IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/agr/journl/v12(529)y2008i12(529)p81-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Efficiency of EU Decision Making Process. Case Study: Measurement of Voting Power Indices of Romanian Parliament, 1996-2004

Author

Listed:
  • Constantin Chiriac

    (Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest)

Abstract

The power distribution of Member States of EU represents a problem of major importance concerning the future decisional structure. The article analyses the distribution of vote power in the CM, showing the influences of states over the decisional process as well as the modification that appears along with the enlargement. Within the organizations with vote decisions systems, an efficient decisional process supposes the knowledge of the possibilities that exists in formation of coalitions in case of a proposal. Starting from the analysis realized at EU level, the article presents a case study regarding the distribution of vote power and its influence over the decisional process in Romanian Parliament during 1996-2004.

Suggested Citation

  • Constantin Chiriac, 2008. "Economic Efficiency of EU Decision Making Process. Case Study: Measurement of Voting Power Indices of Romanian Parliament, 1996-2004," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania - AGER, vol. 12(12(529)), pages 81-88, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:agr:journl:v:12(529):y:2008:i:12(529):p:81-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://store.ectap.ro/articole/357.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ectap.ro/articol.php?id=357&rid=44
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bilbao, J. M. & Fernandez, J. R. & Jimenez, N. & Lopez, J. J., 2002. "Voting power in the European Union enlargement," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 181-196, November.
    2. František Turnovec, 2008. "National, Political and Institutional Influence in European Union Decision Making," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 2(2), pages 154-173, September.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Georgy Egorov & Konstantin Sonin, 2006. "Coalition Formation in Political Games," NBER Working Papers 12749, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Rafel Amer & Francesc Carreras, 1997. "Cooperation Indices and Weighted Shapley Values," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 955-968, November.
    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. Matteo Migheli, 2016. "Measuring Representativeness in Different Electoral Systems, Using Italian and Dutch Data," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 723-748, July.
    2. Frits Hof & Walter Kern & Sascha Kurz & Kanstantsin Pashkovich & Daniël Paulusma, 2020. "Simple games versus weighted voting games: bounding the critical threshold value," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(4), pages 609-621, April.
    3. Antonio Magaña & Francesc Carreras, 2018. "Coalition Formation and Stability," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 467-502, June.
    4. Sylvain Béal & Marc Deschamps & Mostapha Diss & Issofa Moyouwou, 2022. "Inconsistent weighting in weighted voting games," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 75-103, April.
    5. Gianfranco Gambarelli & Angelo Uristani, 2009. "Multicameral voting cohesion games," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 17(4), pages 433-460, December.
    6. Yuto Ushioda & Masato Tanaka & Tomomi Matsui, 2022. "Monte Carlo Methods for the Shapley–Shubik Power Index," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Le Breton, Michel & Montero, Maria & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2012. "Voting power in the EU council of ministers and fair decision making in distributive politics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 159-173.
    8. Daphne Cornelisse & Thomas Rood & Mateusz Malinowski & Yoram Bachrach & Tal Kachman, 2022. "Neural Payoff Machines: Predicting Fair and Stable Payoff Allocations Among Team Members," Papers 2208.08798, arXiv.org.
    9. Radzik, Tadeusz, 2012. "A new look at the role of players’ weights in the weighted Shapley value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(2), pages 407-416.
    10. Levy, Marc, 2011. "The Banzhaf index in complete and incomplete shareholding structures: A new algorithm," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(2), pages 411-421, December.
    11. Benati, Stefano & Rizzi, Romeo & Tovey, Craig, 2015. "The complexity of power indexes with graph restricted coalitions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 53-63.
    12. Alonso-Meijide, J.M. & Bilbao, J.M. & Casas-Méndez, B. & Fernández, J.R., 2009. "Weighted multiple majority games with unions: Generating functions and applications to the European Union," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 530-544, October.
    13. M. Musegaas & P. E. M. Borm & M. Quant, 2018. "Three-valued simple games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 201-224, August.
    14. Julia Cage, 2009. "Asymmetric information, rent extraction and aid efficiency," PSE Working Papers halshs-00575055, HAL.
    15. Álvarez-Mozos, Mikel & Hellman, Ziv & Winter, Eyal, 2013. "Spectrum value for coalitional games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 132-142.
    16. Tanaka, Masato & Matsui, Tomomi, 2022. "Pseudo polynomial size LP formulation for calculating the least core value of weighted voting games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 47-51.
    17. Kóczy Á., László, 2011. "Lisszaboni kilátások [Lisbon prospects]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1045-1058.
    18. Kovacs, A. & Ferto, I. & Koczy, L. & Sziklai, B. & Nas, A.A., 2018. "Who has the critical vote? Power ranking of MEPs in the Agricultural Committee of the European Parliament," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277231, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Michel Breton & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortin & Shlomo Weber, 2008. "Gamson’s law and hedonic games," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 57-67, January.
    20. Algaba, E. & Bilbao, J.M. & Fernandez, J.R., 2007. "The distribution of power in the European Constitution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1752-1766, February.

    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:agr:journl:v:12(529):y:2008:i:12(529):p:81-88. 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: Marin Dinu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/agerrea.html .

    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.