IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/adr/anecst/y2011i101-102p187-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generalized Binary Constitutions and the Whole Set of Arrovian Social Welfare Functions

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga
  • Issofa Mouyouwou
  • Joël Moulen

Abstract

Arrow's theorem [1963] states that a social welfare function (SWF) that simultaneously satis.es completeness, transitivity, independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) and Pareto principle is necessarily dictatorial in the sense that the social decision on any pair of candidates coincides with the strict preference of a fixed individual, the Arrow's dictator. When individual preferences are weak orders, no further description is provided on the social outcome as soon as the Arrow's dictator is indifferent on a pair of candidates. We provide in the present paper another proof of the Arrow's theorem using generalized binary constitutions. Moreover we completely characterize the set of Arrovian SWFs, those are complete and transitive SWFs that satisfy IIA and the Pareto principle.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga & Issofa Mouyouwou & Joël Moulen, 2011. "Generalized Binary Constitutions and the Whole Set of Arrovian Social Welfare Functions," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 101-102, pages 187-199.
  • Handle: RePEc:adr:anecst:y:2011:i:101-102:p:187-199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41615479
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga & Issofa Moyouwou & Monge Kleber Kamdem Ouambo, 2017. "Avoiding Majority Dissatisfaction on a Series of Majority Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 453-471, May.
    2. Nicolas Gabriel Andjiga & Issofa Moyouwou & Monge Kleber Kamdem Ouambo, 0. "Avoiding Majority Dissatisfaction on a Series of Majority Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.

    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:187-199. 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.