A theory is developed to explain all possible positional voting paradoxes coming from a single but arbitraily chosen profile. This includes all pairwise voting cycles, all conflict between Borda and Condorcet winners and rankings, all disagreement in outcomes among positional procedures, and all discrepencies among rankings for any positional procedure as candidates are dropped or added. The theory explains why each of the possible paradoxes occurs while describing how to construct illustrating profiles. It is shown how to use this approach to derive properties of other procedures based on positional voting methods. The three candidate results of the companion paper [19] are extended to an arbitrary number of candidates.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science in its series Discussion Papers with number
1187.
Length: Date of creation: Apr 1997 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:nwu:cmsems:1187
Contact details of provider: Postal: Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University, 580 Jacobs Center, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2014 Phone: 847/491-3527 Fax: 847/491-2530 Email: Web page: http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/ More information through EDIRC
Order Information: Email:
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Fran Walker).