations of evaluative voting and range voting," Working Papers halshs-01222200, HAL.
    17. Burak Can & Jens Leth Hougaard & Mohsen Pourpouneh, 2020. "On Reward Sharing in Blockchain Mining Pools," IFRO Working Paper 2020/09, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    18. Conal Duddy, 2017. "Geometry of run-off elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 267-288, December.
    19. Conal Duddy, 2014. "Condorcet’s principle and the strong no-show paradoxes," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 275-285, August.
    20. Jens Leth Hougaard & Kurt Nielsen & Athanasios Papakonstantinou, 2013. "A Multi-attribute Yardstick Auction without Prior Scoring," MSAP Working Paper Series 02_2013, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics, revised Mar 2014.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    anonymity; neutrality; Pareto optimality; social choice functions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions

    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:hal:wpaper:halshs-01613138. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.