IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/adr/anecst/y2011i101-102p107-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Condorcet Efficiency of Voting Rules with Mutually Coherent Voter Preferences: A Borda Compromise

Author

Listed:
  • William V. Gehrlein
  • Dominique Lepelley
  • Hatem Smaoui

Abstract

The Condorcet Efficiency of a voting rule is defined as the conditional probability that the voting rule elects the Pairwise Majority Rule Winner (PMRW), given that a PMRW exists. Five simple voting rules are considered in this paper: Plurality Rule, Negative Plurality Rule, Borda Rule, Plurality Elimination Rule and Negative Plurality Elimination Rule. In order to study the impact that the presence of degrees of group mutual coherence in voting situations will have on the probability of selecting the PMRW for each of these rules, we develop representations for their Condorcet Efficiency as a function of the proximity of voters' preferences on candidates to being perfectly singlepeaked, perfectly single-troughed or perfectly polarized. The results we obtain lead us to appeal for a Borda Compromise.

Suggested Citation

  • William V. Gehrlein & Dominique Lepelley & Hatem Smaoui, 2011. "The Condorcet Efficiency of Voting Rules with Mutually Coherent Voter Preferences: A Borda Compromise," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 101-102, pages 107-125.
  • Handle: RePEc:adr:anecst:y:2011:i:101-102:p:107-125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41615476
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. William V. Gehrlein & Dominique Lepelley & Florenz Plassmann, 2016. "Should voters be required to rank candidates in an election?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(4), pages 707-747, 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:adr:anecst:y:2011:i:101-102:p:107-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Laurent Linnemer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ensaefr.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.